[blindlaw] Educating Law Enforcement
Bruce E. Naccari
bnaccari at cox.net
Wed Mar 31 20:44:25 UTC 2010
On the topic of how one can best proceed to get enforcement of the rights of guide dog users and the White Cane laws: Many municipalities and states have Human rights Commissions or Human Relations Commissions with rather broad powers to enforce state or local antidiscrimination laws and to assess and then seek to achieve a conciliation of grievances involving discrimination complaints or complaints of poor relations between or among groups in the population. If your locality or state has such an agency, anyone with a grievance involving police failure or business or public accommodation operators’ failures to enforce and/or comply with the White Cane laws and laws protecting the right to use service animals like guide dogs should in my opinion consider filing a complaint there. Because these agencies usually are charged with a duty to try to achieve an amicable conciliation of the complaint before a hearing can be held, their procedures are useful for achieving results in cases of deprivation of rights with no or low special damages in dollars and where litigation would be lengthy and a judge with the discretion to do so might not grant adequate attorney’s fees. While I served first as Legal Counsel to the New Orleans Commission and then later as a commissioner we successfully conciliated several complaints against restaurants, bars, taxi companies, etc., involving the exclusion of guide dogs and discrimination against blind customers. In my opinion getting such a commission to become your advocate with the local police will likely prove to be more fruitful than filing Internal Affairs Division/public Integrity Division complaints with eh police department. Police tend to stiffen and back each other when a complaint is filed against one of their own but will often respond amicably and cooperatively to conciliatory procedures which seem less like an attack. And if there is a local or state Commission of this sort I would contact it to ask it in a formal petition to ensure that Police Officer Standard Training classes and/or Police Academy classes in your jurisdiction are getting adequate education about the White Cane laws and the pertinent antidiscrimination laws and about the rights of cane and service animal users. I will leave it to the wisdom of the NFB’s government relations staff and lobbyists to decide if it would be worth the time and effort to draft model amendments to the pertinent laws that would if enacted explicitly require POST an similar training of law enforcement officers to include formal instruction in this area and to require that applicants for driver’s licenses when tested show familiarity with the White Cane safety laws.
---- blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org wrote:
> Send blindlaw mailing list submissions to
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> blindlaw-owner at nfbnet.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of blindlaw digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
> (Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc.)
> 2. Re: A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access (Steve Jacobson)
> 3. Re: Pimp My Cane (David Andrews)
> 4. Canes and Blindness (David Andrews)
> 5. Re: A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access (Aser Tolentino)
> 6. Re: Pimp My Cane (Ross Doerr)
> 7. Re: Canes and Blindness (WB)
> 8. Re: Pimp My Cane ( Rob Tabor)
> 9. Re: Pimp My Cane (WB)
> 10. Re: Pimp My Cane (David Andrews)
> 11. Re: A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access (James Weisberg)
> 12. Educating Law Enforcement (Joe Orozco)
> 13. Re: Pimp My Cane (Mark BurningHawk)
> 14. Re: Educating Law Enforcement (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net)
> 15. Re: Educating Law Enforcement ( Rob Tabor)
> 16. Arizona Attorney magazine (Susan Kelly)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:18:38 -0600
> From: "Olusegun -- Victory Associates LTD, Inc."
> <ukekearuaro at valtdnet.com>
> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
> Message-ID: <1396EC6B323A463B922D4F129B95066D at valtd>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Hi Cathryn:
>
> MobileSpeak, the competition for cell phone screen reader, will also work on
> the HTC Ozone if you choose to stay with Verizon.
>
> Aside from these, there are several mostly Nokia phones that Talks can run
> on. Here are a few: N85, N86, 6120 Classic, E65, E66, E61I, N95, N96, ETC.
> I hear that the new Talks5 soon to be released will even work on Nokia Touch
> Screen phones.
>
> Please note that Nokia phones use GSM technology; if you choose a Nokia
> phone, you will be stuck with either AT&T or T-Mobile for the most part. It
> is my understanding that the HTC Ozone supports both GSM and CDMA platforms;
> with this phone, you can still keep Verizon if that is your preference.
>
> In the event that you need to use the KNFB Reader, this product DOES NOT
> currently work on any phones running Windows Mobile operating systems. It
> works primarily on Nokia phones such as the N86, N82, and 6120 Classic to
> mention a few.
>
> To learn more about different phones that you can use with a screen reader,
> please consider subscribing to the Blind Phones List using the address
> below:
>
> blindphones-subscribe at mosenexplosion.com
>
> Hope the foregoing has been helpful.
>
> Sincerely,
> Olusegun
> Denver, Colorado
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 13:41:12 -0500
> From: "Steve Jacobson" <steve.jacobson at visi.com>
> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
> Message-ID: <auto-000018901081 at mailback2.g2host.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Cathryn,
>
> Like Joe, I am also using an accessible cellphone through Sprint. Maybe I can shed a little light on a couple of things.
>
> First, the KNFB Reader phone is as expensive as it is mostly because of the KNFB reader software rather than the phone. However the total price has come down
> to around $1,500. Of this, $995 is for the software that converts print into spoken text. That is about the same price as the K-1000 software that performs that
> function on a personal computer. Speaking very generally, the phone itself is roughly $300 and the software or "screen reader" that makes the phone functions talk
> is around another $200. The price estimated here for the phone is based upon buying a phone from a dealer without going through a phone company. Generally if
> you buy a phone through a service provider and sign a two year contract or renew one for two years, the phone company in effect subsidizes the cost of a new
> phone by $150 or $200 or so. Therefore, if you sign a new contract or extend an existing one, it is very possible that you can get a phone that can be made
> accessible for $100 or so, but you still have to buy a "screen reader" for the phone which will probably cost you another $200.
