Club Open Houses & Disabled
JeffFinchX
In article <3489a36e...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, ke...@heinsohn.org.DELETE (R.
Keith Heinsohn) writes:
> there are very few things that ring my bell louder
>than those people who take a handicap parking space to which they are
>not entitled.
A few years ago my brother and I watched as a carload of older, but apparently
able, people pulled into a designated handicap spot. I guess we should have
done what we thought about later: Walk over to the car and say, "I guess your
handicap(s) are mental."
Jeff
Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
enough.
*********************************
To reply via email, delete: X
*********************************
bChuck
JeffFinchX wrote in message
<19971209093...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
<<snip>>
>A few years ago my brother and I watched as a carload of older, but
apparently
>able, people pulled into a designated handicap spot. I guess we should
have
>done what we thought about later: Walk over to the car and say, "I guess
your
>handicap(s) are mental."
>
>Jeff
>Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
>enough.
> *********************************
> To reply via email, delete: X
> *********************************
This has actually been my standard response for years now! Glad to hear
that I'm not the only one with that idea. I was begining to think it was
just me and that perhaps I was being unreasonable. I've seen a lot of kids
pull into Hcap spots too & I think that this response really embarasses them
& gets them to think twice.
bChuck
Modeling the great TH&B in my mind....
One car at a time
w/ no power
w/no track
Hey! it's almost like the real thing!
bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
What bChuck mentioned a few posts back about handicapped spaces providing
additional space for a ramp, etc. is true. It is also true, however, that
parking close also makes a difference. For many citizens with disabilities, it
is more difficult to get from the car to the store than it is for an able-bodied
citizen to get to the store from all the way across the parking lot.
We have all seen people missusing HC parking places. One example that I
remember is a man who parked in a space during Christmas shopping. He limped
to the store and the laughed. He did not limp after that. I put a parking
ticket on his windshield warning him that he had broken the law and was subject
to a fine.
Our research has shown that signs in front of parking spaces with a
statement specifying the fine is a major impedent in minimizing illegal
handicapped parking.
There are also many who have counterfit parking passes that rob people with
disabilities of opportunity and cost cities an enormous amount of money--using
the pass as the basis for not having to put money in meters.
As for layouts, the video is a great device. I can get individuals who are
wheelchair users into my house and layout room, but the 52" to 60" height
creats the problem. The offer to see what one can see from the floor and
a video with the opportunity to talk with others in the family room isn't the
best, but all that I can offer for now.
Jim Budde
K Sf & P RR
Ken Rice
In article <19971209093...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
jefff...@aol.com says...
>In article <3489a36e...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, ke...@heinsohn.org.
>(R. Keith Heinsohn) writes:
>>there are very few things that ring my bell louder
>>than those people who take a handicap parking space to which they are
>>not entitled.
>A few years ago my brother and I watched as a carload of older, but
>apparently able, people pulled into a designated handicap spot. I guess
>we should have done what we thought about later: Walk over to the car and
>say, "I guess your handicap(s) are mental."
>Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
>enough.
Perhaps you can share with us how a quick visual inspection of a person can
diagnose heart aliments, backproblems and other non-visible handicaps that
entitles a person to a handicapped sticker?
A few years ago I had a handicapped sticker after having two ruptured disks
operated upon. After the operation, I looked as healthy as anyone, but I was
told not to walk too much and was given the use of a handicap sticker.
Have some compassion for those with stickers, and call the police for the
violators. That's one reason we have the police.
--
Ken Rice
kenn...@erols.com
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu wrote:
> What bChuck mentioned a few posts back about handicapped spaces providing
> additional space for a ramp, etc. is true. It is also true, however, that
> parking close also makes a difference. For many citizens with disabilities, it
> is more difficult to get from the car to the store than it is for an able-bodied
> citizen to get to the store from all the way across the parking lot.
the Federal suggested wording (used by most states) is the inability to
walk more than 200 feet without the use of oxygen or mechanical
assistance.
the irony, They claim they have to park close, then walk all over the
mall for several hours! yeah right!
> As for layouts, the video is a great device. I can get individuals who are
NO IT IS A Horrible idea. if I come that far, I don't want to see video
> wheelchair users into my house and layout room, but the 52" to 60" height
> creats the problem. The offer to see what one can see from the floor and
home layouts are not display layouts. I will crain my neck at your place,
you can throw your back out bending over looking at mine!
Bob
BTCo
> a video with the opportunity to talk with others in the family room isn't the
> best, but all that I can offer for now.
> Jim Budde
> K Sf & P RR
> In article <66jkf7$4v...@dragon.sk.sympatico.ca>, "bChuck" <bmb...@sk.REMOVE.sympatico.ca> writes:
> >
> > JeffFinchX wrote in message
> > <19971209093...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> > <<snip>>
> >>A few years ago my brother and I watched as a carload of older, but
> > apparently
> >>able, people pulled into a designated handicap spot. I guess we should
> > have
> >>done what we thought about later: Walk over to the car and say, "I guess
> > your
> >>handicap(s) are mental."
> >>
> >>Jeff
> >>Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
> >>enough.
Hugh Tebault
Ken Rice wrote:
> >Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
> >enough.
>
> Perhaps you can share with us how a quick visual inspection of a person can
> diagnose heart aliments, backproblems and other non-visible handicaps that
> entitles a person to a handicapped sticker?
>
The point of the illegal use of HC Stickers is clear here in California.
Recently in San Francisco, one new channel went to the government office
and simply filled out a form and was given the sticker. SFO estimated
that more than 75% of the stickers issued were not for real disabilities
(visible or not), and it was just becoming another government disaster.
The jury is still out on ADA. Some areas it seems to be working well,
but other areas the cost is so high as to stop development altogether.
(My train room is not built with any government grants, so does not fall
under most terms of ADA...)
Daniel A. Mickey
Hugh Tebault wrote:
> Ken Rice wrote:
>
> > >Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
> > >enough.
> >
> > Perhaps you can share with us how a quick visual inspection of a person can
> > diagnose heart aliments, backproblems and other non-visible handicaps that
> > entitles a person to a handicapped sticker?
> >
>
> The point of the illegal use of HC Stickers is clear here in California.
snipWhat should we do about the person who breaks a leg, and is in a cast, and
needs the space for the car door to open wide so that he/she can get out and
fetch the crutches???
The disability is REAL, although temporary (about 6 weeks with the big cast,
followed by another couple of months with the "walking cast". The HC sticker is
for permanant HC, and will not be issued for these temporary things.
Dan Mickey
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Daniel A. Mickey <dmic...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Hugh Tebault wrote:
> > Ken Rice wrote:
> >
> > > >Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
> > > >enough.
> > >
> > > Perhaps you can share with us how a quick visual inspection of a person can
> > > diagnose heart aliments, backproblems and other non-visible handicaps that
> > > entitles a person to a handicapped sticker?
the law is "inability to walk more than 200 ft without oxygen or
mechanical aides" anything else is Fraud!
> snipWhat should we do about the person who breaks a leg, and is in a cast, and
> needs the space for the car door to open wide so that he/she can get out and
> fetch the crutches???
temporary hang signs are avaliable, and free get the forms from MVA. the
police cannot tell if the person parking is real or not when they aren't
there, permit or tag (not DAV or other vet tag either) MUST be displayed.
Bob
Charles A. Davis
Daniel A. Mickey wrote:
>
> Hugh Tebault wrote:
>
> > Ken Rice wrote:
> >
> > > >Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
> > > >enough.
> > >
> > > Perhaps you can share with us how a quick visual inspection of a person can
> > > diagnose heart aliments, backproblems and other non-visible handicaps that
> > > entitles a person to a handicapped sticker?
> > >
> >
>
> needs the space for the car door to open wide so that he/she can get out and
> fetch the crutches???
>
> followed by another couple of months with the "walking cast". The HC sticker is
> for permanant HC, and will not be issued for these temporary things.
>
> Dan Mickey
Well Dan, here in Virginia, we have these little blue thingies thatare
hangable from the rear view mirror, that are 'handicapped "stickers"'.
They are available at the DMV office, and come with an _EXPIRATION DATE_
prominently displayed on them.
Chuck
(Seems like I saw similar in Calif a couple months ago.)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
He, who will not reason, is a bigot; William Drumond,
he, who cannot, is a fool; Scottish writer
and he, who dares not, is a slave. (1585-1649)
While he that does, is a free man! Joseph P. 1955-
-----------------------------------------------------------
Chuck Davis / Sutherlin Industries FAX # (804) 799-0940
1973 Reeves Mill Road E-Mail -- c...@gamewood.net
Sutherlin, Virginia 24594 Voice # (804) 799-5803
bChuck
Sorry I started this (at least this particular thread of the thread) BUT,
A temporary disability is NOTHING compared to what people with permanent
disability have to deal with. 6 weeks in a cast is nothing. Having to park
away from the entrance in order to get the car door open wide enough for a
big cast and crutches is nothing. These spots were designed for people with
permanent disability. So what if you have to walk a couple of hundred feet
with crutches for a few weeks. Cry me a river. It's nothing compared to
having to find a place to park that's big enough to open a wheel chair ramp
on the side of a van. And we're not talking convenience here folks, if the
door don't open and the ramp don't come down, you
_CAN"T_GET_OUT_OF_THE_VEHICLE_! No amount of hopping and wiggling will do
it. Being on 02, same thing; it's permanent and the extra walk can make it
impossible to get indoors. Yes people walk when they get in, but inside
there's at least a place to sit and rest. Try doing that in the middle of
the parking lot.
I get tired of hearing people whine about temporary minor inconveniences.
That's life, deal with it. If you qualify for a temp permit, get it. If
you don't quit whinning, and stay out of the HCap spots. GROW UP. I know,
I've seen and experienced both sides of this.
My point was to support people in MR Clubs who are concerned about being
accessable. I'd encourage every club and organization to do so for three
reasons, 1; it is in some cases the Law. 2; it is "The right neighbourly
thing to do" and three, if your not accessable, then you are not only
depriving someone of the joy of your hobby, but you're depriving yourself of
the privilege of knowing them, and of their wonderful personality, and of
course of their marvelous talents and abilities. In short, on all fronts,
if you're not accessable, YOU LOOSE!
Enough said, can we let this one go? Some of you should be embarassed by
some of the things you've said.
End of Sermon.
bChuck
family in chairs and 8 months on sticks.
Charles A. Davis wrote in message <349292...@ns.gamewood.net>...
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Hugh Tebault <Hu...@Tebault.Org> wrote:
> Ken Rice wrote:
> > >Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
> > >enough.
> >
> The jury is still out on ADA. Some areas it seems to be working well,
no it's not if you happen to be a person with a disability. It is our
civil right's law.
> but other areas the cost is so high as to stop development altogether.
if it is not accessible it should not be built, but on the other hand I
have not been able to find a single documented case where access cost's
have prevented a project from being built!
> (My train room is not built with any government grants, so does not fall
> under most terms of ADA...)
sorry, ADA is not government connected, it is for PRIVATE facilities. if
you open your basement up to the public it WOULD be covered by ADA
Bob
Mike Tennent
"bChuck" <bmb...@sk.REMOVE.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>Sorry I started this (at least this particular thread of the thread) BUT,
>
>A temporary disability is NOTHING compared to what people with permanent
>disability have to deal with. 6 weeks in a cast is nothing. Having to park
>away from the entrance in order to get the car door open wide enough for a
>big cast and crutches is nothing.
> These spots were designed for people with
>permanent disability.
Ummm. No. They were designed to permit handicapped access. The
permanancy of the handicap had nothing to do with it.
What you are saying is that you personally BELIEVE they should only be
used by people with permanent handicaps. How very neighborly of you.
> So what if you have to walk a couple of hundred feet
>with crutches for a few weeks. Cry me a river.
Why don't you look at what you just wrote and think about it.
Arrogance is not pretty. You want facilities for yourself, but are
unwilling to let other "less handicapped" use them. How dare they use
YOUR space, eh? Who do they think they are? Taxpayers?
A person with a temporary handicap is just as deserving as you. How
about taking that chip off your shoulder?
<snip>
>
>I get tired of hearing people whine about temporary minor inconveniences.
>That's life, deal with it. If you qualify for a temp permit, get it. If
>you don't quit whinning, and stay out of the HCap spots. GROW UP. I know,
>I've seen and experienced both sides of this.
>
I'm not sure who should do the growing up, here. I see a lot of
whining in YOUR post.
And before you get too snooty - my father was a double amputee (arm
and leg) from WWII and we dealt with it daily. You know what? He never
demanded a parking space. He never thought he needed much special
attention at all. In fact he, played golf, fished, swam, lived a
pretty normal life.
Of course, I guess he wasn't a "real" handicapped person by your
standards...
Nor am I, being legally deaf.
Mike "TriBop" Tennent
Remove "nospam." for email reply
IMC '98 IronVirgins Website
http://www.gate.net/~wbrunner/imc_iv.htm
WebRunner Running Page and my
Model Railroad page
http://www.gate.net/~wbrunner/
bChuck
Sorry Mike.
Point taken.
bChuck
Mike Tennent wrote in message
<08545565B27B06A2.BDA6D902...@library-proxy.airnews.ne
t>...
Seth Lewin, M.D.
