[nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
Albert J Rizzi
albert at myblindspot.org
Sun Dec 27 04:40:26 UTC 2009
May I ask where you got your last guide from?
Albert J. Rizzi, M.Ed.
CEO/Founder
My Blind Spot, Inc.
90 Broad Street - 18th Fl.
New York, New York 10004
www.myblindspot.org
PH: 917-553-0347
Fax: 212-858-5759
"The person who says it cannot be done, shouldn't interrupt the one who is
doing it."
Visit us on Facebook LinkedIn
-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
Of Marion & Martin
Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 10:24 PM
To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
Albert,
My assumption is that there is a school that has the ear a senator or
representative that wants to have these protections in the ADA.
Marion
----- Original Message -----
From: "Albert J Rizzi" <albert at myblindspot.org>
To: "'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'"
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
> Ok, so then what is all the fuss about? If the protections are there then
> perhaps someone should let the feds know. Over kill is still over kill.
> In
> your opinion which state affords the best accessibility protections and
> enforcements of the ADA as the same relates to the topic at hand?
> Albert J. Rizzi, M.Ed.
> CEO/Founder
> My Blind Spot, Inc.
> 90 Broad Street - 18th Fl.
> New York, New York 10004
> www.myblindspot.org
> PH: 917-553-0347
> Fax: 212-858-5759
> "The person who says it cannot be done, shouldn't interrupt the one who is
> doing it."
>
>
> Visit us on Facebook LinkedIn
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
> Of Marion & Martin
> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 5:19 PM
> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>
> Albert,
> Most states, including New York, have provisions for trainers of
> service
>
> animals already included in their access laws.
>
> Fraternally yours,
> Marion
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Albert J Rizzi" <albert at myblindspot.org>
> To: "'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'"
> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 2:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>
>
>> True, but when and where could we as an organization facilitate that to
>> happen on a state by state basis, when and where necessary?
>>
>> Albert J. Rizzi, M.Ed.
>> CEO/Founder
>> My Blind Spot, Inc.
>> 90 Broad Street - 18th Fl.
>> New York, New York 10004
>> www.myblindspot.org
>> PH: 917-553-0347
>> Fax: 212-858-5759
>> "The person who says it cannot be done, shouldn't interrupt the one who
>> is
>> doing it."
>>
>>
>> Visit us on Facebook LinkedIn
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>> Behalf
>> Of Marion & Martin
>> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 12:25 PM
>> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>
>> Buddy,
>> As I stated in my previous message, this is the difficulty I have with
>> this proposed legislation. Once we open the proverbial can of worms to
>> those
>>
>> who are not disabled, where would it lead? I think it is best to allow
>> the
>> states to allow trainers access, rather than to place it in a federal law
>> prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability.
>>
>> Fraternally,
>> Marion
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Buddy Brannan" <buddy at brannan.name>
>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 6:45 PM
>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>
>>
>>> By the way, before we go a whole bunch further, I think it's important
>>> that I point up a distinction here. It is not the animal which is
>>> granted
>>> or denied access. Not in the law and not in reality. It is, rather, the
>>> disabled person (or, perhaps, not disabled trainer) who is allowed to be
>>> accompanied by a task trained service animal (or, perhaps, an animal in
>>> training for said service related tasks).
>>>
>>> That is all.
>>> --
>>> Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
>>> Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 25, 2009, at 4:49 PM, Steve Johnson wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think it is best to keep the "companion" animal out of this mix as it
>>>> is
>>>> is defined simply as a pet. See Delta Society.org, and JAN.wvu.edu.
>>>>
>>>> And, this everyone, is where the whole issue of abuse of such a law
>>>> comes
>>
>>>> in
>>>> to play if such an allowance were to be. Perhaps, better understanding
>>>> of
>>>> the current laws would be the better approach than trying to fix
>>>> something
>>>> that there is no solid evidence that it is even broke? Albert, you
>>>> refer
>>
>>>> to
>>>> animals being trained that are being denied access. Please show me the
>>>> hard
>>>> data on this.