>
> However, as Joe mentioned, there are some phones out there which have some speech built in. These phones can cost you less than $100 with a new contract or
> an extension, and no screen reader is required. However, phones with built-in speech generally cannot handle e-mail or web browsing, but they can usually handle
> text messaging now and allow access to your contacts. I believe that Sprint still has the LG Rumor 2 and the LG Lotus and there could be others by now that fit this
> category.
>
> You cannot add a screen reader to just any phone. Like computers, the more advanced phones have "operating systems," and some of these do allow a screen
> reader to be added. The most common operating system on phones that can be used with Sprint and Verizon is called Windows Mobile. There is a screen reader
> called Mobile Speak that works with many of these phones. Such phones are sometimes called SmartPhones or Pocket PC's. Common brands include Samsung
> and Joe mentioned and also HTC but there are others. Many of the Palm phones cannot be used with a screen reader.
>
> Many of the phones that work on T-Mobil and AT&T use the Simbian operating system. There is another screen reader that is used on these phones called TALKS.
> However, Mobile Speak also works on some of these phones, and TALKS works on certain Verizon phones now. Phones made by Nokia are most common in this
> category, but not all Nokia phones are capablt of supporting a screen reader.
>
> I just went through the process of buying an HTC Snap phone which I use on Sprint with Mobile Speak, and I found the whole business to be confusing at best.
> Therefore, I hope the above helps a little, but keep in mind that something I have written could easily have become out of date since I started this note. <smile>
> Still, if you can keep in mind that some phones are simply not accessible, some have some built-in accessibility for basics, and some that use Windows Mobile or
> Simbian operating systems can be made accessible with the addition of a screen reader, you will be off to a good start. Then also remember that you can usually get
> a big discount buying a phone from a service provider with a new contract or contract extension. Good luck.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Steve Jacobson ,
>
> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:03:52 -0400, Cathryn Bonnette wrote:
>
> >Thanks much- Do you know if it is possible to purchase the voice software to
> >install on a cell?
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> >Behalf Of Joe Orozco
> >Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 9:47 AM
> >To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'
> >Subject: Re: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
>
> >I have a Samsung Intrepid through Sprint. I switched over from Verizon,
> >better deal on unlimited data plan. The only advantage through Verizon, I
> >think, is that you can purchase their HTC Ozone with Mobile Speak installed.
> >Someone can correct me on that, and Verizon also carries the LG line that
> >provides moderate accessibility. I also live in DC and both carriers are
> >the best ones here in terms of reception.
>
> >Joe Orozco
>
> >"Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their sleeves,
> >some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org
> >[mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Cathryn Bonnette
> >Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 9:03 AM
> >To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'
> >Subject: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
>
> >Greetings to All:
>
> >
>
> >Wondering if anyone can offer guidance on good deals, best
> >companies, etc.
> >for cell phones or cell/internet packages. I confess I don't
> >have $2,000.00
> >to spend on the KNFB version, though it sounds great. I have heard the
> >frustration from Verizon employees in their center for customers with
> >disabilities that no one listens to their attempts to advocate.
> > I observed
> >yesterday that several cell phones using "Talks" voice software are no
> >longer available.
>
> >
>
> >I'm hoping to shortcut similar research on several companies by seeking
> >wisdom from the group.
>
> >
>
> >Thanks in advance for any tips you may have to offer, and thanks for
> >listening-
>
> >
>
> >Cathryn
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/jsoroz
> >co%40gmail.com
> >
>
> >__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
> >virus signature database 4984 (20100330) __________
>
> >The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> >http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
>
> >__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> >database 4985 (20100330) __________
>
> >The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> >http://www.eset.com
> >
>
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/cathrynisfinally%4
> >0verizon.net
> >No virus found in this incoming message.
> >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >Version: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2777 - Release Date: 03/30/10
> >06:32:00
>
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/steve.jacobson%40visi.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:27:02 -0500
> From: David Andrews <dandrews at visi.com>
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Pimp My Cane
> Message-ID: <auto-000145729346 at mailfront2.g2host.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> Mark:
>
> Two things: first, discussion of NFB philosophy is not really on
> topic for this list, nonetheless I will try and briefly answer your
> question. I think the problem comes in that you misunderstand why we
> aren't in favor of some audio pedestrian signals, some forms of
> currency identification etc. First, some of your language, that we
> "rail against" does not lend itself to reasoned discussion. Your
> examples to me imply that you think we are against any recognizable
> identification of blindness. This isn't the reason. I think as a
> group we are proud of ourselves as blind persons and what we have accomplished.
>
> On the other hand we feel that you should only ask for and use those
> accommodations that are necessary, and when there are other ways of
> accomplishing something, you should use those ways.
>
> You are drawing a black and white picture of the world, and NFB's
> reaction to it, and the true picture is much more nuanced.
>
> Dave
>
> At 04:51 PM 3/28/2010, you wrote:
> >I'm following this thread, and I know a large percentage of the folks
> >here are NFB members; I personally a not, nor any organization, for
> >that matter. I find a bit of hypocrisy in this discussion: First the
> >NFB rails against things like audible cross walk signals and so on,
> >claiming that the blind don't need them, that it's not what the blind
> >"want," whatever. Same with identifiable currency. Now, however, I
> >hear a bunch of the same people saying, in effect, "I want to carry a
> >symbol of blindness! I want to proclaim my blindness to everyone so
> >that they can alter their behaviors appropriately in recognition of
> >the fact that I'm blind!" I should think the true spirit of the NFB
> >might be to use a black cane and give no indication whatsoever of
> >blindness, except on a purely voluntary basis. I just don't
> >understand this.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:37:34 -0500
> From: David Andrews <dandrews at visi.com>
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: [blindlaw] Canes and Blindness
> Message-ID: <auto-000145731384 at mailfront2.g2host.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> Mark:
>
> I suppose it is a goal to "blend in and not stand out" as you say,
> but not just in a physical sense. I want to be a part of society, an
> equal, getting the bad and the good do along with my sighted
> counterparts. With the tools available to me today, cane, dog etc.,
> I will always stand out some. So instead of trying to hide that I
> need to be proud of my blindness and promote a positive attitude
> towards those tools and blind people, so the stigma goes away. There
> is a stigma because we are not equals -- our unemployment rate etc.