> sorry, ADA is not government connected, it is for PRIVATE facilities. if
> you open your basement up to the public it WOULD be covered by ADA
>
> Bob
I'd be interested to see the statute that states that if one shares one's
private train setup with the public every so often that that imposes a
duty to modify one's home in compliance with ADA. I'll believe it when I
see it. If my layout is on the third floor, you would appear to be
implying that I'd be obligated to install an elevator. Incredible. Show
me.
john a dalton
...has anybody ever READ this act in it's entirety ??...i had not even
SEEN it, much less read any of it...and i'm totally disabled...here's
the act in it's entirety, for those with questions...it would require
an "act of faith" to comply with this law in full, because just
reading it would take a week..."holy mackerel"...there's a whole
section on "transvestites"...there's a considerable section just
defining "what is a train"...
http://janweb.icdi.wvu.edu/kinder/pages/ada_statute.htm
...it's sure written as though it was expected to be waved in the
judge's face...and there is about as many documents written ABOUT the
law as the law itself...these are "interpretations" and "do not carry
full force of law"...they are at...
http://janweb.icdi.wvu.edu/kinder/document.htm
...enjoy...big john...
PGG
Access Systems wrote:
> In rec.models.railroad Hugh Tebault <Hu...@Tebault.Org> wrote:
> > Ken Rice wrote:
>
> > > >Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
> > > >enough.
>
> > The jury is still out on ADA. Some areas it seems to be working well,
>
> no it's not if you happen to be a person with a disability. It is our
> civil right's law.
>
> > but other areas the cost is so high as to stop development altogether.
>
> if it is not accessible it should not be built, but on the other hand I
> have not been able to find a single documented case where access cost's
> have prevented a project from being built!
>
> > (My train room is not built with any government grants, so does not fall
> > under most terms of ADA...)
>
> sorry, ADA is not government connected, it is for PRIVATE facilities. if
> you open your basement up to the public it WOULD be covered by ADA
I've lurked for months, and nothing has gotten me moved to post here, but
I'm finally there. You are the type of person who would be a 'Scrooge' and
who gets immense satisfaction over getting your way over the rights and feelings,
and even abilities of others. You wave a law or your civil rights at others,
forgetting that EVERYONE -- including the fully-abled have Civil Rights TOO!
You have shown you get immense pleasure from the thought of shutting down
someone else's enjoyment for your own ends. If you can't be a part of it, you'd
rather take it away from them, and that is WRONG. That is NOT what the
law intended, but that is how it has become to be used by people like you.
You know, you asked in a later post "How badly do you want to keep me out"
and I think your messages show clearly that most people would probably go out
of their way to keep you out -- your handicap not withstanding. Perhaps you
mistake a disregard of your handicap for a dislike for you as a person??
I know many places where club members carry or assist disabled members into
the action -- taking their wheel chair or other support with them. They WANT to
do this because they WANT that person to be a part of their fun -- not because
a law says they have to.
I've been disabled at points in my life, and probably will be the last part of
it, and I'm sure I've lived with more pain due to walking than most people suffer
their entire life (and I'm only about half through with mine). Despite that, I've
never used a handicap space -- since if I were able to navigate the mall, and the
2.5 miles of its interior, the extra few hundred feet in the parking lot should not
be a hurdle. If it is, I should not be there. It's not a 'perk' I'm entitled to,
but
that is what you seem to feel it is.
Wide spaces for wheel chair access is a red herring -- a case of hide the real
point of wanting special treatment. MOST disabled people are not wheel chair
bound, so very few 'wheel chair accessible' spaces actually need to be made,
compared to the actual number of handicap spots that are set up. Most cars
in handicap spaces are not wheel chair vans, but cars with a placard on the
window, and the occupants ambling out without a problem. Those that are
wheelchair bound, with vans, the driver drops the person/people off, and can
park in any spot. The only reason to have a handicap spot would be if the
driver was themselves wheelchair bound -- and that is an even smaller minority.
This law is a pet peeve of mine -- ever since 200 handicap spaces open up,
remaining empty in crowded malls and arenas -- while those without
'legal' handicaps have to suffer for your convenience. The handicap spaces
at the walking track in the middle of no where on the Ohio between Pittsburgh
and Wheeling was the ultimate of the law out of control.
Basically the ADA has created a 'special class' of people, who comprise
a minority, but have a GUARANTEED special treatment everywhere they
go. No weight is given to the actual use of the facility by the handicap, nor
to the use of the facility of the non-handicap, only that x-number of spaces,
accommodations and costs must be incurred because at some time a disabled
person MIGHT choose to use the area.
No where else has the majority been subjected to the rule by the minority
as it has been under this law. It's a bad law.
And your standing on it, and threatening people with it, are exactly why the
law is bad.
People who would oppose you would face a McCarthy like rage even if
they were in the LOGICAL right. At some point, that will happen. At
some point logic and reason will take over for political correctness.
Considering that 9 out of 10 times I have seen a car in a handicap spot, it
has been 'illegally' parked there, it causes me to question the validity of
premise of the law. If the spots remain empty, while the rest of the lot is
full, then the law is DETRIMENTAL to the general population, while
providing a very special consideration to a privileged segment of the
population. There is no difference between singling out the handicap as
that segment as there is to "royalty" or those with Aryan good looks.
I hate this law as much as you seem to champion it.
And, your threats, and continued grandstanding on it fuel those fires.
I know I'm not alone in this. I am somewhat unique in that I couldn't give
a rats ass about the political correctness of this position, and I'm not
afraid to say it.
I've come into conflict with it, and prior to the ADA I was often on the
side of the disabled. Since the ADA, I find myself ALWAYS on the
other side -- the law is out of control -- and so are you.
flame off ... but still smoldering
Scott
Not speaking for anyone but myself.
John W Rosenbauer
I also have been lurking a short time and have the EXACT same reaction
as Scott. After reading these ditribes I'm wondering how many private
layouts will NEVER be open to the public for fear running afoul of this
law.
By the way, as to your "reporting of hate messages", untill the First
Ammendment is repealed I will continue to speak my mind.
John
Remove NOSPAM to reply.
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Access Systems <acce...@smart.net> wrote:
> no it's not if you happen to be a person with a disability. It is our
> civil right's law.
> if it is not accessible it should not be built, but on the other hand I
> have not been able to find a single documented case where access cost's
> have prevented a project from being built!
AH HATE MAIL. this post generated several anonymous pieces of hate mail
to my private mailbox.
people who lack the guts to even put their name on their veneom (since
ppg, is not found by the server) show the kind of people who are causing
the problems.
since I could not defuse the original post, I forwarded the messages to a
registry of "hate" crime/threats against persons with disabilities. This
is then forwarded to the Federal Government to document the reality of
life with a disability and why even stronger enforcement is neccessary.
So in effect your mail shows a disrespect to your fellow members of this
fine hobby and proves the neccesity of the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Thank you for the proof of your lack of manhood!
Bob
David Outen
Lighten up. This hate crap can be found in all the usenet groups(excluding
moderated groups in theory) from time to time. It is equal opportunity
which is what you have wanted all this time isn't it? It doesn't prove the
need of the ADA, it proves that some people are Grade A morons. Since you
have forwarded this "hate mail" to be sent to the government perhaps you
would care to post us a sample to see exactly what the content is. I find
it interesting that you didn't mention you going to pursue this with the
senders ISP which kind of leads me to believe that maybe it qualifies as
free speech. No I don't take your word for it because IMHO you have a way
of distorting the story to fit your political agenda.
Dave
--
**if replying by e-mail remove "Z"s from address**
Access Systems <acce...@smart.net> wrote in article
<677e91$7kl$1...@news.smart.net>...
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Seth Lewin, M.D. <sm...@tiac.net> wrote:
> > sorry, ADA is not government connected, it is for PRIVATE facilities. if
> > you open your basement up to the public it WOULD be covered by ADA
> I'd be interested to see the statute that states that if one shares one's
> private train setup with the public every so often that that imposes a
if you invite a few friends in to see your layout, no it is not covered
BUT
if you invite the public in for an open house then yes it is covered under
Public law
28CFR36.207
> Incredible. Show me.
Federal Register Vol 56. No. 144 (Friday July 26, 1991) pg 35595
look it up!
it is also on the on the Web at
http://www.theboard.gov
Bob
Randy Treadway
acce...@smart.net (Access Systems) wrote:
This in no way, shape or form is hate mail.
Your juvenile threats of 'forwarding copies to
the federal government' disgusts most of us.
I'll vote right now to rewrite the handicap
space and access laws, if it shows up on my
ballot, and I have no qualms in telling my
elected representatives that that is how I feel.
BY ALL MEANS, forward this to the entire
U.S. Congress! But don't snip out a single word.
I hold no debt to political correctness and I
believe I can show my appreciation to ALL
people, both handicapped and 'unchallenged',
through other means instead of space quotas,
ramps, and cut curbs dictated by big daddy
government.
And you can't accuse ME of hiding a return
address.
Bring on your flames, I don't care.
Just don't tell that if I open my basement
layout to the public for an afternoon, I
then cannot leave my car in my OWN driveway because
I have to make it available in case anybody
with a placard shows up!
Randy Treadway
ko...@earthlink.net
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad David Outen <Zdou...@ibm.net> wrote:
> Lighten up. This hate crap can be found in all the usenet groups(excluding
> moderated groups in theory) from time to time. It is equal opportunity
> which is what you have wanted all this time isn't it? It doesn't prove the
how true, was a little frustrated by not being able to find his name or
ISP
> need of the ADA, it proves that some people are Grade A morons. Since you
> have forwarded this "hate mail" to be sent to the government perhaps you
> would care to post us a sample to see exactly what the content is. I find
Because I am not able to forward mail to the newsgroups from my server, !
> it interesting that you didn't mention you going to pursue this with the
> senders ISP which kind of leads me to believe that maybe it qualifies as
> free speech.
well it probably does qualify as free speech, but I couldn't contact his
ISP because it was remailed several times (I think, I am not a computer
guru and all my attempts to track it were returned as a bad address)
> No I don't take your word for it because IMHO you have a way
> of distorting the story to fit your political agenda.
??? name one instance??
of course we all have our own political agenda's what does that mean?
Bob
C.L.Zeni
Good job, me bucko. I'm copying these posts to give to a friend who
DOES have public-invited open houses. I'm certain that he'll no longer
do this, no longer allowing just plain people and model railroad
beginners to see the wonders of a large layout in operation. All out of
fear that some knee-jerk tyrant will get a case of the ass and sic the
Feds on him.
Is THAT what you want from the ADA? It's the net result of what you've
said and your attitude toward it. Enjoy it.
--
Craig Zeni - REPLY TO -->> clzeni at mindspring dot com
http://www.mindspring.com/~clzeni/index.html
Mike Chapman
In article <679h79$e7o$5...@news.smart.net>,
Access Systems <acce...@smart.net> wrote:
>well it probably does qualify as free speech, but I couldn't contact his
>ISP because it was remailed several times (I think, I am not a computer
>guru and all my attempts to track it were returned as a bad address)
"Teacher, teacher, Jimmy said I'm an ugly goober!"
Anyone who needs help from The Man to fight their online battles would
probably be better off to contact a mental health professional.
Laws don't make the world a better place, people do.
Access Systems
I appologize for answering this on a public board, but it was published
publically and has a false return address.
So much for pride in his beliefs!
In rec.models.railroad PGG <"PGG_a"@t_pgg_d.t_net> wrote:
> Access Systems wrote:
> > In rec.models.railroad Hugh Tebault <Hu...@Tebault.Org> wrote:
> > > Ken Rice wrote:
> > > > >Too bad the ADA became necessary since the incentive plan didn't work well
> > > > >enough.
> >
> > > (My train room is not built with any government grants, so does not fall
> > > under most terms of ADA...)
> > you open your basement up to the public it WOULD be covered by ADA
> I've lurked for months, and nothing has gotten me moved to post here, but
> I'm finally there. You are the type of person who would be a 'Scrooge' and
how do you know what kind of person I am???
> and even abilities of others. You wave a law or your civil rights at others,
> forgetting that EVERYONE -- including the fully-abled have Civil Rights TOO!
how does universal access deny anyone their rights, other than the right
to deny something to someone because they are not "like" you
> You have shown you get immense pleasure from the thought of shutting down
> someone else's enjoyment for your own ends.
actually quite the contrary, it is time consuming and a royal pain in the
butt to have to deal with, I am old enough that I don't need you or your
layout. I am trying to think of the next generation, and the ones' that
come after, how many young folks are you denying a really great hobby to?
How many of these folks with disabilities will be voting to support AMTRAK
funding, when they know nothing of trains except they can't even see the
toy trains, much less ride the real ones (and yes I am the Scrooge that
forced AMTRAK to be accessible.)
> If you can't be a part of it, you'd
> rather take it away from them, and that is WRONG. That is NOT what the
> law intended, but that is how it has become to be used by people like you.
the law is a civil rights law, was designed that way and is intended that
way and it will be used to end discrimination. anything else is
equivocating,
> You know, you asked in a later post "How badly do you want to keep me out"
you take that quote out of context, it MEANS "I am commited to full access
for my brothers and sisters and children and grandchildren to the point
that I was willing to be hauled off to jail for fighting for my rights"
do you have the same dedication to keeping me (and my brothers and sisters
with disabilities) out??
> and I think your messages show clearly that most people would probably go out
> of their way to keep you out -- your handicap not withstanding. Perhaps you
> mistake a disregard of your handicap for a dislike for you as a person??
personally I don't care if you or anyone else likes me, just as long as we
can get in, then you can judge us by our individual personalities.
> I know many places where club members carry or assist disabled members into
> the action -- taking their wheel chair or other support with them. They WANT to
> do this because they WANT that person to be a part of their fun -- not because
> a law says they have to.
and how many people with disabilities want to be subjected to that risk of
injury or insult?? If I knew that was what was needed to gain access, I
would not risk your health much less my own. and of course this does not
apply to the 300lb person in a 250lb power wheelchair either!
> be a hurdle. If it is, I should not be there. It's not a 'perk' I'm entitled to,
> but
> that is what you seem to feel it is.