>>>>
>>>> I'd bet you anything that most formal agencies do not have any problem
>>>> with
>>>> accessing places of public accommodation with dogs in training before
>>>> they
>>>> are matched with the new master. All of my guides have been from
>>>> Leader,
>>>> and it is amazing how open the communities are in allowing access from
>>>> everything ranging from restaurants to public transit. These cities and
>>>> towns include little ol' Rochester to Detroit. So, where's the
>>>> problem,
>>>> or
>>>> is this just another piece of make me feel good legislation that will
>>>> hurt
>>>> us more than it will actually help us?
>>>>
>>>> Unless one can show me that there is an actual need for this with
>>>> something
>>>> concrete to back it up, then our tax payer dollars are again being
>>>> wasted
>>
>>>> on
>>>> a Federal legislator wasting all of our time with something frivelous
>>>> and
>>
>>>> really, nothing to back it up.
>>>>
>>>> again, JMO
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Albert J Rizzi"
>>>> <albert at myblindspot.org>
>>>> To: "'NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users'"
>>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 1:37 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I would think then we need to qualify and quantify the verbiage which
>>>>> is
>>>>> being considered for amendment because all to often trainers of guides
>>>>> are
>>>>> being denied access. What would be a suitable wording which would 1.
>>>>> protect and ensure that trainers of service animals are included in
>>>>> the
>>>>> a.d.a., which as you yourself presented, can be interpreted to
>>>>> prevent
>>>>> such
>>>>> access unless and until the service animal is being used by a person
>>>>> using
>>>>> the same for the intended purpose? And what of our peers who use
>>>>> companions
>>>>> for a diagnosable condition where a companion animal/service animal
>>>>> is
>>>>> needed? The manner of the wording at present does not seem to afford
>>>>> them
>>>>> the same protections, or do they? I think that trainers should be
>>>>> held
>>>>> to
>>>>> a
>>>>> higher measure so people like many of those on this list who got bum
>>>>> dogs
>>>>> do
>>>>> not live through that pain again. there is something to say for the
>>>>> consideration of certification provided that a standard of national
>>>>> proportions could be meaningful.
>>>>>
>>>>> Albert J. Rizzi, M.Ed.
>>>>> CEO/Founder
>>>>> My Blind Spot, Inc.
>>>>> 90 Broad Street - 18th Fl.
>>>>> New York, New York 10004
>>>>> www.myblindspot.org
>>>>> PH: 917-553-0347
>>>>> Fax: 212-858-5759
>>>>> "The person who says it cannot be done, shouldn't interrupt the one
>>>>> who
>>>>> is
>>>>> doing it."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Visit us on Facebook LinkedIn
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>>>>> Behalf
>>>>> Of Steve Johnson
>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 2:14 PM
>>>>> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>>>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Cindy,
>>>>>
>>>>> PWD = People or Persons with disabilities.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that the points being made are very strong, and the
>>>>> certification
>>>>> issue does not broaden as Albert eluded to, but does indeed restrict
>>>>> the
>>>>> definition of who who could eventually access a place of public
>>>>> accommodation.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, if only a certified trainer, which the points are well-expressed
>>>>> on
>>>>> this, is allowed to access a place of public accommodation, then
>>>>> would'nt
>>>>> this essentially mean that unless an animal trained by a certified
>>>>> entity
>>>>> could only then access a place of public accommodation?
>>>>>
>>>>> There are a lot of frauds out there, and again we are speaking about
>>>>> places
>>>>> of public accommodation. The fair housing amendments act already
>>>>> provides
>>>>> for any person to have an emotional support, or even companion animals
>>>>> in
>>>>> Federal assisted housing, and this can also move into private housing
>>>>> where
>>>>> emotional support animals can be granted access through a request for
>>>>> reasonable accommodation. The underlying problem is that these are
>>>>> not
>>>>> highly trained animals that are specifically trained to provide a
>>>>> functional
>>>>> support/service for the individual whether it be through a
>>>>> professional
>>>>> entity or an individual who chooses to self-train.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to disagree with Albert in that his comment that this would
>>>>> expand
>>>>> the coverage of access as it clearly discriminates against those who
>>>>> self-train and again, I will point out that this language is
>>>>> specifically
>>>>> stated in the ADA.
