[nabs-l] Pedestrian safety improvement act

Fri Apr 24 18:07:38 UTC 2009

Jont,
I disagree.  Putting a mechanism in every cane to
detect the hybrid has several problems.  It likely will make the cane 
heavier.  It will make canes more fragile.  Lastly and importantly it will 
drive up the cost of canes.  We need canes to be affordable.  My canes wear 
out in a handful of years, like three or four years.  The paint wears off 
and its just older.  So I want the cost of canes to stay where they are.

Also such legislation will help all pedestrians not just blind people. 
Children are still taught to stop, look and listen.  So listening is still a 
valuable cue for all.  We should not take this away.

Ashley

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "jonte" <jonte711 at gmail.com>
To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list" 
<nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 9:43 PM
Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Pedestrian safety improvement act

> How about putting a mechanism in the cane that detects the hybrid car? I 
> think that would be much more effective than trying to persuade the car 
> companies to accommodate us.
> Jonte
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Spangler <spangler.robert at gmail.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 8:06 PM
> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list 
> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Pedestrian safety improvement act
>
> I totally agree with you but I think you misunderstand the legislation.
>  It is not necessarily saying that we have to cause setbacks in hybrid
> cars or even how we should be able to hear them.  It simply states that
> the department of transportation would have to research it.  It can be
> done without being a hinderance--there could be a mechanism on the car
> that would make a sound whose speed changes with the speed of the car.
> And let's remember that we don't want noise; we just want something that
> is audible.  I think that most blind people would agree with sighted
> people that they don't want loud trucks driving past their houses.
>
> Thanks,
> Robby
>
> Jim Reed wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I am not quite sure how to feel on this issue. On one hand, quiet cars 
>> might pose a saftey risk to blind persons and others, but on the other 
>> hand, there is such a thing as noise pollution, air pollution, dependence 
>> on forign oil, and enviromental damage.
>>
>> Aditionally, there is another element of this issue related to the 
>> support or hinderance of societal progress. Hybrids represent the next 
>> great leap in our society, if additional laws are passed regulating this 
>> development, it may prove to hinder the development of the hybrid car. 
>> Remember, the impact of hybrid cars isnt just a blindness issue, there 
>> are much more importiant nation issues at stake. For example, national 
>> security risk via a dependence of forign oil.
>>
>> There are also economic concerns. The continued research and development 
>> of hybrids, alternative fuels, and  "green" energy, will potentially be 
>> the savior of our economy. If hybrids become the next big thing, they 
>> could jumpstart the nearly dead auto industry, thus helping our economy 
>> and individual families. If you go to the national convention in Detroit, 
>> you will all see first hand the conciquences of this current economic 
>> collapes. Now is the time to be supporting industy and inovation, not 
>> hindering it.
>>
>> Lastly, if blind independence is truely the goal of the NFB and blind 
>> persons, then the burden is on us -- blind people-- to adapt to the 
>> changing world, the burden is not on the world to adapt to us. Perhaps in 
>> the era of silent cars, it may be time to tweak cane-travel 
>> methodologies?
>>
>> I can't support this. I will not be a party to the hinderance of societal 
>> progress, continued enviromental degradfation,  or further economic 
>> decline. I will not expect industy or tax payers to foot the bill because 
>> I (we) refuse to adapt.
>>
>> Well thats my two cents
>> Jim
>>
>> "Ignorance killed the cat; curiosity was framed."
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nabs-l mailing list
>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> nabs-l:
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/spangler.robert%40gmail.com
>>
>
> -- 
> Robert Spangler
> The University of Toledo
> Student Senate - Recording Secretary
> Ohio Association of Blind Students - President
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nabs-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/jonte711%40gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nabs-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/bookwormahb%40earthlink.net
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature database 4033 (20090424) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> 