It is not a "perk" as you seem to think BUT a requirement of the law.
> Wide spaces for wheel chair access is a red herring -- a case of hide the real
snip
> driver was themselves wheelchair bound -- and that is an even smaller minority.
Welll since I am a wheelchair user who drives a modified van!
> This law is a pet peeve of mine -- ever since 200 handicap spaces open up,
yeah it is a pet peeve of mine too, I haven't been in a mall in years, can
never find a damn accessible parking spot.
> at the walking track in the middle of no where on the Ohio between Pittsburgh
> and Wheeling was the ultimate of the law out of control.
actually that is a beautiful trail, been there. but my favorite is the
C&O canal trail especially between Paw Paw and Hancock. What makes you
think that wheelchair users don't like the outdoors or wilderness??
I white water canoe in the summer and ski in the winter, so stay out of
the accessible parking spots at Hidden Valley or Seven Springs !!
> Basically the ADA has created a 'special class' of people, who comprise
no the exact opposite it elimanates the special class and makes everyone
equal
> go. No weight is given to the actual use of the facility by the handicap, nor
actually the law does put quite a bit of weight on that issue, and
experience has proven that every estimate is too low, usage is far higher
> to the use of the facility of the non-handicap, only that x-number of spaces,
personally I would prefer that all spaces were 13 ft wide then I wouldn't
have to listen to people like you. all I want is a space wide enough to
get out of my van. I have convinced a few store owners to add a few wide
marked spaces in the remote corners of their lot, no one steals those!
> accommodations and costs must be incurred because at some time a disabled
> person MIGHT choose to use the area.
yes we MIGHT choose to spend our money there! I WON'T spend my money
anywhere that is not accessible, period.
> No where else has the majority been subjected to the rule by the minority
> as it has been under this law. It's a bad law.
hmmm most laws require a majority to accept something to allow a minority
to participate, things like free speech, voting, rights etc. I am sure
that at some point you force me to do something that I don't want to, so
that you can have your rights too!
> And your standing on it, and threatening people with it, are exactly why the
> law is bad.
I don't threaten anyone, I warn them, so they have time to change their
ways before I act to enforce the constitutional right to equality.
> People who would oppose you would face a McCarthy like rage even if
> they were in the LOGICAL right. At some point, that will happen. At
> some point logic and reason will take over for political correctness.
since when is Respect for others, equality, civil rights, dignity, etc
illogical or unreasonable. and the term "political correct" is a
euphemism for being called to task for discrimination and rude behavior.
> Considering that 9 out of 10 times I have seen a car in a handicap spot, it
> has been 'illegally' parked there, it causes me to question the validity of
how have you been able to "judge" the validity of this action????
did you wait around for the person to come out??
did you perform a medical exam??
and assuming you are right why should the 1 out of 10 who is not breaking
the law be punished because you were forced to walk an extra ten feet to
your car?? at least you could get out of your car!
> There is no difference between singling out the handicap as
> that segment as there is to "royalty" or those with Aryan good looks.
??????? huh!
> I hate this law as much as you seem to champion it.
ride a while in my shoes!
> And, your threats, and continued grandstanding on it fuel those fires.
I don't threaten, ask the folks who have had to respond to the complaints.
and always remember, this is one minority that has an open membership, you
can join it at any time!
> I know I'm not alone in this. I am somewhat unique in that I couldn't give
unfortunately you are not alone, but then again no one did anything about
slavery for 100s of years, and we locked up American citizens in 1941
because they had a specific last name. And people of color couldn't even
ride in a particular seat on the train until the 50's and women didn't
start driving those trains until just recently, let's not be too proud of
our past!
> I've come into conflict with it, and prior to the ADA I was often on the
> side of the disabled. Since the ADA, I find myself ALWAYS on the
???? why is it I find this hard to believe
> other side -- the law is out of control -- and so are you.
guess it has to do with viewpoint, I am doing a slow burn because of the
glacial pace of the changes and enforcement actions. I wonder if I will
live long enough to ride a greyhound bus! or a trolley in Philadelphia.
or visit some of the GREAT model railroad Clubs.
> flame off ... but still smoldering
As I have said before, I am a veteran, I fought for this country, now I
want to use it!
you have your freedoms because of veterans like me, dating all the way
back to the revolutionary war. I fought for your right to say the things
that you do, but that doesn't make em right! I was like you expected
people "like me" to behave. but after about 15-20 years of promises, I got
nasty. and now I get in. it is people like you who have made me like I
am.
Thanks!
Bob
PS have a happy "FREE" holiday,
compliments of your veterans of all past wars and conflicts
Nick Buchholz
Access Systems (acce...@smart.net) wrote:
: In rec.models.railroad Seth Lewin, M.D. <sm...@tiac.net> wrote:
: > > sorry, ADA is not government connected, it is for PRIVATE facilities. if
: > > you open your basement up to the public it WOULD be covered by ADA
: > I'd be interested to see the statute that states that if one shares one's
: > private train setup with the public every so often that that imposes a
: if you invite a few friends in to see your layout, no it is not covered
: BUT
: if you invite the public in for an open house then yes it is covered under
: Public law
: 28CFR36.207
: > Incredible. Show me.
: Federal Register Vol 56. No. 144 (Friday July 26, 1991) pg 35595
: look it up!
: it is also on the on the Web at
: http://www.theboard.gov
: Bob
Perhaps you should read the Law. The section mentioned only applies to
residences part of which is used as a public accomodation. Which is defined in the law
as
"Place of public accommodation means a facility, operated by a private entity, whose operations affect
commerce and fall within at least one of the following categories --
^^^^^^^^
(1) An inn, hotel, motel, or other place of lodging, except for an establishment located within a building
that contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and that is actually occupied by the proprietor of
the establishment as the residence of the proprietor;
(2) A restaurant, bar, or other establishment serving food or drink;
(3) A motion picture house, theater, concert hall, stadium, or other place of exhibition or entertainment;
(4) An auditorium, convention center, lecture hall, or other place of public gathering;
(5) A bakery, grocery store, clothing store, hardware store, shopping center, or other sales or rental
establishment;
(6) A laundromat, dry-cleaner, bank, barber shop, beauty shop, travel service, shoe repair service,
funeral parlor, gas station, office of an accountant or lawyer, pharmacy, insurance office, professional
office of a health care provider, hospital, or other service establishment;
(7) A terminal, depot, or other station used forspecified public transportation;
(8) A museum, library, gallery, or other place of public display or collection;
(9) A park, zoo, amusement park, or other place of recreation;
(10) A nursery, elementary, secondary, undergraduate, or postgraduate private school, or other place of
education;
(11) A day care center, senior citizen center, homeless shelter, food bank, adoption agency, or other
social service center establishment; and
(12) A gymnasium, health spa, bowling alley, golf course, or other place of exercise or recreation.
"
My home layout must provide only the access I choose to provide and not one bit more.
In addition the exemption for private clubs and religous organizations (Sec. 307) which do not affect
interstate commerce also applies to these open houses.
"
Private club means a private club or establishment exempted from coverage under title II of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000a(e)).
"
Now can we stop this and get back to playing with trains
--
buch...@noao.edu | "Time is an illusion, Lunchtime doubly so"
| - Ford Prefect
Time is an illusion perpetrated by the manufacturers of space.
Mike Kinney
In general I support reasonable accessibility laws. However...
Access Systems, sounds like a company that sells products or services that
make facilities more accessible. If I owned that business, I'd be lobbying
for these laws to apply everywhere also.
Access Systems wrote in message <678okm$cda$1...@news.smart.net>...
HICJHH
As a model railroader and a shopping center owner, this string of posts is of
interest. Here in Portland, we have two very fine clubs(among many others) who
open their premises during Novermber weekends to the public. One club charges
an admission, and the other takes contributions. In the one case, they have a
relatively new building which has entry ramps, and would appear to be well
suited for in-wheelchair folks. The other is down some stairs. From a
practical standpoint, it would be difficult, but not impossible for
in-wheelchair folks to get the crowds at the club with ramps.
Compliance with ADA is tedious, but necessary in the shopping centers, and is
triggered by new constuction and/or remodeling of premises. Accessibility is a
first key issue. I agree with previous posters that some of the requirements
are difficult to implement and/or cost prohibitive(which isn't an
issue-incidentally)-with the government). At one of our company's centers, we
do have one tenant who is in a wheelchair. I have seen very few folks in
wheelchairs in our centers; accessability is the issue-they just aren't around.
A very costly set of standards to comply with for very few. OK by me, but it
is tedious.
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Nick Buchholz <buch...@yogi.tuc.noao.edu> wrote:
> Access Systems (acce...@smart.net) wrote:
> : In rec.models.railroad Seth Lewin, M.D. <sm...@tiac.net> wrote:
> : > > sorry, ADA is not government connected, it is for PRIVATE facilities. if
> : > > you open your basement up to the public it WOULD be covered by ADA
> : if you invite a few friends in to see your layout, no it is not covered
> : BUT
> : if you invite the public in for an open house then yes it is covered under
> : Public law
> : 28CFR36.207
> : > Incredible. Show me.
> : Federal Register Vol 56. No. 144 (Friday July 26, 1991) pg 35595
> : look it up!
> : it is also on the on the Web at
> : http://www.theboard.gov
> : Bob
> Perhaps you should read the Law. The section mentioned only applies to
> residences part of which is used as a public accomodation. Which is defined in the law
> as
> "Place of public accommodation means a facility, operated by a private entity, whose operations affect
> commerce and fall within at least one of the following categories --
> ^^^^^^^^
Commerce does not neccesarly require an exchange of money
> (3) or other place of exhibition or entertainment;
a model railroad is an exhibition
> (8) or other place of public display or collection;
it is also a public display
> (9) or other place of recreation;
it is also a place of recreation
> My home layout must provide only the access I choose to provide and not one bit more.
> In addition the exemption for private clubs and religous organizations (Sec. 307) which do not affect
the exemption is only when it is for "Members only" it becomes a public
accomodation the moment you open it to the public
> interstate commerce also applies to these open houses.
> "
> Now can we stop this and get back to playing with trains
would love to, is it accessible???
Bob
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad HICJHH <hic...@aol.com> wrote:
> As a model railroader and a shopping center owner, this string of posts is of
> interest. Here in Portland, we have two very fine clubs(among many others) who
> open their premises during Novermber weekends to the public. One club charges
> an admission, and the other takes contributions. In the one case, they have a
> relatively new building which has entry ramps, and would appear to be well
the key here is "new building"
> suited for in-wheelchair folks. The other is down some stairs. From a
> practical standpoint, it would be difficult, but not impossible for
> in-wheelchair folks to get the crowds at the club with ramps.
maybe it would be required maybe not. again the law is VERY flexible, but
it does require some action on the part of the public accomodation.
how hard would it be to take some of that money donated or charged to make
the place more accessible.
do clubs comply with the fire code, electrical code or the health and
safety codes the same way.
all place a burden of responsibility on the building owners and tenants.
those who complain about civil rights laws, do they also complain about
protecting their layout from fire??
> Compliance with ADA is tedious, but necessary in the shopping centers, and is
in the beginning like any new prochedure it can be tedious but after a
fashion it becomes second nature and a normal part of doing business.
I know one club that took their elevator out so they could put a
operator's tower in the shaft area!!!
give me one good reason why they should not be sued?!?
> I agree with previous posters that some of the requirements
> are difficult to implement and/or cost prohibitive(which isn't an
> issue-incidentally)-with the government).
there is built into the law an undue burden waiver and many clubs might
qualify, but putting in a DCC control system instead of a ramp would not
fly
> At one of our company's centers, we
> do have one tenant who is in a wheelchair. I have seen very few folks in
> wheelchairs in our centers; accessability is the issue-they just aren't around.
but more than before they were accessible, and as it becomes known there
will be more and more
> A very costly set of standards to comply with for very few. OK by me, but it
> is tedious.
for a business it should not be costly because there is a tax credit, and
accelerated depreciation built into the tax code (THIS IS NOT TAX ADVICE,
have your tax/financial consultant give you advice on implimentation of
sections 44 and 190 of the tax code)
Bob
Peter Olivola
On 18 Dec 1997 04:16:19 GMT, acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)
wrote:
>
>Commerce does not neccesarly require an exchange of money
>
>
>
I think you would find it difficult to convince a judge and jury that
a model railroad in a private home, opened to the public once or twice
a year, should be subject to your interpretation of ADA.
I think it would be even more difficult to get the responsible federal
agency interested in taking the case.
I think it would be foolish and counterproductive to the intent of ADA
to even try and threatening to do so only antagonizes people
unnecessarily, kind of like trying to apply ADA to NASA.
If you want to convince people to improve access for the handicapped
you might want to reconsider your attitude. I find it a turn off, and
when I'm turned off I stop listening. YMMV.
Peter Olivola (poli...@advsoftech.com
C.L.Zeni
Peter Olivola wrote:
>
> On 18 Dec 1997 04:16:19 GMT, acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)
> wrote:
> >
> >Commerce does not neccesarly require an exchange of money
> >
> >a model railroad is an exhibition
> >
> >it is also a public display
> >
> >it is also a place of recreation
>
> I think you would find it difficult to convince a judge and jury that
> a model railroad in a private home, opened to the public once or twice
> a year, should be subject to your interpretation of ADA.
>
> I think it would be even more difficult to get the responsible federal
> agency interested in taking the case.
Indeed, I concur with this analysis. However, the average layout owner,
when faced with the prospect of legal action by the federal gummint and
its comcomitant expenses for legal assistance and the time involved,
will simply say the heck with it and not show his layout. It would
certainly be my attitude - why risk a run in with a nut and the feds?