>>>>>
>>>>> Furthermore, if the word certification were deleted from this, then we
>>>>> are
>>>>> where we are at now, and is this a bad thing?
>>>>>
>>>>> While this proposed legislation specifically addresses service
>>>>> animals,
>>>>> the
>>>>> problem herein is that it creates this slippery slope that I mention
>>>>> in
>>>>> that
>>>>> there will be a push like you have never seen by other groups to
>>>>> expand
>>>>> and
>>>>> include emotional support, therapy, and companion animals. Mark my
>>>>> word.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's go back to the intent of the ADA, and you will further
>>>>> understand
>>>>> that
>>>>> this narrows, not expands as these other types of animals are not
>>>>> providing
>>>>> a service. A support yes, a service no.
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cindy Ray" <cindyray at qwest.net>
>>>>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
>>>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 12:20 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> What is PWD?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And you make a good point. Who certifies? If the schools where the
>>>>>> people
>>>>>> train certify them, then what about these independents, particularly
>>>>>> those
>>>>>> who train their own dogs. And, of course, NAC was a certification
>>>>>> outfit
>>>>>> that certified places, but any of us who knows the history of NAC
>>>>>> knows
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> certification meant for agencies and schools serving the bolind. So
>>>>>> why
>>>>>> bother if you can't certify better than that? Suppose the Guide Dog
>>>>>> School
>>>>>> Association, whose official name I don't remember, certified
>>>>>> trainers?
>>>>>> Would
>>>>>> they be willing to certify an independent, and would such a person be
>>>>>> willing to do that (be certified by such a certifying body?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CL
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "The Pawpower Pack"
>>>>>> <pawpower4me at gmail.com>
>>>>>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
>>>>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 12:15 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and who certifies the trainers?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is no certifying body for dog trainers. If I want to call
>>>>>> myself a dog trainer, I can. There are outfits like CPDT who are
>>>>>> trying to certify pet dog trainers but it's all voluntary. The guide
>>>>>> and service dogs, with the exception of California, may "certify"
>>>>>> their trainers but it's about as valuable as the paper it's printed
>>>>>> on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> California "certifies" it's trainers but frankly, I would hate to see
>>>>>> an outfit like the California guide dog board become the norm.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also think it's a step awy from certifying trainers to certifying
>>>>>> PWD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rox and the Kitchen Bitches
>>>>>> Bristol (retired), Mill'E SD. and Laveau Guide Dog, CGC.
>>>>>> "Struggle is a never ending process. Freedom is never really won, you
>>>>>> earn it and win it in every generation."
>>>>>> -- Coretta Scott King
>>>>>> pawpower4me at gmail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows Live Only: Brisomania at hotmail.com
>>>>>> AIM: Brissysgirl Yahoo: lillebriss
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>>> nagdu:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/cindyray%40qwest.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>>> nagdu:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/stevencjohnson%40cent
>>>>> urytel.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> ----
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>> Version: 9.0.722 / Virus Database: 270.14.119/2586 - Release Date:
>>>>> 12/25/09
>>>>> 03:33:00
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> nagdu:
>>>>>
>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.
>>>>> org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> nagdu:
>>>>>
>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/stevencjohnson%40cent
>> urytel.net
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>> Version: 9.0.722 / Virus Database: 270.14.119/2586 - Release Date:
>>>> 12/25/09
>>>> 03:33:00
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> nagdu:
>>>>
>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/buddy%40brannan.name
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu:
>>>
>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40verizo
>> n.net
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.
>> org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nagdu:
>>
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40verizo
> n.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nagdu:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.
> org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nagdu:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40verizo
n.net
_______________________________________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nagdu:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.
org
More information about the NAGDU
mailing list