> prove that. When we change that it won't matter that we carry a
> cane, use a dog etc. We won't change attitudes by not using canes
> and the like though.
>
> Dave
>
> At 08:00 PM 3/28/2010, you wrote:
> >I'm not quibbling with the white cane as a mobility tool. However,
> >recently a thread started here about carrying a white cane merely to
> >identify oneself as blind, so as not to cause confusion when being
> >unable to read name tags, etc., at a symposium or whatever. It was
> >put forth that canes should be carried, in addition to any value they
> >may have as a mobility aid, merely to identify a blind person as
> >blind, and to allow the sighted to give them a "handicap," in not
> >being able to read name tags. For this purpose, a sign declaring "I
> >am blind, please act accordingly," would serve just as well, it seems
> >to me, and the white cane then becomes a stigma-maker, not a tool.
> >For purposes of this discussion, the "white," color of the cane
> >becomes the "distress cry of the blind," or something; the identifying
> >mark by which blind people are known and warn their surroundings that
> >they are in fact in need of a handicap. This is one reason why I want
> >to use a cane that's other than white with a red tip. It is very true
> >that, even with my guide dog, when I wear sunglasses, I am often
> >mistaken for a dog-walker, not a guide dog user. It's like that old
> >left-handed compliment, "No one would know you're blind, you do that
> >so well." That infuriates me when it's said to me. It seems that
> >some here are trying to avoid just this situation--being mistaken for
> >a sighted person--when I should think that was the ultimate goal of
> >any blind person--to blend in and not stand out.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 12:42:23 -0700
> From: Aser Tolentino <agtolentino at gmail.com>
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
> Message-ID: <AB0AB2D6-502D-49EC-9A47-95A399487F7D at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> > I thought I'd chime in with a note about VoiceOver on the iPhone.
> > Apple includes a mobile version of its screen reader as part of the
> > operating system. It works with all Apple apps and many third party
> > apps to varying degrees. I can type on the onscreen keyboard about
> > as fast as I could on a numeric keypad. The phone starts at $199
> > with contract and runs about $90 a month for service.
>
> On Mar 30, 2010, at 11:41, "Steve Jacobson" <steve.jacobson at visi.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Cathryn,
> >
> > Like Joe, I am also using an accessible cellphone through Sprint.
> > Maybe I can shed a little light on a couple of things.
> >
> > First, the KNFB Reader phone is as expensive as it is mostly because
> > of the KNFB reader software rather than the phone. However the
> > total price has come down
> > to around $1,500. Of this, $995 is for the software that converts
> > print into spoken text. That is about the same price as the K-1000
> > software that performs that
> > function on a personal computer. Speaking very generally, the phone
> > itself is roughly $300 and the software or "screen reader" that
> > makes the phone functions talk
> > is around another $200. The price estimated here for the phone is
> > based upon buying a phone from a dealer without going through a
> > phone company. Generally if
> > you buy a phone through a service provider and sign a two year
> > contract or renew one for two years, the phone company in effect
> > subsidizes the cost of a new
> > phone by $150 or $200 or so. Therefore, if you sign a new contract
> > or extend an existing one, it is very possible that you can get a
> > phone that can be made
> > accessible for $100 or so, but you still have to buy a "screen
> > reader" for the phone which will probably cost you another $200.
> >
> > However, as Joe mentioned, there are some phones out there which
> > have some speech built in. These phones can cost you less than $100
> > with a new contract or
> > an extension, and no screen reader is required. However, phones
> > with built-in speech generally cannot handle e-mail or web browsing,
> > but they can usually handle
> > text messaging now and allow access to your contacts. I believe
> > that Sprint still has the LG Rumor 2 and the LG Lotus and there
> > could be others by now that fit this
> > category.
> >
> > You cannot add a screen reader to just any phone. Like computers,
> > the more advanced phones have "operating systems," and some of these
> > do allow a screen
> > reader to be added. The most common operating system on phones that
> > can be used with Sprint and Verizon is called Windows Mobile. There
> > is a screen reader
> > called Mobile Speak that works with many of these phones. Such
> > phones are sometimes called SmartPhones or Pocket PC's. Common
> > brands include Samsung
> > and Joe mentioned and also HTC but there are others. Many of the
> > Palm phones cannot be used with a screen reader.
> >
> > Many of the phones that work on T-Mobil and AT&T use the Simbian
> > operating system. There is another screen reader that is used on
> > these phones called TALKS.
> > However, Mobile Speak also works on some of these phones, and TALKS
> > works on certain Verizon phones now. Phones made by Nokia are most
> > common in this
> > category, but not all Nokia phones are capablt of supporting a
> > screen reader.
> >
> > I just went through the process of buying an HTC Snap phone which I
> > use on Sprint with Mobile Speak, and I found the whole business to
> > be confusing at best.
> > Therefore, I hope the above helps a little, but keep in mind that
> > something I have written could easily have become out of date since
> > I started this note. <smile>
> > Still, if you can keep in mind that some phones are simply not
> > accessible, some have some built-in accessibility for basics, and
> > some that use Windows Mobile or
> > Simbian operating systems can be made accessible with the addition
> > of a screen reader, you will be off to a good start. Then also
> > remember that you can usually get
> > a big discount buying a phone from a service provider with a new
> > contract or contract extension. Good luck.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Steve Jacobson ,
> >
> > On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:03:52 -0400, Cathryn Bonnette wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks much- Do you know if it is possible to purchase the voice
> >> software to
> >> install on a cell?