This is the real pity to me - I personally know of a half-dozen young
people that got into model railroading after seeing the open house I
referred to in an earlier post.
> I think it would be foolish and counterproductive to the intent of ADA
> to even try and threatening to do so only antagonizes people
> unnecessarily, kind of like trying to apply ADA to NASA.
>
> If you want to convince people to improve access for the handicapped
> you might want to reconsider your attitude. I find it a turn off, and
> when I'm turned off I stop listening. YMMV.
>
> Peter Olivola (poli...@advsoftech.com
--
Craig Zeni - REPLY TO -->> clzeni at mindspring dot com
http://www.mindspring.com/~clzeni/index.html
" Clucko, ergo sum." - Rene Descacchiatore
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad C.L.Zeni <clz...@elsewhere.com> wrote:
> > BUT
> > if you invite the public in for an open house then yes it is covered under
> >
> > Public law
> > 28CFR36.207
> Good job, me bucko. I'm copying these posts to give to a friend who
> DOES have public-invited open houses. I'm certain that he'll no longer
> do this, no longer allowing just plain people and model railroad
> beginners to see the wonders of a large layout in operation. All out of
> fear that some knee-jerk tyrant will get a case of the ass and sic the
> Feds on him.
yeah that father who has brought his son (who happens to use a wheelchair)
to see the wonders of a large layout in operation, who is a "knee-jerk
tyrant" because his son is discriminated against.
But then again you would tell your son what???
?Oh that guy is ignorant and breaks the law and no one does anything
about it!?
"Dad are you going to do something about it??"
And your response?
> Is THAT what you want from the ADA? It's the net result of what you've
> said and your attitude toward it. Enjoy it.
no I would much rather get in and see the layout! and be able to take my 4
grandsons and 2 grandaughters in to see the layout. but there are 6 young
children out there who won't get that thrill of going with grandad to see
other peoples trains!, just like his 4 children who have not taken up the
hobby partly because the only trains they saw or heard about were the ones
in the basement.
so far 10 young people have been DIRECTLY affected by your attitude,
and it is personal they are my grandbabies!
Bob
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Mike Kinney <mik...@home.com> wrote:
> In general I support reasonable accessibility laws. However...
> Access Systems, sounds like a company that sells products or services that
> make facilities more accessible. If I owned that business, I'd be lobbying
> for these laws to apply everywhere also.
Access Systems is a consulting engineering company that works with public
transit agency's in helping them comply with access laws in the most cost
effective manner.
it is 100% disabled owned and operated, I am not speaking in Access
Systems name, but as a person with a disability who has been a model
railroader for over 45 years and been denied access to other folks model
railroading and clubs for over 25 of those years.
Bob
(NOT SPEAKING FOR Access Systems)
Access Systems
> >
> > I think you would find it difficult to convince a judge and jury that
> > a model railroad in a private home, opened to the public once or twice
> > a year, should be subject to your interpretation of ADA.
> >
> > I think it would be even more difficult to get the responsible federal
> > agency interested in taking the case.
maybe? maybe not? fortunately or unfortunatly they still have to
investigate every complaint, so you would still have to answer the
questions asked by the agency.
> certainly be my attitude - why risk a run in with a nut and the feds?
> This is the real pity to me - I personally know of a half-dozen young
> people that got into model railroading after seeing the open house I
> referred to in an earlier post.
yup a nut who has tried to interest several young folks with disabilities
into the joy of the hobby, only to have every person I tried to take them
to or show them a layout, or have them talk to, couldn't be bothered!
> > unnecessarily, kind of like trying to apply ADA to NASA.
It does not apply to NASA because NASA is a government agency and has been
covered by the federal facilities law (section 501 and 502 of the rehab
act) since 1976 and there was (part of the project canceled with
the Challenger explosion) at least one disabled astronaut candidate
not to mention numerous disabled employees of NASA, and yes the space
station is accessible ! (of course you don't need a ramp in weightless
conditions but other parts apply!)
> > If you want to convince people to improve access for the handicapped
> > you might want to reconsider your attitude. I find it a turn off, and
> > when I'm turned off I stop listening. YMMV.
been there, done that, you didn't listen then either! so talk to the
judge, you will finally pay attention, it is called "empowerment" when I
was powerless I was ignored, now I have the RIGHT to file against you and
you say "be nice" not a chance, talk to the judge!
how many buses were accessible before folks chained themselves to the
buses, and trolleys. now most of em are!
I even can ride the train now, took an All Aboard America trip over 3,000
miles in two weeks, couple years ago, and have made several business trips
by train too! AMTRAK didn't let me on out of the goodness of their
hearts, and I wouldn't be supporting AMTRAK funding and lobbying for the
trains either if I couldn't get on, (and my disability activism has me on
a first name basis with several congress folks, at least one of whom is on
the transportation subcommittee, and voted for all AMTRAK funding bills,
did my talking to them have an effect, who knows???, my comments to them
"AMTRAK is accessible, Greyhound is not, killing AMTRAK would eliminate my
abibility to travel")
Bob
Brad Libby
I have followed this thread from day one. Originally it was civil, and
informative. I was interested in the content on general grounds, I also
hade a pretty solid respect for disabled persons and what they have to
go thru. Three years ago I was struck with a crippling case of Psoratic
Athritis, almost over night I found that I was un-able to walk. I spent
3 days in the hospital, 2 months on crutches, and 18 months walking with
a cane. I still walk with a decided limp, and minor pain that I have
learned to deal with. I also had to give up my position as Assistant
Fire Chief in my local Fire Department (after 25 years of service),
something that was a large part of my life. I only mention this to
establish some credentials refernce to this thread.
As time went on the postings from Access Systems got more shrill. After
I posted a notice about my club's annual show I got a personal E-Mail
scolding me about wheel chair access when our show was held in a fully
compliant facility! I decided to ignore the message, to me it looked as
if Mr. Access Systems was just laying the ground work for a raft of
litigations centered around our hobby. As things have escalated the
past two days, and shrillness has changed to threats, I feel that enough
is enough. The latest ploy of the ADA Police is to hide behind the
Flag.
Mr. Access Systems: However good intentioned you may have been when you
statrted, you have lost the ball. Even you must be able to see by now
that you are doing more harm than good to a good cause. Take a deep
breath, step back, and give it a rest. You are only going to continue
to piss good people off and ultimately hurt the ADA. And notice that I
use my full name and E-Mail address, I find your snide personal attacks
against other members of this group un-professional, un-necessary, and
obnoxious. After all, sir, you set the tone here.
Brad Libby
Denton Mickelson
I totally agree with David and others in this thread who have criticized
your inflammatory and self righteous postings!
You seem unable to understand how much antagonism you arouse in people with
your whining and threats. As for sicking "The Government" on us, don't
forget that we ARE the government- ALL of us (even you)!
David Outen <Zdou...@ibm.net> wrote in article
<01bd0aa7$efda01a0$d68748a6@chaos>...
> Lighten up. This hate crap can be found in all the usenet
groups(excluding
> moderated groups in theory) from time to time. It is equal opportunity
> which is what you have wanted all this time isn't it? It doesn't prove
the
> need of the ADA, it proves that some people are Grade A morons. Since
you
> have forwarded this "hate mail" to be sent to the government perhaps you
> would care to post us a sample to see exactly what the content is. I
find
> it interesting that you didn't mention you going to pursue this with the
> senders ISP which kind of leads me to believe that maybe it qualifies as
> free speech. No I don't take your word for it because IMHO you have a
way
> of distorting the story to fit your political agenda.
> Dave
Rick Vera-Burgos
Peter Olivola wrote:
>
> On 18 Dec 1997 04:16:19 GMT, acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)
> wrote:
> >
> >Commerce does not neccesarly require an exchange of money
> >
> >a model railroad is an exhibition
> >
> >it is also a public display
> >
> >it is also a place of recreation
>
> a model railroad in a private home, opened to the public once or twice
> a year, should be subject to your interpretation of ADA.
>
The saddest thing though, is that you'd also be hard-pressed in this PC
environment to get a judge and jury in such a case to agree with you
that this is a frivolous and injurious lawsuit, and that the filer
should be procecuted as such. So people with the time and inclination
can pursue a hobby of making life miserable (and expensive) for others.
--
Rick Vera-Burgos (work:rver...@ford.com, home:Ric...@msn.com)
Div. Supt. B&O Cumberland Division East End (under construction)
Novi, Michigan
Rick Vera-Burgos
Access Systems wrote:
>
> In rec.models.railroad C.L.Zeni <clz...@elsewhere.com> wrote:
> > Peter Olivola wrote:
> > >
> > > a model railroad in a private home, opened to the public once or twice
> > > a year, should be subject to your interpretation of ADA.
> > >
> > > agency interested in taking the case.
>
> maybe? maybe not? fortunately or unfortunatly they still have to
> investigate every complaint, so you would still have to answer the
> questions asked by the agency.
Which is why this whole situation is so sad, and make so many people so
angry. Whether or not I'm guilty of any violation under any provision of
your wonderful law, I am subject to harrassment, expense, and
procecution if *you* decide I'm in violation. You get to be judge, jury,
and executioner, whether I like it or not. I'm sorry, I'm about as
grateful as any American you'll find for the contributions that veterans
have made to my personal freedom, but this priviledge is *not* one that
you're entitled to.
There seems to be a total lack of common sense and degree in the
application of all law these days. Pushing for access to essential
services and taxpayer supported agencies, and general disability
awareness programs (especially in schools) is one thing; threatening
homeowners who open their layouts is quite another.
If everyone had your attitude, and was given their way, there'd be laws
lowering basketball hoops to four feet, requiring beauty pagents to
allow 350 lb. entrants, removal of physics and math from all school
curriculums for the benefit of the numerically challenged, etc. etc. We
should all do everything we can to make life "normal" for the
handicapped, but there are things which you cannot ever do, *deal with
it*. We all have limitations we must learn to live with; running to big
brother to get him to beat up on the rest of the world because "it's not
fair" is not a way to handle them.
Matthew Latham
This is all very interesting. I think I will consult with an attorney. I
had planned to include my model railroad, that is currently under
construction, on the layout tour for the annual model train show in Plano,
Texas in the near future. I was hoping to have it open in 1999.
If there is any remote possibility that I can be sued for ADA
non-compliance, then it will never happen. I'll post my decision after
talking to an attorney.
Matthew Latham
Corridor Manager
Fort Smith Sub-Division
Missouri, Arkansas, & Texas Railway (Under Construction)
Aubrey Woodward
To Handicapped Bob: Well you have succeeded in shutting down one Open
House at the regional NMRA Convention to be held in our town in 1998. I
will spend my time with a few friends of my choice at my layout, you sir
are not welcome because you are an a- - hole, your handicap not
withstanding. If I ever get to know a nice person who is handicapped
they would be welcome. I too served in the Military and think that gives
me the right to choose my friends. Take your poor me attitude, your
handicap, your handicar, your militant activism and your parking place at
the mall and shove them where the sun sun don't shine. I am not going to
build you an access, so my layout is by invite only!
Woody Woodward
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Brad Libby <libb...@bangornews.infi.net> wrote:
> I have followed this thread from day one. Originally it was civil, and
> informative. I was interested in the content on general grounds, I also
> As time went on the postings from Access Systems got more shrill. After
I guess it depends on weather your on the outside trying to get in or on
the inside
> I posted a notice about my club's annual show I got a personal E-Mail
> scolding me about wheel chair access when our show was held in a fully
> compliant facility! I decided to ignore the message, to me it looked as
if you were sent a private e-mail it was because it was the "for more
info" address in the announcement. those are standard request for
information notices, as other people with disabilitys ask me what shows
are accessible and I post some of the info on disabled related news
groups, if you did not respond you were not "scolded"
> if Mr. Access Systems was just laying the ground work for a raft of
I sign my name, it is Bob.
> litigations centered around our hobby. As things have escalated the
> past two days, and shrillness has changed to threats, I feel that enough
> is enough. The latest ploy of the ADA Police is to hide behind the
> Flag.
it is the exact opposite, I am saying and posting these to PREVENT
litigation and to educate clubs to their responsibilities under the ADA,
there is no need for groundwork under ADA.
if you are refering to my comment about being a veteran as hiding behind
a flag, I take that as an insult, when others were hiding I was serving.
(and proud of my service)
> to piss good people off and ultimately hurt the ADA. And notice that I
> use my full name and E-Mail address, I find your snide personal attacks
> against other members of this group un-professional, un-necessary, and
> obnoxious. After all, sir, you set the tone here.
my comments about e-mail was concerning "hate" mail that was sent to my
address and did not show up on the board.
my name and e-mail address has been on all my posts.
the tone is very simple.
my tone,- I have a right to access
responding tone - no you don't
I have heard very few comments about making a place accessible. not one
person said, "hmm never thought about it, we will have to make some
changes"
and only one person has asked for advice on making their place accessible.
most responses have been,
"NO NO NO stay out,
we don't have to let people like you in!"
if you think I am the ADA police, so be it! considering the size of the
country and that I really have given up on clubs, the odds are I will not
visit your club, But I am not the only person who is militant about
access. but I may be the only one who IS a model railroader and who is
trying to make other modellers aware that they really are covered by this
law. I don't want to see any clubs close, I want to see all the young
modellers get a chance at enjoying this hobby.
WHAT has your club done to welcome people with disabilities, or has this
subject been ignored. Do you rate a new signal system as more important
than access?? will a judge?? will the Access board?? will the dept of
Justice???
