[nfb-talk] Explanation of traffic lights and pedestrian signals

Wed May 26 00:45:37 UTC 2010

I agree with you in full
you have a good day.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "T. Joseph Carter" <carter.tjoseph at gmail.com>
To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Explanation of traffic lights and pedestrian signals


> Mr. John Heim seems to have the opinion that the NFB position is 
> inappropriate and somehow harmful pretty consistently, in my experience. 
> Often enough, it becomes apparent to most in the discussion that the 
> position of this organization is not that which is expressed by Mr. Heim. 
> I know of no instance where Mr. Heim has ever allowed facts presented in 
> rebuttal to change his negative view of the NFB.  Remarkably, Mr. Heim 
> styles himself a supporter of the organization.
>
> I have found it useless to argue with him, since his views are inevitably 
> self-described as "factual" and "logical".  That with which he disagrees 
> is "irrational", "illogical", or "supposition".  Indeed, I once presented 
> Mr. Heim with an Aristotilian Syllogism whose very form necessitated that 
> the argument was valid.  One need only evaluate two premises to determine 
> the valid argument was also a sound one.  Mr. Heim called it both 
> illogical and irrational.
>
> I have long since stopped receiving his messages.  I see that the pattern 
> persists on this mailing list, however.
>
> In the hopes of providing SOME meaning to this message, I will say that my 
> understanding of the NFB view on these pedestrian signals is as follows:
>
> The original audible pedestrian signals, rarely used today but still 
> installed in many places, pose a significant danger to blind travelers. 
> They drown out the sound of the traffic, no matter how heavy.  We 
> unequivocally oppose these, and indeed want the ones that have been 
> installed to be removed.  They are a direct hazard to the very population 
> they purport to serve.
>
> Modern audible pedestrian signals adapt themselves to current traffic 
> conditions.  We do not, as a policy, protest the installation of these 
> signals.  It is true that we largely find them unnecessary, but we do 
> concede that they could be useful at certain intersections under certain 
> conditions.  Since this view renders the usefulness of such a device a 
> matter for subjective judgment, we can have no clear policy on the matter 
> and are left with only our general opinion: We find them unnecessary at 
> most intersections.
>
> At some point, I had information detailing the cost breakdown for 
> installing an audible signal.  I cannot locate it now, and it would not 
> necessarily reflect costs half a decade later.  Even so, the overall 
> picture it painted was that while the overall cost associated with 
> installing such a device seemed horrendous, the cost of the signal and the 
> labor to install it were minimal.  Most of the costs are those associated 
> with road construction work and closing an intersection in order to do it.
>
> Faced with this data, most Federationists in the past have readily agreed 
> that if the road crew were already in use on the street in question, 
> installing the signal was no large matter or additional expense.  If a 
> city wishes to install such signals in such a fashion, the cost is so 
> little that it can hardly be worth an objection—we should be so lucky if 
> this were the largest and most frequent unnecessary expenditure of 
> taxpayer dollars at even the city level of government!  At least the 
> signal may prove to be of some use over its multi-decade life cycle (and 
> how often can one say so of a government expenditure?)
>
> I cannot imagine you would have heard that from Mr. Heim.
>
> Joseph
>
>
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 02:06:46PM -0500, Dewey Bradley wrote:
>>Why do you think the NFB  should change its stance?
>>Do you need them?
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "John G. Heim" <jheim at math.wisc.edu>
>>To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 9:51 AM
>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Explanation of traffic lights and pedestrian 
>>signals
>>
>>
>>As recently as 2003, the NFB organized protests against audible  walk
>>signals:
>>http://nfb.org/legacy/bm/bm03/bm0301/bm030103.htm
>>
>>Personally, I feel there is no more important issue on which the NFB needs
>>to change its stance. This is about as wrong-headed as an organization can
>>be.
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Sherri" <flmom2006 at gmail.com>
>>To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>; "Florida Association of
>>Guide Dog Users" <flagdu at nfbnet.org>; "NAGDU Mailing List,the National
>>Association of Guide Dog Users" <nagdu at nfbnet.org>; "NFB Florida"
>><nfbf-l at nfbnet.org>; "NFB of Florida parents" <fopbc at nfbnet.org>
>>Cc: "Dianne Ketts" <dianne at ketts.org>
>>Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2010 8:20 AM
>>Subject: [nfb-talk] Explanation of traffic lights and pedestrian signals
>>
>>
>>The FCB is streaming their convention and I am currently listening to a
>>speech by an O & M instructor, Dianne Ketts, who happens to work for the
>>Lighthouse of Central Florida. I know Dianne personally and find her to be 
>>a
>>very progressive-thinking O & M instructor. She is explaining the various
>>kinds of Pedestrian signals, traffic lights and the use of audible
>>pedestrian signals. She particularly emphasizes that you need proper O & M
>>techniques and training whether or not the audible indications exists,
>>saying that the audible signal only indicates that the walk signal is
>>showing, not that it is safe to cross the street. I find her outlook
>>refreshing and the lecture fascinating.  It is interesting to learn how 
>>the
>>various lights are actuated as well as how the audible pedestrian signals
>>work. I think it would be of great use to have an explanation of these
>>various signals and the technology regarding APS'S AT A FUTURE NFBF
>>CONVENTION AND EVEN POSSIBLY AT AN NFB national convention. I really 
>>believe
>>with traffic patterns changing, with more and more cars on our roadways,
>>this information is useful for us to know. She says, for example, that
>>whether there is an APS or not, there are some intersections where it is
>>imperative for people to find the push-button. Really interesting!
>>
>>Sherri
>>
>>
>>Sherri Brun, NFBF Secretary and Newsline® Coordinator
>>E-mail:  flmom2006 at gmail.com
>>http://www.nfbnewslineonline.org
>>http://www.nfbflorida.org
>>
>>"Don't give up something you want forever for something you want only for
>>now!"
>>_______________________________________________
>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>