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-
> >> bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> >> Behalf Of Joe Orozco
> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 9:47 AM
> >> To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'
> >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
> >
> >> I have a Samsung Intrepid through Sprint. I switched over from
> >> Verizon,
> >> better deal on unlimited data plan. The only advantage through
> >> Verizon, I
> >> think, is that you can purchase their HTC Ozone with Mobile Speak
> >> installed.
> >> Someone can correct me on that, and Verizon also carries the LG
> >> line that
> >> provides moderate accessibility. I also live in DC and both
> >> carriers are
> >> the best ones here in terms of reception.
> >
> >> Joe Orozco
> >
> >> "Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their
> >> sleeves,
> >> some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org
> >> [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Cathryn Bonnette
> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 9:03 AM
> >> To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'
> >> Subject: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
> >
> >> Greetings to All:
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Wondering if anyone can offer guidance on good deals, best
> >> companies, etc.
> >> for cell phones or cell/internet packages. I confess I don't
> >> have $2,000.00
> >> to spend on the KNFB version, though it sounds great. I have heard
> >> the
> >> frustration from Verizon employees in their center for customers with
> >> disabilities that no one listens to their attempts to advocate.
> >> I observed
> >> yesterday that several cell phones using "Talks" voice software are
> >> no
> >> longer available.
> >
> >>
> >
> >> I'm hoping to shortcut similar research on several companies by
> >> seeking
> >> wisdom from the group.
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Thanks in advance for any tips you may have to offer, and thanks for
> >> listening-
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Cathryn
> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/jsoroz
> >> co%40gmail.com
> >>
> >
> >> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
> >> virus signature database 4984 (20100330) __________
> >
> >> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >
> >> http://www.eset.com
> >>
> >>
> >
> >> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> >> signature
> >> database 4985 (20100330) __________
> >
> >> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >
> >> http://www.eset.com
> >>
> >
> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/cathrynisfinally%4
> >> 0verizon.net
> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
> >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >> Version: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2777 - Release Date:
> >> 03/30/10
> >> 06:32:00
> >
> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/steve.jacobson%40visi.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/agtolentino%40gmail.com
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:52:00 -0400
> From: "Ross Doerr" <rumpole at roadrunner.com>
> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Pimp My Cane
> Message-ID: <B46A6F9A01924457B492FEA900358FB3 at none8a46117901>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Hey, before they cut off this thred of postings, where do I get one of those
> gold-plated canes again?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Danielsen" <cdanielsen8 at aol.com>
> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 6:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Pimp My Cane
>
>
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > With due respect, I think you are misunderstanding the NFB's philosophy
> > and
> > some of our positions. The NFB didn't oppose audible signals, or the
> > lawsuit
> > seeking identifiable money, because we don't believe that blind people
> > need
> > accommodations. What we believe is that blind people ought to have the
> > tools
> > and receive the accommodations that are necessary, not just every
> > conceivable accommodation. Now, you may well disagree with us on what
> > accommodations are necessary, and that is all well and good. Even our own
> > members don't always agree on everything, but we take a vote on the issues
> > we disagree on and once a position has been voted on we stick with it
> > until
> > there is a vote to change it. The white cane is a tool that many blind
> > people have found useful, primarily because it helps us get around. A
> > guide
> > dog is useful to other blind people for the same reason. In the NFB we
> > generally believe that a blind person should be able to have access to
> > these
> > tools and make choices about the ones they will use. Symbolically, the
> > white
> > cane is important because it means we believe it is respectable to be
> > blind,
> > but that's not the only or even the primary reason to carry one. If one
> > has
> > some vision, a white cane may be useful and will certainly avoid
> > misunderstandings arising from not being able to see very well. That said,
> > of course being identified as blind has its down sides. A lot of us have
> > decided that the benefits of carrying a cane outweigh those down sides.
> >
> > In a speech on the nature of independence, our long-time president Kenneth
> > Jernigan pointed out that the white cane and Braille are simply tools that
> > can make a person independent and that many blind people find useful. But
> > he
> > warned us against defining whether a person was independent based on
> > whether
> > or not they chose to use any given tool. Sometimes all of us forget this
> > warning, but I still think it is generally what we believe. We do push for
> > things like Braille literacy and cane training because those who are blind
> > or have low vision should know what all of their options are. It's fine to
> > make a choice, but we believe it should be an informed choice, and not one
> > that is merely made because one doesn't want to seem blind because of
> > society's attitude about blindness. Beyond that, the choice is up to the
> > individual blind person.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> > Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk
> > Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 5:51 PM
> > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Pimp My Cane
> >
> > I'm following this thread, and I know a large percentage of the folks here
> > are NFB members; I personally a not, nor any organization, for that
> > matter.
> > I find a bit of hypocrisy in this discussion: First the NFB rails against
> > things like audible cross walk signals and so on, claiming that the blind
> > don't need them, that it's not what the blind "want," whatever. Same with
> > identifiable currency. Now, however, I hear a bunch of the same people
> > saying, in effect, "I want to carry a symbol of blindness! I want to
> > proclaim my blindness to everyone so that they can alter their behaviors
> > appropriately in recognition of the fact that I'm blind!" I should think
> > the true spirit of the NFB might be to use a black cane and give no
> > indication whatsoever of blindness, except on a purely voluntary basis. I
> > just don't understand this.
> >
> > Mark BurningHawk
> > Skype and Twitter: BurningHawk1969
> > Home: Http://MarkBurningHawk.net/
> > Namaste!
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/cdanielsen8%40aol.