I can not file a complaint until I try to get in your club and am
unable to (carrying is expressly prohibited under ADA) but will someone
not as nice as I and who really doesn't care about the hobby or the club
feel the same way when they can't get in!??
statistically for every 300 people who come through your club or show
one will be between the ages of 15 and 65 and a full time wheelchair user.
one out of 450 will be hearing impaired. and one in 10 will have some
impairment. look out at the show, do your numbers reflect the national
average ??? if you cannot say yes, than you are probably at risk for
being cited for failure to comply. maybe no one will file a complaint for
50 years, maybe the next person will?? it doesn't even have to be a
person with a disability. this is the club's exposure. consider it!
maybe my shrillness is trying to be a wake up call! is anyone listening?
And yes I personally have filed over 250 complaints, I have only lost 3.
(I have not won a single penny in doing this, it actually costs me quite a
bit) the results, stores, shops, displays, businesses that now get my
business and a share of my money.
I have been a model railroader for over 45 years, I have had several
articles published in the model press. heck my MR file goes back to the
50's. this is not a lark. I would like to go to some NMRA shows. the
last one I went to was Philadelphia, and it was horrible access. I
finally gave up and went home early.
Maybe no one wants to hear my story or my knowledge, but what about you
if you have an accident, are you willing to give up your hobby!???
*****
blatant advertisement
the company I work for "Access Systems" believes that access is an
inexpensive common sense response to a major problem. I will offer my
services free to any club that wants assistance in achieving full access
at your club.
it will take some work on your part, but I am willing to share my
knowledge. a year from now I will post how many actually took me up on
this offer. send a private e-mail to Bob at ACCE...@SMART.NET
ad off
*******
Bob
Mike Chapman
In article <67bcff$mgk$1...@news.smart.net>,
Access Systems <acce...@smart.net> wrote:
>no I would much rather get in and see the layout! and be able to take my 4
>grandsons and 2 grandaughters in to see the layout. but there are 6 young
>children out there who won't get that thrill of going with grandad to see
>other peoples trains!, just like his 4 children who have not taken up the
>hobby partly because the only trains they saw or heard about were the ones
>in the basement.
Just what do you expect someone to do? Not show their layout because it's
impossible for you to see? Is THAT fair? How many people will THAT
keep out of the hobby? There's nothing anyone is going to do that
will make it easy for you to get into most basements, where many
layouts are located. Perhaps we should ban putting layouts in
basements too?
So, since no one is going to spend thousands on a lift, what you
really want is for them to not be able to show their layout. There's
no way around it.
> so far 10 young people have been DIRECTLY affected by your attitude,
>and it is personal they are my grandbabies!
They are directly affected by your disability. The rest of us can
walk just fine. *You're* the one who went off to kill them evil
commies. It's not the world's fault that you are highly abnormal
in your mobility. It's certainly not *my* fault.
I'm happy to see laws ensuring access to essential services for
those with disabilities. I'm disgusted to see the law applied
in such an abusive manner as you openly express. You're willing
to harrass anyone to get for yourself. You're willing to
push the limits of the law right down the throats of people who
are just trying to help their hobby, to the point that they
can't have open houses.
If you can't have it, no one can. That's freakin sick. People
aren't gonna put elevators into their basement for you, ok?? Sicing
The Man on them isn't going to make it happen. Your only sane
goal in doing so would be to shut them down, which is just WRONG.
What next, sue someone who has a garage sale and their driveway
isn't wide enough for your van, or too steep to wheel up?
Keep going buddy, keep it up, and see how long your law lasts.
All we need is you, the crazies who can't be fired, and the fat
pigs who demand an extra airline seat for free, and we'll be
out from under this in no time!
It's a DISABILITY that I grab the tits of all the women at
work, I just can't HELP it, you can't fire me!
Wow, you're great at making people bitter. However much you
want to deny it, you can't piss off the whole world. Laws,
like mobility, can disappear in a flash.
HICJHH
Not to be redundant; but I am sure your attorney will tell you that any idiot
can sue you for anything legitimate or not. Been there, done that(had it done
to me). John Hudson.
James Spears
In article <67a8rn$hva$2...@news.smart.net>,
acce...@smart.net (Access Systems) wrote:
>In rec.models.railroad HICJHH <hic...@aol.com> wrote:
>> As a model railroader and a shopping center owner, this string of posts is
of
>> interest. Here in Portland, we have two very fine clubs(among many others)
who
>> open their premises during Novermber weekends to the public. One club
charges
>> an admission, and the other takes contributions. In the one case, they
have a
>> relatively new building which has entry ramps, and would appear to be well
>
>the key here is "new building"
As a member of one of the clubs in question
<http://www.teleport.com/~jspears/cgmrc/cgmrc.html>
it's time to toss my 2c worth in here.
Yes the building is 'accessable' entry ramps, bathroom etc. But the building
is not "new" it predates the ADA by about ten years. We are open for four
weekends in November, I have seen many powered and unpowered wheelchairs come
through the club with no compalints. We have several members of varing
disability levels.
>> suited for in-wheelchair folks. The other is down some stairs. From a
>> practical standpoint, it would be difficult, but not impossible for
>> in-wheelchair folks to get the crowds at the club with ramps.
>
>maybe it would be required maybe not. again the law is VERY flexible, but
>it does require some action on the part of the public accomodation.
>
>how hard would it be to take some of that money donated or charged to make
>the place more accessible.
Thats where the bathroom came from.
>do clubs comply with the fire code, electrical code or the health and
>safety codes the same way.
>all place a burden of responsibility on the building owners and tenants.
You bet.
The one problem I am having with this discussion is Access Systems (Bob) is
very wheel chair focused, from what he has written I can understand that. But
the ADA is not just about wheel chairs, it includes visual, audio etc.
disabilities. But that dose not meen that you would have to let some one with
a visual disabiliy handle you railroad equipment, or touch your paintings in a
musuem. In other words there are "Limits". A good part of this started with a
question about providing Video access to *SECTIONS* of a layout that were not
easily accessable to a disabled person. We have sections of the layout that
are not accessable to the public at all, and run a tape in the club room that
shows some of this. But we still don't let people (the public) handle the
equipment, for that matter I have engines I don't bring to the club becuse I
don't trust the members handleing them. So what is the difference? Why isn't
someone all bent out of shape becuse we don't let visualy disabled people
handle the equipment?
James Spears
---------------------------------------------------------------------- +-------+
James Spears | Steam The Final Frontier. | Plate |
ji...@ichips.intel.com | General Manager C. E. Keen Flume & Lumber Co. | C |
jsp...@teleport.com | The SP&S 700 the last Northern! +-------+
Peter Olivola
On 18 Dec 1997 15:00:20 GMT, acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)
wrote:
>
>been there, done that, you didn't listen then either! so talk to the
>judge, you will finally pay attention, it is called "empowerment" when I
>was powerless I was ignored, now I have the RIGHT to file against you and
>you say "be nice" not a chance, talk to the judge!
I didn't listen? You know that for a fact, eh? I guess arrogance has
no problem residing with anyone.
To put it bluntly, you've become that which you claim to abhor, an
ignorant, kneejerk bigot.
Peter Olivola (poli...@advsoftech.com
JackN2MPU
I was under the impression that the ADA was only for commercial interests,
not private. And a club layout in a basement is certainly not commercial. I
would not expect, if I were wheelchair bound, to be accomodated by a lift or
some such device, in a person's own home that I visit once a year (aka layout
tour). I would just look for another layout open house, and leace it at that.
Before anyone flames me for being anti-disabled, I'll let you know that I walk
with a cane and knee brace because of a severe skiing accident almost 3 years
ago that left me with what is essentially a non-function right knee. I cope as
best as I can at open houses and such; I don't whine and say:' I need an
elevator or lift. You don't have one. I'll sue under ADA'. I suck it up and
carry on with life. Life's too short to bitch about this kind of stuff.
Jack
Modeling the NYC & NYNH&H in HO and CPRail & D&H in N
NRA & NRA-ILA
ARRL - N2MPU
Frank Forsten
Access Systems wrote:
> (blabla)
>
> And yes I personally have filed over 250 complaints, I have only lost 3.
> (I have not won a single penny in doing this, it actually costs me quite a
> bit) the results, stores, shops, displays, businesses that now get my
> business and a share of my money.
> (...)
> I would like to go to some NMRA shows. the
> last one I went to was Philadelphia, and it was horrible access. I
> finally gave up and went home early.
> (...)
>
> Bob
Did you file a complaint regarding the NMRA shows? Results? What about an
initiative for the Visual Challegened to join the MR hobby?
Mike Tennent
"Matthew Latham" <mkl...@flash.net> wrote:
Please note that ADA does not necessarily mandate PHYSICAL access to
an area. You can also have programmatic access. In the case of a home
layout in a basement at an Open House, that could be as simple as
installing a temporary video camera with a monitor in an accessible
area. Or even showing a previously recorded tour of the layout.
It works for lighthouses.
Mike "TriBop" Tennent
Remove "nospam." for email reply
IMC '98 IronVirgins Website
http://www.gate.net/~wbrunner/imc_iv.htm
WebRunner Running Page and my
Model Railroad page
http://www.gate.net/~wbrunner/
Mike Tennent
DPA...@prodigy.com (Aubrey Woodward) wrote:
Please note that ADA does not necessarily mandate PHYSICAL access to
an area. You can also have programmatic access. In the case of a home
layout in a basement at an Open House, that could be as simple as
installing a temporary video camera with a monitor in an accessible
area. Or even showing a previously recorded tour of the layout.
It works for lighthouses.
Your group might want to look into that.
Robert Hill
In <67bocu$62...@eccws1.dearborn.ford.com> Rick Vera-Burgos
<Rick_VB@NOSPAM!msn.com> writes:
>
>There seems to be a total lack of common sense and degree in the
>application of all law these days. Pushing for access to essential
>services and taxpayer supported agencies, and general disability
>awareness programs (especially in schools) is one thing; threatening
>homeowners who open their layouts is quite another.
>
>If everyone had your attitude, and was given their way, there'd be
laws
>lowering basketball hoops to four feet, requiring beauty pagents to
>allow 350 lb. entrants, removal of physics and math from all school
>curriculums for the benefit of the numerically challenged, etc. etc.
We
>should all do everything we can to make life "normal" for the
>handicapped, but there are things which you cannot ever do, *deal with
>it*. We all have limitations we must learn to live with; running to
big
>brother to get him to beat up on the rest of the world because "it's
not
>fair" is not a way to handle them.
>--
>Rick Vera-Burgos (work:rver...@ford.com, home:Ric...@msn.com)
>Div. Supt. B&O Cumberland Division East End (under construction)
>Novi, Michigan
And here is one other thing. Every post from Access I've read, tells
EVERYONE ELSE, what to do to accomodate THEIR needs. So here's a
suggestion to them...why not tell us what YOU'LL do to help YOURSELVES
in this hobby? Please don't portray young potential modelers as some
sort of "victim" Do something yourself to teach them. And I'll even
give you an idea. What is the PERFECT medium in which handicapped
people of all types can learn this hobby and enjoy it? What sort of
layout design has unlimited access potential, can be built low enough
to allow even the young to work on it, and can be built on a small
budget? And...can also be built as large as you can make it, provided
enough people really ARE interested in the hobby?
How about...you....personally...take steps to start a nationwide
modular club for the handicapped? One on the model of N-trak? With
local chapters. A ,odular layout can be made fully accessable...right
from the get-go. It can be set up in malls and other public places
where your message of access could not only be spoken...but SHOWN. You
can by example, show people what you need to be able to enjoy a hobby
like ours, plus showcase what I'm sure must be thousands of great
modelers' work. And maybe YOUR company can invest some of YOUR capital
to come up with standards for the modules that accommodate your
constituency, and maybe YOUR company can spend the money needed to
organize and run such an organization. Buy the ads, invest in the first
10 modules maybe. I would BET...that if you did...you'd soon pull in
other modelers without handicaps who would want to join. How about it
my friend? Are you willing to put YOUR money where your mouth is?
Bob
David Holliday
Mike Tennent wrote:
>
> DPA...@prodigy.com (Aubrey Woodward) wrote:
>
> >To Handicapped Bob: Well you have succeeded in shutting down one Open
> >House at the regional NMRA Convention to be held in our town in 1998.
so my layout is by invite only!
> >
> >Woody Woodward
> >
>
> Please note that ADA does not necessarily mandate PHYSICAL access to
> an area. You can also have programmatic access. In the case of a home
> layout in a basement at an Open House, that could be as simple as
> installing a temporary video camera with a monitor in an accessible
> area. Or even showing a previously recorded tour of the layout.
>
> It works for lighthouses.
>
> Your group might want to look into that.
>
Seriously though, in building my new layout, I'm lucky. I've got a
clearspan 26x36' room in a steel building with adjacent shop. I've been
trying to keep the aisle/door width a minimum 48". But this thread
brings up other issues. What about bathroom access? Lots of room to
park, but the driveway (700')and parking area are gravel (and get pools
in serious rain), do I have to pave the thing? I'd never be able to get
out after a snowfall. At some point the whole thing gets out of
control, and I can invest in more modeling instead. As Woody is saying,
having somebody DEMANDING their "rights" on my private property just
makes me want to say "screw it", build smaller aisles and larger yards.
And INVITE whomever I damned well please. I've already dropped the idea
of a club for similar reasons.
David
Jim Hill
Before we all embarrass ourselves . . .
Bob <acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)> has written several notes pointing
out the provisions and possible implications of the ADA. Whether his
interpretation of the law is correct or not is certainly a proper subject of
debate (although it appears that he knows what he's talking about) and his
confrontational style may be subject to legitimate criticism, but the recent
posts to this thread seem to fall into one or more of the following
categories:
1) Bob is a jerk - therefore I wouldn't want him to visit my layout.
