[nabs-l] Not Just Your Average Cane

Tue Apr 20 02:28:52 UTC 2010

Catching up on piles of email, I saw this thread.  I can already see 
Joe Orozco wearing a giant talking watch around his neck.

In all seriousness (or at least some seriousness), aside from the 
specific legal status afforded to a cane that is specifically white 
in many jurisdictions, I see no reason why one couldn't have one or 
more canes that reflect your personality.  In my case, I can picture 
one with a more ivory gloss finish, a leather grip, and polished 
steel cap with a satin finish.  It would be exactly the sort of cane 
I would take to more upscale events and the like.

That said, finding a good way to treat the chips and scratches my 
general every day working cane is subjected to would be a good start.  
I've seen a number of rigid NFB canes that have gotten so much use 
that the bottom foot or so are graphite black because the white 
coating has completely chipped away.  Not exactly what I want when I 
want to look my best!

And yes, the big talking watch for Joe to wear around his neck should 
have that [CENSORED] rooster alarm.

Joseph

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 08:33:56PM -0400, Joe Orozco wrote:
>Hi Mark,
>
>Having started the thread, I feel compelled to respond to your thoughtful
>post.  It goes without say that people's opinions here do not reflect any
>official NFB positions, and I honestly doubt the NFB would genuinely care if
>all its members suddenly decided to sport a wide range of colorfully
>decorated canes.  I think Dr. Maurer would probably find the concept
>amusing, and doesn't Whozit sport a black cane in our logo?  That fellow was
>far ahead of the curve.
>
>For my own part, I'm headed to Michael's sometime soon to embark upon a
>project to transform my own cane into the walking wonder I know it can be.
>I think that in doing so I would do well to use a measure of practical
>sense.  Security checkpoints at airports and federal buildings would
>probably not look kindly on a cane that is different from what is popularly
>accepted.  We can't expect the world to automatically get that blind people
>have their own sense of pizzazz, and by the same token, we can't expect
>people to pick up on the fact we're blind at night if using something as
>obscure as a black cane, even though I agree with the previous subscriber
>that motorists should respect pedestrians with or without this new breed of
>eye candy.
>
>I'm glad people pointed out the jurisdictions that specifically call for the
>cane to be white.  In asking my question, sarcasm notwithstanding, I was not
>really setting out to violate laws that are meant to preserve my safety, but
>I do not want these laws to tuck me away into a label that can be every bit
>as condescending as terms like "handicapped."  If senior citizens can sport
>all manner of creatively designed walking canes, by golly, I want my own
>mode of transportation to broadcast my own sense of humor.  It's not as if I
>can smack a bumper sticker on my German shepherd's butt and call it good,
>although, can you imagine the wide range of clever slogans one could produce
>with that kind of strategic angle?
>
>All of this having been said, I spent nearly a year working on behalf of
>victims of human trafficking.  I learned all about the negative connotations
>associated with words like "pimping," and for using that term to catch your
>attention, I am truly sorry.
>
>In summation, I think the responses on both lists to which the question went
>out has been mostly positive.  It's no scientific survey, but I think it is
>at least slightly indicative of the membership's willingness to explore the
>idea or at least humor my nonsense.  People who have given more
>straight-laced responses are no doubt secretly glad they're not the only
>ones who thought of this, because original this idea is most certainly not.
>Let's leave out the references to accessible currency and other
>controversial topics out of it this time around.  We debate those serious
>issues all the time and should enjoy the all too infrequent light banter.
>
>Best,
>
>Joe Orozco and the Soon to Be Improved Sir Tap-A-Lot
>
>What, as if you haven't ever thought of giving your cane a name???
>
>"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 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/jsoroz
>co%40gmail.com
>
>
>__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
>virus signature database 4980 (20100328) __________
>
>The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
>http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
>database 4980 (20100328) __________
>
>The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
>http://www.eset.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/carter.tjoseph%40gmail.com