> > com
> >
> > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> > signature
> > database 4983 (20100329) __________
> >
> > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> > signature
> > database 4983 (20100329) __________
> >
> > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/rumpole%40roadrunner.com
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2776 - Release Date: 03/28/10
> 18:32:00
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:36:30 -0500
> From: "WB" <mruniverse08 at gmail.com>
> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Canes and Blindness
> Message-ID: <034501cad059$730318d0$59094a70$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> >From my reading of Mark's statement....and he can defend his own....but I
> didn't see where he said not to use a cane.
>
> One problem in this e-mail trail and others is that many times, myself
> included, read what we want to out of a person's statement rather than what
> they really said. I guess, as in court, yowe cannot come to an amicable
> resolution if the facts are not taken into consideration.
>
> I'm sure there will be a statement regarding this one that may take a word
> or two out of context.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of David Andrews
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 2:38 PM
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: [blindlaw] Canes and Blindness
>
> Mark:
>
> I suppose it is a goal to "blend in and not stand out" as you say,
> but not just in a physical sense. I want to be a part of society, an
> equal, getting the bad and the good do along with my sighted
> counterparts. With the tools available to me today, cane, dog etc.,
> I will always stand out some. So instead of trying to hide that I
> need to be proud of my blindness and promote a positive attitude
> towards those tools and blind people, so the stigma goes away. There
> is a stigma because we are not equals -- our unemployment rate etc.
> prove that. When we change that it won't matter that we carry a
> cane, use a dog etc. We won't change attitudes by not using canes
> and the like though.
>
> Dave
>
> At 08:00 PM 3/28/2010, you wrote:
> >I'm not quibbling with the white cane as a mobility tool. However,
> >recently a thread started here about carrying a white cane merely to
> >identify oneself as blind, so as not to cause confusion when being
> >unable to read name tags, etc., at a symposium or whatever. It was
> >put forth that canes should be carried, in addition to any value they
> >may have as a mobility aid, merely to identify a blind person as
> >blind, and to allow the sighted to give them a "handicap," in not
> >being able to read name tags. For this purpose, a sign declaring "I
> >am blind, please act accordingly," would serve just as well, it seems
> >to me, and the white cane then becomes a stigma-maker, not a tool.
> >For purposes of this discussion, the "white," color of the cane
> >becomes the "distress cry of the blind," or something; the identifying
> >mark by which blind people are known and warn their surroundings that
> >they are in fact in need of a handicap. This is one reason why I want
> >to use a cane that's other than white with a red tip. It is very true
> >that, even with my guide dog, when I wear sunglasses, I am often
> >mistaken for a dog-walker, not a guide dog user. It's like that old
> >left-handed compliment, "No one would know you're blind, you do that
> >so well." That infuriates me when it's said to me. It seems that
> >some here are trying to avoid just this situation--being mistaken for
> >a sighted person--when I should think that was the ultimate goal of
> >any blind person--to blend in and not stand out.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/mruniverse08%40gma
> il.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:37:55 -0500
> From: " Rob Tabor" <rob.tabor at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Pimp My Cane
> Message-ID: <DF703EA8F23945B59830BBEB0CFEC302 at Rob>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=response
>
> Good evening.
>
> Although this thread of conversation began as something quite amuzing and at
> least arguably relevant to questions pertaining to alternately colored or
> multi-colored travel canes and their compliance with white cane laws it has
> evolved into an equally interesting but kokophanous diatribe over how we
> perceive one another and how the world perceives as people with blindness or
> otherwise low vision. In other words, the conversation is drifting far from
> being relevant to a blind lawyers' discussion list for which it is intended.
> I recognize, however, that Dave Anddrews has final judgment on this as list
> owner/moderator. Perhaps someone should start a philosophy of blindness
> discussion list where views like these can be aired and responded to.
> Best regards,
> Rob Tabor Vice president Douglas county (KS) Chapter NFB
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark BurningHawk" <stone_troll at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 5:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Pimp My Cane
>
>
> > Oh cut that out. I was born blind, too, and I don't have insecurities
> > about injuring someone; I've never been responsible for anyone else's
> > injury that I didn't mean to, so stop making it personal when I'm trying
> > to keep it general. Blindness is *NOT* a liability any more than
> > clumsiness or large feet. Having bright red hair can e a distraction
> > which can cause injury to someone who sees it. I protest loudly the idea
> > that blind people, especially high-end, intelligent, lawyer-type blind
> > people accept the fact that they may injure someone more readily than a
> > sighted person with two left feet might. When I see professionals who
> > are blind accepting this shame instead of actively working to correct it,
> > I am sad because this attitude will trickle down to disrupt my life when
> > I do something unconventional. So knock off that psychology crap,
> > please; I use a guide dog, not a cane anyway.
> >
> > Mark BurningHawk
> > Skype and Twitter: BurningHawk1969
> > Home: Http://MarkBurningHawk.net/
> > Namaste!
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/rob.tabor%40sbcglobal.net
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:41:23 -0500
> From: "WB" <mruniverse08 at gmail.com>
> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Pimp My Cane
> Message-ID: <034601cad05a$20734620$6159d260$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I'm a member of NFB and have heard the things that Mark was speaking of.
> Dave, you may be taking your view which you stated. The fact is that there
> are many members who do what Mark spoke of. And the perception of many in
> the blind community is as such.
>
> I've heard an NFB member rail against the I-Phone because they wanted to
> dissuade a person from purchasing it so they could waste money on the KNFB
> reader which is way to expensive. I've heard many a philosophy on the use
> of straight canes and why we shouldn't use a folding cane.
>
> The list goes on and on. I think a point was being made that those who wish
> to disagree with mark are blatantly overlooking.