2) Bob is a jerk - therefore the ADA is crap
3) Bob is a jerk - therefore I don't plan to obey the law
4) Bob is a jerk - therefore people with disabilities are all jerks
5) Handicap parking spaces are not always full - therefore all of the above
Wake up boys - you've been provided with information that you didn't have
before, and you've been made aware of a situation that you hadn't thought
about or provided for. For that, you should be thankful.
Whether you approve or disapprove of this man's style or etiquette is of no
consequence to me, nor does your disapproval of his style seem to have much
relevance to the purpose of this newsgroup.
Seems to me that the relevant questions are what requirements the Disabilities
Act imposes on clubs and private layouts when an open house is held. The
answer may be "none". If there ARE requirements, then Bob has done you a favor
by making you aware of the ADA and allowing you to do whatever may be
necessary to comply with the act or exempt yourself from it.
And regardless of the applicability of the act, this thread will undoubtedly
cause some people to give a little thought to handling handicapped visitors.
Which is a lot better than trying to figure out what to do after they show up
at the door.
And if you still can't accept whatever it is that the ADA may (or may not)
require, then perhaps you should contact your congressional delegation. Model
railroaders are far from the only group potentially affected by the act. If
its bad law, then it can be changed . . . this was still a democracy the last
time I looked. Try writing your congressman instead of dumping all this hate
and bitterness in a model railroad group.
Jim Hill
Madison WI
Rick Vera-Burgos
Jim Hill wrote:
>
> Before we all embarrass ourselves . . .
>
> Bob <acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)> has written several notes pointing
> out the provisions and possible implications of the ADA. Whether his
> interpretation of the law is correct or not is certainly a proper subject of
> debate (although it appears that he knows what he's talking about) and his
> confrontational style may be subject to legitimate criticism, but the recent
> posts to this thread seem to fall into one or more of the following
> categories:
>
> 1) Bob is a jerk - therefore I wouldn't want him to visit my layout.
> 2) Bob is a jerk - therefore the ADA is crap
> 3) Bob is a jerk - therefore I don't plan to obey the law
> 4) Bob is a jerk - therefore people with disabilities are all jerks
> 5) Handicap parking spaces are not always full - therefore all of the above
>
Whoa, Jim, I for one don't fall into any of those categories. Carefully
reread my postings, and you'll see that *my* position is "none of the
above".
> Wake up boys - you've been provided with information that you didn't have
> before, and you've been made aware of a situation that you hadn't thought
> about or provided for. For that, you should be thankful.
Nope, neither is true. I knew of the ADA before, and I new of a small
radical element's confrontational attempts to force compliance from
those they perceived as being in violation. And, I am fully aware of
what full access to a club or layout would entail. If your literate and
pay any attention to current events, and have lived in this country for
the last ten years, you can't help but be up on most of this. (Yes Bob,
some of us *are* listening, despite your assertions to the contrary.) So
I treat that input of Bob's as "yeah, so what else?".
>
> Whether you approve or disapprove of this man's style or etiquette is of no
> consequence to me, nor does your disapproval of his style seem to have much
> relevance to the purpose of this newsgroup.
>
It has great relevance to the purpose of this newsgroup, since his
threatening style of presentation on this subject may disuade some from
making their modeling efforts public, which diminishes the hobby for
*all* of us.
> Seems to me that the relevant questions are what requirements the Disabilities
> Act imposes on clubs and private layouts when an open house is held. The
> answer may be "none". If there ARE requirements, then Bob has done you a favor
> by making you aware of the ADA and allowing you to do whatever may be
> necessary to comply with the act or exempt yourself from it.
If this was all Bob had done, then there would be *no* problem (well,
certainly none for me). But, consider what he wrote in another thread on
12/6:
>> SHOW ORGANIZERS TAKE NOTE, the last two or three shows that I went to
>> that weren't accessible, I filed a formal discrimination complaint
>> against. I am right now 4 for 4 don't risk a fine or being closed down
>> if I come and can't get in, your in court!
>> and club open houses fall into the same catagory. If you were started
>> after 26 Aug 1991 you are dead meat if you are not accessible. before
>> that date, you have some wiggle room but it is getting smaller each year!
>> and if someone who is disabled wants to join, YOU MUST MODIFY to comply.
>> ***********
>> this is not legal advice, consult your own legal counsel before you hear
>> from my legal counselor!
Note that he is directly threatening legal action against (potentially)
any club member reading this. He's not saying "the law requires
reasonable access for the disabled", he's saying "if *I* don't like your
accessibility, you get to deal with legal fees, time consuming
investigations, bad publicity, etc. etc.". This is hardly a reasonable
approach to clubs who frequently run fairly close to the edge of
economic extinction. I'd hazard a guess that in many such cases, the
club would just close rather than deal with the trouble such an attack
would bring.
Then on 12/19 he writes:
>> sorry, ADA is not government connected, it is for PRIVATE facilities. if
>> you open your basement up to the public it WOULD be covered by ADA
So now he's gone and said that he considers that legal access
requirements apply to plain old ordinary homeowners. Juxtapose that with
the above threats, and you can see where a lot of folks would instantly
fly off the handle.
>
> And regardless of the applicability of the act, this thread will undoubtedly
> cause some people to give a little thought to handling handicapped visitors.
> Which is a lot better than trying to figure out what to do after they show up
> at the door.
Well, I suppose I could spend $10,000-$15,000 to make my basement layout
accessible, but then I wouldn't have the funds for the layout anymore.
So I resigned myself to the ideas as stated before by others, with
alternative activities in accessible areas. Sorry, my house (and
especially my basement) just wasn't designed to be accessible to the
wheelchair bound. I'd even consider publicizing through whatever means I
used to announce an open house
>
> And if you still can't accept whatever it is that the ADA may (or may not)
> require, then perhaps you should contact your congressional delegation. Model
> railroaders are far from the only group potentially affected by the act. If
> its bad law, then it can be changed . . . this was still a democracy the last
> time I looked. Try writing your congressman instead of dumping all this hate
> and bitterness in a model railroad group.
Reality: laws are by and large written (and guarded) by lawyers, who
have a vested interest in causing as much formal litigation as possible,
and by politicians who have as their number one priority to get
re-elected, which requires strict conformity to political correctness in
the eyes of his constuancy, which are largely media-mesmerized sheep,
and by power-mongers whose main purpose in life is to wield as much
control over other folks as is possible. In the present political
climate, the ADA in it's present form is as safe as Social Security. My
head is sore enough from dealing with stuff I can reasonably affect
without whacking it on that brick wall.
Again: my beef is not with the concept, but with the reasonable
application of the concept.
Rick Vera-Burgos
Robert Hill wrote:
>
> And here is one other thing. Every post from Access I've read, tells
> EVERYONE ELSE, what to do to accomodate THEIR needs. So here's a
> suggestion to them...why not tell us what YOU'LL do to help YOURSELVES
> in this hobby?
I know some folks are going to misunderstand and accuse me of waffling
on this, as they have on other subjects in the past, but as I always
say, the truth (or the "right") in any argument is usually somewhere in
the middle...
Bob is definitely right when he asserts that until recently, the
handicapped (and *especially* disabled veterans) where mistreated and
ignored in this country when it came to there physical needs. It only
stood to reason that there should be a law dictating what things should
be changed to address those injustices, to define the level of support
that all must rise to. So the basic idea behind the ADA was a long
overdue necessity. And we should all expect to have to think of what we
can do in any situation to make equal participation for the handicapped
possible.
BUT, this does not dispense the responsibility for the handicapped to
continue to adapt *themselves* to their environment. It seems to be
human nature for a newly entitled minority to use that entitlement as a
stick to continue to force the world to conform to their concept of
normality, far beyond equal footing and more toward advantage for the
minority. I'm a firm believer that the world owes *no one* a free ride,
and it's an unfortunate aspect of life that some folks' ride will be
bumpier than others. So while they should expect understanding and aid
to overcome difficulty, they shouldn't expect the world to come to a
stop and cushion their ride. There has got to be a happy medium, and
*all* parties must realize that they must do their share.
I realize I (and this thread) have gone way beyond reasonable drift, and
I apologize for my part and promise to let it drop here.
bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
In article <67eqgi$nj...@eccws1.dearborn.ford.com>, Rick Vera-Burgos <Rick_VB@NOSPAM!msn.com> writes:
Rick raised the issues that ADA is safe.
ADA is not safe. There are many powerful and rich interests that would
drastically modify the ADA on the basis of misuse and excessive cost.
ADA might need some refinement, but it is a good law.
With the intimidation of some in this thread, they would gladly vote to
repeal ADA. We don't need that.
Please read my previous post on information from the U.S. Justice Department
that requires accomodations for layouts only if they are "readily achievable" or
"easy to accomplish without much difficulty or expense."
Jim Budde
K SF & P
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad David Holliday <dholli...@pop.a001.sprintmail.com> wrote:
> Mike Tennent wrote:
> > DPA...@prodigy.com (Aubrey Woodward) wrote:
> > >To Handicapped Bob: Well you have succeeded in shutting down one Open
> > >House at the regional NMRA Convention to be held in our town in 1998.
> snip
> brings up other issues. What about bathroom access? Lots of room to
if you don't have a bathroom no problem, if you do, a door that opens out
and is 32 inchs wide is usually all that is needed. zero cost!
> park, but the driveway (700')and parking area are gravel (and get pools
> in serious rain), do I have to pave the thing? I'd never be able to get
no you are not required to pave it.
might be nice if you allowed someone to park close.
> out after a snowfall. At some point the whole thing gets out of
> control, and I can invest in more modeling instead. As Woody is saying,
the only time it gets out of control is when the "not me's" and the other
"naysayers" start yelling about irrational burdens. it is not hard.
it is 1. attitude
2. attitude
3. attitude
it is a shame when common courtesy is lowered to "political correct"
euphinisms and has to be legislated!
Bob
David Holliday
Access Systems wrote:
>
> it is 1. attitude
> 2. attitude
> 3. attitude
>
> it is a shame when common courtesy is lowered to "political correct"
> euphinisms and has to be legislated!
>
> Bob
Okay, Bob, all of those sound reasonable, except I think you meant
"euphemisms" ;) I've plenty of parking up close, and don't mind
reserving it. The door opening OUT I hadn't thought of, but no problem,
and it is 36". Planned aisles are 48" but do have dead ends. Main door
is 40".
The biggest problem I've REALLY run into so far is layout height. For
realism, it should be around eye-level but that, of course, is vastly
different for someone seated or standing. I'd even considered building
it at "sea(t) level" so that during construction (which I've discovered
is 80 of a layout anyway) it would be more comfortable; and, besides, I
might require that kind of access someday myself. Ain't gittin any
younger. Any constructive contributions to solving this dilemma are
welcome from all and sundry ("sun dry" is an euphemism here in the
Pacific Northwest).
David
Tom E Arnold
Access Systems wrote:
>
> In rec.models.railroad Seth Lewin, M.D. <sm...@tiac.net> wrote:
>
> > > sorry, ADA is not government connected, it is for PRIVATE facilities. if
> > > you open your basement up to the public it WOULD be covered by ADA
>
> > private train setup with the public every so often that that imposes a
>
> if you invite a few friends in to see your layout, no it is not covered
> BUT
> if you invite the public in for an open house then yes it is covered under
>
> Public law
> 28CFR36.207
>
So what Access Systems is saying is "If I can't have it, nobody can." In
order to avoid any confrontation, I hereby declare that my layout, even
should it ever amount to anything, will _never_ be open to the public.
Sorry. Not my fault.
TEA/
Jim
In article <349750...@NOSPAMwpa.net>, jlr...@NOSPAMwpa.net says...
>
>PGG wrote:
>
>>
>> Scott
>> Not speaking for anyone but myself.
>
>I also have been lurking a short time and have the EXACT same reaction
>as Scott. After reading these ditribes I'm wondering how many private
>layouts will NEVER be open to the public for fear running afoul of this
>law.
>
>By the way, as to your "reporting of hate messages", untill the First
>Ammendment is repealed I will continue to speak my mind.
>
>John
>
>Remove NOSPAM to reply.
First, I want to thank both of you for expressing your views. Although
completely opposite of mine, I appreciate the time you took to tell us
about them.
I will be the first to admit that there are those that abuse ADA, and that
there are instances where ADA does go too far, but I would like for you to
consider the millions of us that, were it not for ADA, would be shut-ins.
Rather than letting all this energy you have regarding ADA fesater, why
not turn it into something positive? Why not join me in trying to find a
way for ADA to work as it was intended?
I don't believe for a minute that anyone actually hates the disabled, or
wants to see us suffer needlessly, but I do appreciate your feelings that
we are getting something more than you.I don't feel like we are, of
course. I feel we are only being given a helping hand. However, I have
apparently failed to communicate that to you.
Jim
John W Rosenbauer
Jim wrote:
>
> In article <349750...@NOSPAMwpa.net>, jlr...@NOSPAMwpa.net says...
> >
> >PGG wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Scott
> >> Not speaking for anyone but myself.
> >
> >I also have been lurking a short time and have the EXACT same reaction
> >as Scott. After reading these ditribes I'm wondering how many private
> >layouts will NEVER be open to the public for fear running afoul of this
> >law.
> >
> >By the way, as to your "reporting of hate messages", untill the First
> >Ammendment is repealed I will continue to speak my mind.
> >
> >John
> >
> >Remove NOSPAM to reply.
>
> First, I want to thank both of you for expressing your views. Although
> completely opposite of mine, I appreciate the time you took to tell us
> about them.
>
> I will be the first to admit that there are those that abuse ADA, and that
> there are instances where ADA does go too far, but I would like for you to
> consider the millions of us that, were it not for ADA, would be shut-ins.
