[nagdu] Washington - Guide dog killed crossing Kennewick street

Mon Mar 22 12:51:45 UTC 2010

MARION, I AM NOT SURE THAT YOUR STATEMENT IS COMPLETELY CORRECT IN THIS
REGARD. AFTER RESEARCH IT SEEMS THAT MANY STATES HAVE AMENDED THIS LAW TO
PRECLUDE THE BLIND FROM BEING CONTRIBITORILY NEGLAGENT OR RESPONSIBLE IN
SOME WAY FOR HAVING BEEN HIT. I HAVE FOUND THESE REFERENCES ONE OF WHICH I
THINK IS FROM A SOUTHERN STATE AND THE OTHER IS WISCONSIN. SO IT SEEMS TO
VARY FROM STATE TO STATE. IT WOULD BE GOOD TO FOLLOW THE LEAD OF WISCONSIN
FOR SURE IF WHAT YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE IN YOUR STATE. WE SHOULD HAVE ONE
CONSISTANT AND CONSTANT LAW FROM STATE TO STATE FOR THOSE OF us who travel
across our country,

PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION LAW 

White Cane Law 752.52 Sec. 2.(1) A driver of a vehicle shall not approach a
crosswalk..., or any other pedestrian crossing without taking all necessary
precautions to avoid accident or injury to a blind pedestrian carrying a
cane or using a guide dog.
(2) A driver who approaches a crosswalk or any other pedestrian crossing
without taking all necessary precautions to avoid accident or injury to a
blind pedestrian carrying a cane or using a guide dog shall be liable in
damages for any injuries caused the blind pedestrian...
752.53 Sec. 3. A person who violates section 2(1) is guilty of a
misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 90 days, or by a
fine of not more than $100.00 or both.

Then there is Wisconsin:

Blind pedestrian on highway.

1) An operator of a vehicle shall stop the vehicle before approaching closer
than 10 feet to a pedestrian who is carrying a cane or walking stick which
is white in color or white trimmed with red and which is held in an extended
or raised position or who is using a dog guide and shall take such
precautions as may be necessary to avoid accident or injury to the
pedestrian. The fact that the pedestrian may be violating any of the laws
applicable to pedestrians does not relieve the operator of a vehicle from
the duties imposed by this subsection.

2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to deprive any totally or
partially blind person not carrying the white or the red and white cane or
walking stick or not using a dog guide of the rights of other pedestrians
crossing highways, nor shall the failure of such totally or partially blind
pedestrian to carry such cane or walking stick or to use a dog guide be
evidence of any negligence.

3) No person who is not totally or partially blind shall carry or use on any
street, highway or other public place any cane or walking stick which is
white in color, or white trimmed with red.

Last Revised: February 22, 2010

And then there is the Florida statute. No where does it lay claim to a blind
person and their negligence, on the contrary, it goes as far as to assert
that anywhere a blind person steps off a curb to cross a street puts the
burden of responsibility solely in the lap of the driver. 

White Cane Law: 316.1301  Traffic regulations to assist blind persons
(1)  It is unlawful for any person, unless totally or partially blind or
otherwise incapacitated, while on any public street or highway, to carry in
a raised or extended position a cane or walking stick which is white in
color or white tipped with red. A person who is convicted of a violation of
this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable
as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

(2)  Whenever a pedestrian is crossing, or attempting to cross, a public
street or highway, guided by a dog guide or carrying in a raised or extended
position a cane or walking stick which is white in color or white tipped
with red, the driver of every vehicle approaching the intersection or place
where the pedestrian is attempting to cross shall bring his or her vehicle
to a full stop before arriving at such intersection or place of crossing
and, before proceeding, shall take such precautions as may be necessary to
avoid injuring such pedestrian. A person who is convicted of a violation of
this subsection is guilty of a moving violation punishable as provided in
chapter 318.

(3)  Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to deprive any
totally or partially blind or otherwise incapacitated person not carrying
such a cane or walking stick, or not being guided by a dog, of the rights
and privileges conferred by law upon pedestrians crossing streets or
highways. The failure of any such person to carry a cane or walking stick or
to be guided by a dog shall not be considered comparative negligence, nor
shall such failure be admissible as evidence in the trial of any civil
action with regard to negligence.

I would like to see the law you are referencing here in the hopes we could
amend the one you are relying on, peace.

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 Gwizdala
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 5:34 AM
To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Washington - Guide dog killed crossing Kennewick street

Dan,
    One scenario in which a blind person could have been at fault in such a 
crash is if the blind person stepped out in front of the vehicle and the 
operator was unable to avoid the crash! The White Cane Law does not give us 
carte blanche to cross an intersection at any time nor absolve us from any 
responsibilities for our safe travel!

Fraternally yours,
Marion Gwizdala

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Weiner" <dcwein at dcwein.cnc.net>
To: "'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Washington - Guide dog killed crossing Kennewick street

> How exactly would the blind person be responsible in this accident, what
> about our trusty White Cane Law.
> The fact that no one complies with the law doesn't mean that lack of
> compliance isn't a criminal act.
>
> Dan W. and the Carter Dog
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/blind411%40verizon.ne
t 

_______________________________________________
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