>
> Again, he can defend his own statements but I've been reading the e-mails
> relating to this topic. Once again, I and others have gotten on their
> soapbox on a topic that started lightly. Well, here's to reading some more.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of David Andrews
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 2:27 PM
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Pimp My Cane
>
> Mark:
>
> Two things: first, discussion of NFB philosophy is not really on
> topic for this list, nonetheless I will try and briefly answer your
> question. I think the problem comes in that you misunderstand why we
> aren't in favor of some audio pedestrian signals, some forms of
> currency identification etc. First, some of your language, that we
> "rail against" does not lend itself to reasoned discussion. Your
> examples to me imply that you think we are against any recognizable
> identification of blindness. This isn't the reason. I think as a
> group we are proud of ourselves as blind persons and what we have
> accomplished.
>
> On the other hand we feel that you should only ask for and use those
> accommodations that are necessary, and when there are other ways of
> accomplishing something, you should use those ways.
>
> You are drawing a black and white picture of the world, and NFB's
> reaction to it, and the true picture is much more nuanced.
>
> Dave
>
> At 04:51 PM 3/28/2010, you wrote:
> >I'm following this thread, and I know a large percentage of the folks
> >here are NFB members; I personally a not, nor any organization, for
> >that matter. I find a bit of hypocrisy in this discussion: First the
> >NFB rails against things like audible cross walk signals and so on,
> >claiming that the blind don't need them, that it's not what the blind
> >"want," whatever. Same with identifiable currency. Now, however, I
> >hear a bunch of the same people saying, in effect, "I want to carry a
> >symbol of blindness! I want to proclaim my blindness to everyone so
> >that they can alter their behaviors appropriately in recognition of
> >the fact that I'm blind!" I should think the true spirit of the NFB
> >might be to use a black cane and give no indication whatsoever of
> >blindness, except on a purely voluntary basis. I just don't
> >understand this.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/mruniverse08%40gma
> il.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:41:33 -0500
> From: David Andrews <dandrews at visi.com>
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Pimp My Cane
> Message-ID: <auto-000146642379 at mailfront1.g2host.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> There is -- try nfb-talk. To subscribe either go to:
>
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
> or send e-mail to nfb-talk-request at nfbnet.org and put the word
> subscribe in the subject line by itself.
>
> Dave
>
> At 05:37 PM 3/30/2010, you wrote:
> >Good evening.
> >
> >Although this thread of conversation began as something quite
> >amuzing and at least arguably relevant to questions pertaining to
> >alternately colored or multi-colored travel canes and their
> >compliance with white cane laws it has evolved into an equally
> >interesting but kokophanous diatribe over how we perceive one
> >another and how the world perceives as people with blindness or
> >otherwise low vision. In other words, the conversation is drifting
> >far from being relevant to a blind lawyers' discussion list for
> >which it is intended. I recognize, however, that Dave Anddrews has
> >final judgment on this as list owner/moderator. Perhaps someone
> >should start a philosophy of blindness discussion list where views
> >like these can be aired and responded to.
> >Best regards,
> >Rob Tabor Vice president Douglas county (KS) Chapter NFB
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:42:43 -0700
> From: "James Weisberg" <jimi-law at dc.rr.com>
> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
> Message-ID: <68E61DE2FA7F410EA387623187EB1870 at Blind>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello:
>
> I have had the nokia, forgot the model, running talks and then moved to the
> Motorola Q9 running mobilespeaks. At first I found Talks superior but it
> was obviously due to my familiarity with it and the Nokia I had been using.
> I soon discovered the "MotoQ" running the mobilespeaks software was much
> slicker. I had access to basically all blackberry type options although I
> did not pay for the internet and cannot say how that worked. Currently I am
> using an iPhone with "voiceover" which is inadequate if you are totally
> blind but usable with limited vision and worth the hassle.
>
> Jimi
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of Steve Jacobson
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 11:41 AM
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
>
> Cathryn,
>
> Like Joe, I am also using an accessible cellphone through Sprint. Maybe I
> can shed a little light on a couple of things.
>
> First, the KNFB Reader phone is as expensive as it is mostly because of the
> KNFB reader software rather than the phone. However the total price has
> come down
> to around $1,500. Of this, $995 is for the software that converts print
> into spoken text. That is about the same price as the K-1000 software that
> performs that
> function on a personal computer. Speaking very generally, the phone itself
> is roughly $300 and the software or "screen reader" that makes the phone
> functions talk
> is around another $200. The price estimated here for the phone is based
> upon buying a phone from a dealer without going through a phone company.
> Generally if
> you buy a phone through a service provider and sign a two year contract or
> renew one for two years, the phone company in effect subsidizes the cost of
> a new
> phone by $150 or $200 or so. Therefore, if you sign a new contract or
> extend an existing one, it is very possible that you can get a phone that
> can be made
> accessible for $100 or so, but you still have to buy a "screen reader" for
> the phone which will probably cost you another $200.
>
> However, as Joe mentioned, there are some phones out there which have some
> speech built in. These phones can cost you less than $100 with a new
> contract or
> an extension, and no screen reader is required. However, phones with
> built-in speech generally cannot handle e-mail or web browsing, but they can
> usually handle
> text messaging now and allow access to your contacts. I believe that Sprint
> still has the LG Rumor 2 and the LG Lotus and there could be others by now
> that fit this
> category.
>
> You cannot add a screen reader to just any phone. Like computers, the more
> advanced phones have "operating systems," and some of these do allow a
> screen
> reader to be added. The most common operating system on phones that can be
> used with Sprint and Verizon is called Windows Mobile. There is a screen
> reader
> called Mobile Speak that works with many of these phones. Such phones are
> sometimes called SmartPhones or Pocket PC's. Common brands include Samsung
> and Joe mentioned and also HTC but there are others. Many of the Palm
> phones cannot be used with a screen reader.
>
> Many of the phones that work on T-Mobil and AT&T use the Simbian operating
> system. There is another screen reader that is used on these phones called
> TALKS.