>
> Rather than letting all this energy you have regarding ADA fesater, why
> not turn it into something positive? Why not join me in trying to find a
> way for ADA to work as it was intended?
>
> I don't believe for a minute that anyone actually hates the disabled, or
> wants to see us suffer needlessly, but I do appreciate your feelings that
> course. I feel we are only being given a helping hand. However, I have
> apparently failed to communicate that to you.
>
> Jim
Jim,
I never said you or anyone else was getting " more than me". What I DID
say was that I wondered how many folks reading these posts were now
seriously rethinking public open houses. When my RR is operable I will
not even consider opening it after the recent exchanges and I think
anyone who risks the wrath of an ADA" Advocate with an attitude", as I
believe Bob to be, is crazy. Even if they survive the complaint, dealing
with the Feds could bankrupt them in legal fees alone.
You did not fail to communicate to me that all you want is a "helping
hand" but what some folks fail to consider is the cost and effect of
that helping hand on those of us who are expected to provide it. A club
I formerly belonged to is located in an 80 year old building being used
as a community center. The second and third floors are not accessable
and there are no funds to make them so. As it stands now the roof leaked
for several years till the money could be found to replace it. If Bob
shows up and files a complaint the effect will be to put 25 to 30
tennants on the street as the building would have to be closed if no
goverment funding could be had. By the way, the tennants include a food
bank, daycare and several other agencies devoted to helping the public
but I guess that doesn't really matter, does it?
John W Rosenbauer
Remove NOSPAM to reply.
Robert Hill
In <67ehqa$1ofm$1...@news.doit.wisc.edu> jrh...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Jim
Hill) writes:
>
>Before we all embarrass ourselves . . .
>
>Bob <acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)> has written several notes
pointing
>out the provisions and possible implications of the ADA. Whether his
>interpretation of the law is correct or not is certainly a proper
subject of
>debate (although it appears that he knows what he's talking about) and
his
>confrontational style may be subject to legitimate criticism, but the
recent
>posts to this thread seem to fall into one or more of the following
>categories:
>
>1) Bob is a jerk - therefore I wouldn't want him to visit my layout.
>2) Bob is a jerk - therefore the ADA is crap
>3) Bob is a jerk - therefore I don't plan to obey the law
>4) Bob is a jerk - therefore people with disabilities are all jerks
>5) Handicap parking spaces are not always full - therefore all of the
above
See my post on this one Jim....I see him as none of the above...but did
make the point that there is a difference between telling others what
you WANT...and showing others you have the independence to carry it
off. It can't be both ways. You can't clamor for independence ...but
only when it is made easy for you to be independent.
I'd also disagree on one other point. How one makes one's argument is
very relative to the probability of success in putting your point
across for SERIOUS consideration. I'd reccommend a super book called
"Getting To Yes"...which is a well regarded and easily-read treatise on
the art of negotiation. It's most basic premise lies in the acceptance
by BOTH sides of an issue, that the other side has a valid agenda that
they need to have heard/met. Once you take a hard positionm against
someone, you condemn things to stalemate.
I agree Bob has a point that needs to be made. But I also agree that
while it may not be politically correct to say so, sometimes people
have to face the reality of their limitations and find their own ways
to overcome them, instead of expecting everyone else to pay in one way
or another for their personal misfortune....by using government and the
courts as a club.
And in Bob's defense, I know a lovely lady who is wheelchair-bound. I
asked her about all this and her response was as follows: "If the
handicapped want 5, we have to ask for 100".
Jim is right in one respect above all others. This has opened debate,
and that is a good thing.
The other Bob
Bob
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Rick Vera-Burgos <Rick_VB@NOSPAM!msn.com> wrote:
> Jim Hill wrote:
> >
> > Bob <acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)> has written several notes pointing
> > out the provisions and possible implications of the ADA. Whether his
> > interpretation of the law is correct or not is certainly a proper subject of
> > debate (although it appears that he knows what he's talking about) and his
> > Wake up boys - you've been provided with information that you didn't have
> > before, and you've been made aware of a situation that you hadn't thought
> > about or provided for. For that, you should be thankful.
that was the only purpose when I started this thread.
the confrontational style was to indicate the type of person you MAY
confront.
> Nope, neither is true. I knew of the ADA before, and I new of a small
> radical element's confrontational attempts to force compliance from
"Radical" is defined differently by those who are or are not defended by
their actions. the people who founded this country were maybe the
ultimate radicals!
> It has great relevance to the purpose of this newsgroup, since his
> threatening style of presentation on this subject may disuade some from
> making their modeling efforts public, which diminishes the hobby for
> *all* of us.
or it may open some of the hobby up for all of us, and get much needed new
blood into the hobby. (or do you believe that people with disabilities
are unable to build and run model trains?)
> certainly none for me). But, consider what he wrote in another thread on
> 12/6:
> >> SHOW ORGANIZERS TAKE NOTE, the last two or three shows that I went to
> >> that weren't accessible, I filed a formal discrimination complaint
> >> against. I am right now 4 for 4 don't risk a fine or being closed down
> >> if I come and can't get in, your in court!
now read what it ACTUALLY says. Show organizers (this was a commercial
show thread) and they are absolutely positivily covered by ADA
> >> and club open houses fall into the same catagory. If you were started
> >> after 26 Aug 1991 you are dead meat if you are not accessible. before
> >> that date, you have some wiggle room but it is getting smaller each year!
> >> and if someone who is disabled wants to join, YOU MUST MODIFY to comply.
> >> ***********
> >> this is not legal advice, consult your own legal counsel before you hear
> >> from my legal counselor!
> Note that he is directly threatening legal action against (potentially)
NOPE actually I AM saying it is NOT legal advice, and it says "File a
complaint" not file a law suit. under the law the normal course of action
is to file a compliant with an oversight agency, which then investigates
the aleged action, then tries to negotiate a solution. it isn't until
after failure of a negotiated settlement that legal action is taken. and
the person filing the complaint is only a witness for the agency!
(I thought you said you knew the ADA, read all of it!)
> Then on 12/19 he writes:
> >> sorry, ADA is not government connected, it is for PRIVATE facilities. if
> >> you open your basement up to the public it WOULD be covered by ADA
> So now he's gone and said that he considers that legal access
I don't say that, read 28CFR36.207 which says that explicitely
> > And regardless of the applicability of the act, this thread will undoubtedly
> > cause some people to give a little thought to handling handicapped visitors.
> Well, I suppose I could spend $10,000-$15,000 to make my basement layout
> accessible, but then I wouldn't have the funds for the layout anymore.
I doubt very much that would be required, but what about solid handrails,
open risers, etc. this is part of ADA too!
> especially my basement) just wasn't designed to be accessible to the
> wheelchair bound. I'd even consider publicizing through whatever means I
> used to announce an open house
hope you never need it to be accessible for your own use!
> Reality: laws are by and large written (and guarded) by lawyers, who
> have a vested interest in causing as much formal litigation as possible,
> and by politicians who have as their number one priority to get
At the signing ceremony there was stated by one of the Congress people.
"this is the first law since I have been in the Congress that was created
the way the founders intended, by the will of the people!"
it was oppossed by many powerful businesses and people, but there were
hundreds of people with disabilities on Capitol Hill for months, and
writing letters and calling. not lobbiest but voters with disabilities
and their families and friends. Any way you look at it this law IS a
civil rights law, it is written as such and is enforced as such.
> the eyes of his constuancy, which are largely media-mesmerized sheep,
> and by power-mongers whose main purpose in life is to wield as much
> control over other folks as is possible. In the present political
no those were the folks opposed to ADA, the people forced the passage of
ADA. we filled the galleries of Congress every day for 4 years, we called
and camped out at each and every member of Congress's office both in DC
and in their home district. ADA didn't just happen, hundreds and
thousands of plain citizens who happened to have a disability got tired of
being treated as second class citizens.
Some of the more militant, marched in the streets and were arrested in
peacefull civil disobedience. most wrote and phoned and talked to their
friends and family, But imangine if you will a crowd of people in
wheelchairs with guide dogs and crutches and aides filling Pennslyvannia
Ave in DC from the White House to the Capitol, you will have an idea of
the number of people who showed up to tell congress one thing.
"disABled, but Able to vote!"
> Again: my beef is not with the concept, but with the reasonable
> application of the concept.
again, define "reasonable" are you inside looking out? or are you outside
trying to get in??
big difference !
Bob
Access Systems
> >
> > And here is one other thing. Every post from Access I've read, tells
> > EVERYONE ELSE, what to do to accomodate THEIR needs. So here's a
> > suggestion to them...why not tell us what YOU'LL do to help YOURSELVES
> > in this hobby?
> I know some folks are going to misunderstand and accuse me of waffling
> on this, as they have on other subjects in the past, but as I always
> say, the truth (or the "right") in any argument is usually somewhere in
> the middle...
actually I agree with you on this matter,
> BUT, this does not dispense the responsibility for the handicapped to
> continue to adapt *themselves* to their environment. It seems to be
And this is being done in a far quieter manner, Modern wheelchairs for
example, are far more versatile and flexible than in the past. and can go
far more places with less accomodations than even 15 years ago.
when most people think of a wheelchair they probably think of those big
old clunkers in the hospital. mine for example is an aircraft alloy with
radial high presure tires, easy to get accross the grass and rough
terrain. only weighs 19 lbs which means I can throw it places others used
to have to help.
but it still won't go up and down steps! (it also costs over $4,000)
> human nature for a newly entitled minority to use that entitlement as a
> stick to continue to force the world to conform to their concept of
> normality, far beyond equal footing and more toward advantage for the
> minority. I'm a firm believer that the world owes *no one* a free ride,
never asked for a free ride, don't believe in it. only demand a equal
shot at it! No one least of all me has advocated changing the club rules
for qualifing to be an engineer, but a wireless walk around throttle might
be in order if all of the engineer stations are in an elevated tower!
I stated that it was not part of ADA to be required to allow people with
disabilities to handle equipment if no one else was allowed to.
> and it's an unfortunate aspect of life that some folks' ride will be
> bumpier than others. So while they should expect understanding and aid
it's not the bumps that are the problem. it is the outright barriers that
have nothing to do with the activity that are the problem.
I don't believe I ever posted a statement that I had to be allowed to do
anything anyone else was doing. but as a popular disability bumper
sticker proclaims
"TO BOLDLY GO WHERE EVERYONE ELSE HAS GONE BEFORE"
> *all* parties must realize that they must do their share.
anyone who doesn't think a person with a disability is not doing their
share is invited to go to work with me on any day. or any other active
person with a disability.
it is like parking, don't want a spot in front of the store, just one
wide enough to get out of the car, paint all the spaces wide enough and I
will take my chances with everyone else, but that was a compromise with
the shopping center owners, they didn't want to lose all that parking. so
we compromised, all spaces don't have to be wide, only some, but we get
priority on those wider spaces. now some folks seem to think it is a gift
or perk, when all it is is 13 feet of width!
Bob
RPearce900
The trouble with America is that legislation and litigation have taken such a
high profile that everyone has forgotten how to use common sense. I regret to
say the same is happening in England.
A few years back I got a parking fine for occupying a disabled spot. I paid it,
because I was in the wrong, but I was extremely offended because :
The parking spot was marked only with a 4 inch square badge, which I had
simply missed.
My father (who was not with me at the time) was registered disabled, and would
have refused to use that space because...
The parking spot was a mudbath, three inches deep in water.
I'm glad to say the council have rectified these problems since, but there are
other similar examples around.
Rob
Chief Engineer of the Sump, Laisse and Huneausware Railway
Come visit http://members.aol.com/rpearce900/
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Robert Hill <nava...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> In <67ehqa$1ofm$1...@news.doit.wisc.edu> jrh...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Jim
> Hill) writes:
big snip, of old stuff
> make the point that there is a difference between telling others what
> you WANT...and showing others you have the independence to carry it
> off. It can't be both ways. You can't clamor for independence ...but
> only when it is made easy for you to be independent.
independence and barriers are a big difference. I drive, but to get in
the vehicle takes a wide parking space. driving is independence, but it
is mooted by lack of wide parking. is the wide parking space an
abandonment of independence or a reasonable accomodation to it???
I am a ski instructor, when people ask what the hardest part is, I always
say, "getting from the parking lot to the snow" I have adapted to the
enviorenment of the ski slope, I have the proper training and equipment,
but people's stereotyping of a person with a disabilities' abilities they
will laugh and take the accessible parking space at the ski slope!
I am a model railroader, does my being judged as a competent modeler have
anything to do with getting to the layout?? or is it the equipment I set
on the track, or the workmanship of the models. Judge my skill on my
models not on how I got into the layout room! I want to learn from your
experiences, and I might even have a little bit that would help you.
as Vane Jones said for years
"knowledge is of no value until it is shared with others!"
> by BOTH sides of an issue, that the other side has a valid agenda that
> they need to have heard/met. Once you take a hard positionm against
> someone, you condemn things to stalemate.
the problem is that the other side has never (up to this point)
acknowledged that there was a problem!?
> I agree Bob has a point that needs to be made. But I also agree that
> while it may not be politically correct to say so, sometimes people
> have to face the reality of their limitations and find their own ways
> to overcome them, instead of expecting everyone else to pay in one way
hmmm not sure how to answer this, myself personally, I could probably
crawl into any basement or attic out there (plays havoc with my clothes
bill) but can we expect everyone to do so, and many times I won't because
it is demeaning and just a plain pain in the butt!
I have gotten into Virginia Ave tower (anyone who knows it knows the
problem there) but I sure wouldn't do it again, even if invited (yes I
know it has been closed) does that mean that ALL people with disabilities
should have to crawl! how many would stay in the hobby long.
