[blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008

Tue Jan 6 15:39:08 UTC 2009

However, it should be pointed out here that the blind man who is shackled in 
leg irons, with his hands cuffed in front of him, not using a cane while 
walking backward and furthermore being led not by a guide dog, but instead 
by a wildebeest, may overcome all these imposed social handicaps and cast 
off the chains of his oppressors by using an ancient form of wee bag round, 
may be considered only slightly unreasonable.  Gosh I'm sorry I started 
this. :)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Craig Borne" <cjborne at comcast.net>
To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: 
[blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008

> It's not that blind folks are required to warn people of their presence;
> it's that blind folks are to conduct themselves reasonably.  In fact, in 
> the
> case discussing the "reasonable blind person" standard, the blind 
> individual
> was not using his cane while navigating through his newsstand store he
> operated in a federal building.  Remember, the reasonable person standard
> goes both ways: the sighted individual has to be acting reasonably as 
> well.
> Walking backwards is not reasonable on a public street.  This gets into 
> the
> whole negligence vs. contributory/comparative negligence/assumption of the
> risk argument.
>
> Bottom line: blind individuals should conduct themselves reasonably, 
> meaning
> what the average blind individual with similar background and similar
> experiences would do in a similar situation.  If the blind individual is
> acting "reasonably," then he is not negligent.  Moreover, if the blind
> individual is negligent, the sighted individual walking backwards might be
> contributory /comparatively negligent, thereby lessening or knocking out 
> the
> need for damages.
>
> Craig
>
> Craig Borne, Esq.
> Baltimore, Maryland
> "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial
> appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in
> defense of custom."  --Thomas Paine, Common Sense
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of John
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:53 PM
> To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'
> Subject: Re:
> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008
>
> And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat 
> analogous
> to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a 
> window
> cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very
> similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case 
> for
> example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. 
> It
> is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who
> tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause
> problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect
> ourselves and others.
> John
>
> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq.
>
> Gainesville, FL 32609
>
> Phone: (352) 505-6642
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: Re:
> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008
>
>
> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public 
> of
>
> their presence.  Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but
> shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need?
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John " <joramsey at cox.net>
> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM
> Subject: Re:
> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008
>
>
>> Chuck,
>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because
>> they
>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea
>> what
>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person
>> would act. However,  I can almost guarantee you that if you were
>> practicing
>> some form of martial arts  navigation you are going to be liable if
>> someone
>> is injured because you walked into them and the like.
>> Take care,
>> John
>>
>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq.
>>
>> Gainesville, FL 32609
>>
>> Phone: (352) 505-6642
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>> On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net
>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM
>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
>> Subject: Re:
>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of
>> 2008
>>
>>
>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the
>> potential
>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when
>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law
>> suits
>> are far-fetched.
>> Chuck
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "KEITH VICK " <keith-vick at msn.com>
>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>; "Mark
>> BurningHawk" <stone_troll at sbcglobal.net>
>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM
>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw]
>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008
>>
>>
>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows
>>> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the
>>> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of
>>> training in
>>
>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts
>>> training
>>
>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly
>>> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me
>>> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts
>>> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a
>>> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest
>>> regards, Keith Vick
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Mark BurningHawk
>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM
>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw]
>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am
>>> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a
>>> certain type of training could injure another person.  I am a bit
>>> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for
>>> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original
>>> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any
>>> controversy over mobility
>>> methods.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindlaw:
>>>
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4
>> 0msn.c
>> om
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindlaw mailing list
>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindlaw:
>>>
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s
>> bcglob
>> al.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c
>> ox.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>>
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg
> lobal.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast.
> net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> blindlaw:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net 