> However, Mobile Speak also works on some of these phones, and TALKS works on
> certain Verizon phones now. Phones made by Nokia are most common in this
> category, but not all Nokia phones are capablt of supporting a screen
> reader.
>
> I just went through the process of buying an HTC Snap phone which I use on
> Sprint with Mobile Speak, and I found the whole business to be confusing at
> best.
> Therefore, I hope the above helps a little, but keep in mind that something
> I have written could easily have become out of date since I started this
> note. <smile>
> Still, if you can keep in mind that some phones are simply not accessible,
> some have some built-in accessibility for basics, and some that use Windows
> Mobile or
> Simbian operating systems can be made accessible with the addition of a
> screen reader, you will be off to a good start. Then also remember that you
> can usually get
> a big discount buying a phone from a service provider with a new contract or
> contract extension. Good luck.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Steve Jacobson ,
>
> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:03:52 -0400, Cathryn Bonnette wrote:
>
> >Thanks much- Do you know if it is possible to purchase the voice software
> to
> >install on a cell?
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> >Behalf Of Joe Orozco
> >Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 9:47 AM
> >To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'
> >Subject: Re: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
>
> >I have a Samsung Intrepid through Sprint. I switched over from Verizon,
> >better deal on unlimited data plan. The only advantage through Verizon, I
> >think, is that you can purchase their HTC Ozone with Mobile Speak
> installed.
> >Someone can correct me on that, and Verizon also carries the LG line that
> >provides moderate accessibility. I also live in DC and both carriers are
> >the best ones here in terms of reception.
>
> >Joe Orozco
>
> >"Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their sleeves,
> >some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org
> >[mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Cathryn Bonnette
> >Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 9:03 AM
> >To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'
> >Subject: [blindlaw] A Change of Topic-Cell Phone Access
>
> >Greetings to All:
>
> >
>
> >Wondering if anyone can offer guidance on good deals, best
> >companies, etc.
> >for cell phones or cell/internet packages. I confess I don't
> >have $2,000.00
> >to spend on the KNFB version, though it sounds great. I have heard the
> >frustration from Verizon employees in their center for customers with
> >disabilities that no one listens to their attempts to advocate.
> > I observed
> >yesterday that several cell phones using "Talks" voice software are no
> >longer available.
>
> >
>
> >I'm hoping to shortcut similar research on several companies by seeking
> >wisdom from the group.
>
> >
>
> >Thanks in advance for any tips you may have to offer, and thanks for
> >listening-
>
> >
>
> >Cathryn
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/jsoroz
> >co%40gmail.com
> >
>
> >__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
> >virus signature database 4984 (20100330) __________
>
> >The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> >http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
>
> >__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature
> >database 4985 (20100330) __________
>
> >The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> >http://www.eset.com
> >
>
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/cathrynisfinally%
> 4
> >0verizon.net
> >No virus found in this incoming message.
> >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >Version: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2777 - Release Date: 03/30/10
> >06:32:00
>
>
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/steve.jacobson%40
> visi.com
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/jimi-law%40dc.rr.c
> om
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
> database 4986 (20100330) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
> database 4986 (20100330) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 21:20:17 -0400
> From: "Joe Orozco" <jsorozco at gmail.com>
> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: [blindlaw] Educating Law Enforcement
> Message-ID: <EC24770AC0A34F3BB0B93B0510529BCB at Rufus>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Dear all,
>
> On a more serious topic, what is the best course of action to take in a
> situation where police officers do not know of service animal accessibility
> laws, or will not enforce these laws even if they are aware of them? A
> couple of years ago I wound up suing a Chinatown curbside carrier for not
> allowing my Seeing Eye dog on one of their buses. Since that incident I
> have monitored other discrimination cases where the police officers on the
> scene either partially or mostly took the side of the public business,
> claiming the business could refuse whoever they want or suggesting
> alternative services to avoid future discrimination. In the moment it seems
> as though there is very little one can do to trump the authority of the
> local police department, which seems unfair, but there must surely be
> something one can do to educate what seems to be a widespread ignorance
> among the law enforcement community on the issue. Are there not standard
> training procedures for most law enforcement departments? Are there perhaps
> legal maneuvers one could use to catch the attention of departments that do
> not help protect the rights of service animal handlers? With all respect,
> please do not suggest my going through NAGDU. Otherwise, thank you in
> advance for any light you can shed.
>
> Regards,
>
> Joe Orozco
>
> "Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their sleeves,
> some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> database 4986 (20100330) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:45:45 -0700
> From: Mark BurningHawk <stone_troll at sbcglobal.net>
> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Pimp My Cane
> Message-ID: <F7D27CB1-DD97-44CC-8772-F6C22C78DC51 at sbcglobal.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> I made a promise to take this off list, so that's why I'm not
> defending my statements. :) I'd just be repeating myself at this
> point; I have tried to make my words stand on their own, to not make
> it personal and to keep my rhetoric to a minimum. My apologies if I
> failed, but WB's right; things like the railing against the Iphone,
> the amazingly harsh status *AGAINST* guide dogs, etc., have really
> turned me off to NFB, as well as the whole "you will be assimilated,"
> thing. This is why I don't join *ANY* organization; I just don't fit
> in. :)
>
> Mark BurningHawk
> Skype and Twitter: BurningHawk1969
> Home: Http://MarkBurningHawk.net/
> Namaste!
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 20:17:38 -0700
> From: <ckrugman at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Educating Law Enforcement
> Message-ID: <F658ECD40C124A9A9F6FE626B8BBA285 at spike>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Hi Joe,
> Much depends on the jurisdiction that you are in. One option is to request a
> police supervisor such as a sergeant or contact a shift or watch commander
> to address the issue. Here in California I am familiar with a situation
> where a guide dog user was not allowed in a store with his dog and the
> police warned the business owner that the dog user could sue him and file a
> civil rights complaint. The important thing is to know the laws in each
> jurisdiction as well as the relevant sections of the ADA regarding public
> businesses and accommodations.
> Chuck
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe Orozco" <jsorozco at gmail.com>
> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 6:20 PM
> Subject: [blindlaw] Educating Law Enforcement
>
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > On a more serious topic, what is the best course of action to take in a
> > situation where police officers do not know of service animal
> > accessibility
> > laws, or will not enforce these laws even if they are aware of them? A
> > couple of years ago I wound up suing a Chinatown curbside carrier for not
> > allowing my Seeing Eye dog on one of their buses. Since that incident I
> > have monitored other discrimination cases where the police officers on the
> > scene either partially or mostly took the side of the public business,
> > claiming the business could refuse whoever they want or suggesting
> > alternative services to avoid future discrimination. In the moment it
> > seems
> > as though there is very little one can do to trump the authority of the
> > local police department, which seems unfair, but there must surely be
> > something one can do to educate what seems to be a widespread ignorance
> > among the law enforcement community on the issue. Are there not standard
> > training procedures for most law enforcement departments? Are there
> > perhaps
> > legal maneuvers one could use to catch the attention of departments that
> > do
> > not help protect the rights of service animal handlers? With all respect,
> > please do not suggest my going through NAGDU. Otherwise, thank you in
> > advance for any light you can shed.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Joe Orozco
> >
> > "Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their sleeves,
> > some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing
> >
> >
> > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> > signature
> > database 4986 (20100330) __________
> >
> > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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%40sbcglobal.net
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 23:00:41 -0500
> From: " Rob Tabor" <rob.tabor at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Educating Law Enforcement
> Message-ID: <3239D11BD0AD48EF8EC29BA6A3206D85 at Rob>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Hi, Joe and all.
>
> When I acquired my dog guide from The Seeing Eye? in 1980 all of us in the
> dog navigation training class were provided a copy of the dog guide use
> protection clause in the White Cane Act applicable to our respective home
> states. I suspect The Seeing Eye? and other dog guide training schools
> provide the same service to their graduates. That being the case, the
> obvious first step is to carry the document and show it to the officer who
> is questioning your right to bring the service animal. If the officer is not
> persuaded that s/he has seen the law of the land, the next step is to file a
> formal complaint with the chief of police or to follow whatever process or
> apparatus is available in your municipal government to launch a public
> grievance against the actions of the officer. There is always the option of
> taking one's complaint to the "court of public opinion" in the form of
> letters to the newspaper editor, contacting a newspaper or TV reporter about
> doing a feature on the issue, etc. If these kinder and gentler measures fail
> to yield the desired results, filing a law suit against the police
> department under Title 2 of ADA or the applicable state anti-discrimination
> law may prove to be necessary. One thinng is for sure. Either you will
> acquire a reputation in town as a troublemaker or people will learn you are
> not a person to be trifled with. Take your pick. In any event, good luck in
> these endeavors.
>
> best regards
> Rob Tabor, J.D, Vice president, Douglas County Chapter, NFB
> of Kansas
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe Orozco" <jsorozco at gmail.com>
> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 8:20 PM
> Subject: [blindlaw] Educating Law Enforcement
>
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > On a more serious topic, what is the best course of action to take in a
> > situation where police officers do not know of service animal
> > accessibility
> > laws, or will not enforce these laws even if they are aware of them? A
> > couple of years ago I wound up suing a Chinatown curbside carrier for not
> > allowing my Seeing Eye dog on one of their buses. Since that incident I
> > have monitored other discrimination cases where the police officers on the
> > scene either partially or mostly took the side of the public business,
> > claiming the business could refuse whoever they want or suggesting
> > alternative services to avoid future discrimination. In the moment it
> > seems
> > as though there is very little one can do to trump the authority of the
> > local police department, which seems unfair, but there must surely be
> > something one can do to educate what seems to be a widespread ignorance
> > among the law enforcement community on the issue. Are there not standard
> > training procedures for most law enforcement departments? Are there
> > perhaps
> > legal maneuvers one could use to catch the attention of departments that
> > do
> > not help protect the rights of service animal handlers? With all respect,
> > please do not suggest my going through NAGDU. Otherwise, thank you in
> > advance for any light you can shed.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Joe Orozco
> >
> > "Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their sleeves,
> > some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing
> >
> >
> > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> > signature
> > database 4986 (20100330) __________
> >
> > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/rob.tabor%40sbcglobal.net
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:42:15 -0700
> From: "Susan Kelly" <Susan.Kelly at pima.gov>
> To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> Subject: [blindlaw] Arizona Attorney magazine
> Message-ID:
> <1C09B58171332F49B237676A5158B1F7033D6CE1 at EVS02.central.pima.gov>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
>
> Does anyone else on the list practice in Arizona?
>
> I emailed the State Bar last week to find out if there was either a
> text-only on-line version of the Arizona Attorney magazine, or an audio
> version, as it has become increasingly difficult to read the publication
> even with my CCTV and/or screen magnification software. The format of
> the on-line version does not work at all with screen narration, as it
> keeps getting "off track" into the other fluff on the sides of the
> articles and notices. Of course, the Bar has not bothered to even
> acknowledge my email as of yet. So - would anyone on this list happen
> to know the answer? I ask because the magazine is often the first, or
> at least the most in-depth, notification of rule changes, convention
> information, etc. for Arizona....
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: image/jpeg
> Size: 5675 bytes
> Desc: image001.jpg
> URL: <http://www.nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20100331/25c0ced2/attachment-0001.jpe>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>
>
> End of blindlaw Digest, Vol 70, Issue 24
> ****************************************
More information about the BlindLaw
mailing list