AND as I have stated frequently, this is because I want the young folks to
have the opportunity to enjoy this hobby too. And not everyone can or is
willing to demean themselves to get in.
As I have said to many others, I have nothing left to lose so I am willing
to be the lightning rod for others so they will not have to put up with
the insults and abuse for exercising their rights. I don't care about the
comments anymore and am willing to make a fool of myself so others won't
have too.
> or another for their personal misfortune...
I know no one will believe me here, but I do not consider my disability as
a "personal misfortune" but rather a fact of life and am very satisfied
with my life. wouldn't change it if I had the opportunity. don't have
time to wish for my life to be different, am too busy doing "stuff"
this loooong thread is cutting into my modeling time BUT I consider it
very important.
> .by using government and the
> courts as a club.
only as needed, but the knowledge that it can/will be used is an incentive
to discuss reasonable alternatives!?
> And in Bob's defense, I know a lovely lady who is wheelchair-bound. I
> asked her about all this and her response was as follows: "If the
> handicapped want 5, we have to ask for 100".
if I were being cynical tonight I would say "she's an optimist" but I
won't
> Jim is right in one respect above all others. This has opened debate,
> and that is a good thing.
that was the idea!
> The other Bob
the previous Bob?
Bob
bChuck
Sorry to post to this again, as last time I only made things worse, which
was not my intent, but...:
I must say that accesability has always been an issue for me. I really feel
that everyone needs to make an effort. I am not currently disabled, but
have been (NS knees w/surgery, & back injury suffered in armed forces,
currently not a problem) and will be in the future. I have had family who
spent their lives in a chair.
I'm a pastor (I know, you wouldn't know it from my last post on this topic,
but hey, I'm only human) of a small rural church. We are a poor church,
with a good percentage of our members haveing restricted mobility. We owned
a store that was horrendous and our church was so inaccessable that the
local funeral homes wouldn't even do funerals there! (honest!) But we had
no money for building renovations. Solution: Gave away the store & got a
deal on renting other (accessable, with accessable offices and public
restrooms to boot) and sold the church and purchased an old school that only
needed minor reno's to make it accessable. It worked because it was a
priority.
We now have a model railroad club that meets in our building. We have an
accessable club. We need to work on the modules, but one step at a time.
BTW, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that the NMRA standards for
modules states that they must be 48" high. That is probably something that
should be looked at.
So much for my self-agrandizing boasting.
What I really wanted to ask is this:
Have you noticed that most new houseing is not accessable? I wonder why
that is. I wonder how the various gov'ts allow it. Oh well. Sorry that
this went off topic, but I was wondering. About the NMRA modules too I
guess.
bChuck
confused in the flat lands (which aren't really)
Jim wrote in message <67d4h6$s...@news.myriad.net>...
<<really big stinking snip>>
>I will be the first to admit that there are those that abuse ADA, and that
>there are instances where ADA does go too far, but I would like for you to
>consider the millions of us that, were it not for ADA, would be shut-ins.
>
>Rather than letting all this energy you have regarding ADA fesater, why
>not turn it into something positive? Why not join me in trying to find a
>way for ADA to work as it was intended?
>
>I don't believe for a minute that anyone actually hates the disabled, or
>wants to see us suffer needlessly, but I do appreciate your feelings that
>we are getting something more than you.I don't feel like we are, of
Randy Treadway
acce...@smart.net (Access Systems) wrote:
>been there, done that, you didn't listen then either! so talk to the
>judge, you will finally pay attention, it is called "empowerment" when I
>was powerless I was ignored, now I have the RIGHT to file against you and
>you say "be nice" not a chance, talk to the judge!
uh huh. you have the right to file all right.
You also have the right to reimburse my legal expenses when you lose.
And you also have the right to pay a fine to the court for filing
a frivolous claim and wasting the court's time.
You may then also have the right to file for bankruptcy when you
can't pay.
Aren't you glad you have rights?
R.T.
Access Systems
> > In rec.models.railroad C.L.Zeni <clz...@elsewhere.com> wrote:
> > > Peter Olivola wrote:
> >
> > maybe? maybe not? fortunately or unfortunatly they still have to
> > investigate every complaint, so you would still have to answer the
> > questions asked by the agency.
> Which is why this whole situation is so sad, and make so many people so
> angry. Whether or not I'm guilty of any violation under any provision of
> your wonderful law, I am subject to harrassment, expense, and
this is the SAME law that would engender the same response if you denied a
person of color access (or women or Jewish or any other protected
class, including you) no one is forcing anyone to hold an open house,
the law only says that IF you invite the public into your house then you
are subject to the anti discrimination laws.
the more public the invitation the more public the requirement!
> There seems to be a total lack of common sense and degree in the
> application of all law these days. Pushing for access to essential
> services and taxpayer supported agencies, and general disability
> awareness programs (especially in schools) is one thing; threatening
that has been required since 1976! and how much compliance has there
been??? I still can't ride the NEW Phila trolleys' bought with taxpayer
money, or even the BRAND NEW type 7 cars delivered to Boston.
> homeowners who open their layouts is quite another.
if you make your home into a public accomodation, then that part must be
open to all.
THAT IS ALL I HAVE SAID, nothing more. no one forces you to invite the
public into your house, if you don't then there is no obligation. if you
invite a few friends in, there is no obligation,
if you have a PUBLIC open house there IS an obligation, the level of
that obligation depends on the level of your public invitation.
HOW CLEAR DO I HAVE TO MAKE IT!
> If everyone had your attitude, and was given their way, there'd be laws
> lowering basketball hoops to four feet, requiring beauty pagents to
nope, the law says EQUAL nothing more, basketball is a popular sport
among many with disabilities
> allow 350 lb. entrants,
again, nope it is already open to all
> removal of physics and math from all school
> curriculums for the benefit of the numerically challenged, etc. etc.
again NO there may be a requirement for alternative presentation and
testing but the standard is not changed.
> We
> should all do everything we can to make life "normal" for the
> handicapped,
again NO, the law and the presentation and the expectation is eliminate
ARTIFICIAL barriers that do not change the essential nature of the
activity.
the amount of misunderstanding and misinformation is the main cause of
the frustration and anger amoung most people with disabilities I have
encountered.
This thread was started about CLUBs and CLUBs are required to comply with
ADA especially if they hold an open house, and even more so if they have
an admision or accept donations
> but there are things which you cannot ever do, *deal with
> it*. We all have limitations we must learn to live with; running to big
what I can and cannot do is not the problem, it is the artifical barriers
that are not an essential part of the activity that are the problem.
NOT once have I suggested changing the nature of model railroading, only
that it STOP excluding people with disabilities SOLELY because of their
disability.
now if that is not fair, explain why?
> brother to get him to beat up on the rest of the world because "it's not
> fair" is not a way to handle them.
heck that is all we have ever wanted, A FAIR shot at what everyone else
gets for nothing!
Bob
(please read what was written, not what you think was written, and keep it
in context!)
Access Systems
the following post only demonstrates the inaccuracy and misinformation
that is spread by the opponents of civil rights. there is not one thing
mentioned in this entire post that is accurate!
every comment, every assumption is false, there are no other comments
possible
Bob
In rec.models.railroad Mike Chapman <mi...@paranoia.com> wrote:
> In article <67bcff$mgk$1...@news.smart.net>,
> Access Systems <acce...@smart.net> wrote:
> >no I would much rather get in and see the layout! and be able to take my 4
> >grandsons and 2 grandaughters in to see the layout. but there are 6 young
> >children out there who won't get that thrill of going with grandad to see
> >other peoples trains!, just like his 4 children who have not taken up the
> >hobby partly because the only trains they saw or heard about were the ones
> >in the basement.
> Just what do you expect someone to do? Not show their layout because it's
> impossible for you to see? Is THAT fair? How many people will THAT
> keep out of the hobby? There's nothing anyone is going to do that
> will make it easy for you to get into most basements, where many
> layouts are located. Perhaps we should ban putting layouts in
> basements too?
> So, since no one is going to spend thousands on a lift, what you
> really want is for them to not be able to show their layout. There's
> no way around it.
> > so far 10 young people have been DIRECTLY affected by your attitude,
> >and it is personal they are my grandbabies!
> They are directly affected by your disability. The rest of us can
> walk just fine. *You're* the one who went off to kill them evil
> commies. It's not the world's fault that you are highly abnormal
> in your mobility. It's certainly not *my* fault.
> I'm happy to see laws ensuring access to essential services for
> those with disabilities. I'm disgusted to see the law applied
> in such an abusive manner as you openly express. You're willing
> to harrass anyone to get for yourself. You're willing to
> push the limits of the law right down the throats of people who
> are just trying to help their hobby, to the point that they
> can't have open houses.
> If you can't have it, no one can. That's freakin sick. People
> aren't gonna put elevators into their basement for you, ok?? Sicing
> The Man on them isn't going to make it happen. Your only sane
> goal in doing so would be to shut them down, which is just WRONG.
> What next, sue someone who has a garage sale and their driveway
> isn't wide enough for your van, or too steep to wheel up?
> Keep going buddy, keep it up, and see how long your law lasts.
> All we need is you, the crazies who can't be fired, and the fat
> pigs who demand an extra airline seat for free, and we'll be
> out from under this in no time!
> It's a DISABILITY that I grab the tits of all the women at
> work, I just can't HELP it, you can't fire me!
> Wow, you're great at making people bitter. However much you
> want to deny it, you can't piss off the whole world. Laws,
> like mobility, can disappear in a flash.
Derrick J Brashear
On 20 Dec 1997, Access Systems wrote:
> > It has great relevance to the purpose of this newsgroup, since his
> > threatening style of presentation on this subject may disuade some from
> > making their modeling efforts public, which diminishes the hobby for
> > *all* of us.
>
> or it may open some of the hobby up for all of us, and get much needed new
> blood into the hobby. (or do you believe that people with disabilities
> are unable to build and run model trains?)
Well, it's unlikely that any threats in my case would be useful, for
instance, because there's no question that right now I don't have the
funds to install those chair lift things on my staircases, but I already
own the layout supplies....
> > wheelchair bound. I'd even consider publicizing through whatever means I
> > used to announce an open house
>
> hope you never need it to be accessible for your own use!
Well, note that if I'm falling down that slippery slope where my
facilities are getting worse, I have some time to deal. If it's sudden I
believe the insurance I have is sufficient to permit me to have my house
modified. But there's no way I have that money around to do it myself.
> again, define "reasonable" are you inside looking out? or are you outside
> trying to get in??
In the case of a club, I have no definition, but in the case of a home (a
personal layout) reasonable is probably going to depend on where in the
house the layout is, and where the house is open from. My layout is on the
third floor. I'd have to heavily modify the house and get a variance for
an elevator... and that's not going to happen. Staircase chair lifts are a
possibility but not as long as that basic tenet of mine, I only need a job
that pays me enough to live and I can be happy at is good enough, I'm not
looking to get rich, is still in play.
And now, because in secret I am a netcop;-) or at least a weasel who likes
a higher signal to noise ratio...
The obvious way to accomodate wheelchairs and people unable to duck under
the "duckunder" bridge upon entering the room (which isn't there yet) is
to build a lift bridge! It's too bad Walthers is building a rolling lift
bridge; A vertical lift bridge would be so much better there!
-D
bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
It would be a great contirbution if Bob's, Jim's, or any other modeler who has
an accessible layout could be featured in a model railroad journal. Such an
article could also feature the ADA requirements for conventiosns/meets vs the
average model layout accomodations, (e.g. mirrors, temporary ramps, remote
cameras). This information could be used to plans conventions, meets, and our
layouts.
During the NMRA convention in Long Beach, I went on a tour to a club that
had (I believe) an accesible environment. It might have been the Alhambra RR
Club. It was in a huge building like an old grocery store. It a balcony that
went around three sides of the layout room. Wheelchair users could use the
balcony--probably because it was built after ADA. The problem was that the
tour bus did not have a lift, so an accessible environment didn't help.
Again individuals with disabilities can help develop reasonable accommodations.
What about a video tour, pooling accessible vans, a barrier free tour, etc.
How about it Bob?
Jim Budde
K SF & P RR
In article <67d4h6$s...@news.myriad.net>, NSjp...@mail.myriad.net (Jim) writes:
> In article <349750...@NOSPAMwpa.net>, jlr...@NOSPAMwpa.net says...
>>
>>PGG wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Scott
>>> Not speaking for anyone but myself.
>>
>>I also have been lurking a short time and have the EXACT same reaction
>>as Scott. After reading these ditribes I'm wondering how many private
>>layouts will NEVER be open to the public for fear running afoul of this
>>law.
>>
>>By the way, as to your "reporting of hate messages", untill the First
>>Ammendment is repealed I will continue to speak my mind.
>>
>>John
>>
>>Remove NOSPAM to reply.
>
> First, I want to thank both of you for expressing your views. Although
> completely opposite of mine, I appreciate the time you took to tell us
> about them.
>
bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO TERRY FLYNN?
bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
In article <67gn8o$an3$1...@news.smart.net>, acce...@smart.net (Access Systems) writes:
> In rec.models.railroad Rick Vera-Burgos <Rick_VB@NOSPAM!msn.com> wrote:
>> Access Systems wrote:
> THAT IS ALL I HAVE SAID, nothing more. no one forces you to invite the
> public into your house, if you don't then there is no obligation. if you
> invite a few friends in, there is no obligation,
> if you have a PUBLIC open house there IS an obligation, the level of
> that obligation depends on the level of your public invitation.
>
> HOW CLEAR DO I HAVE TO MAKE IT!
>
WHAT YOU HAVE NOT MADE CLEAR IS THE ISSUE OF REASONABLE AND TEMPORARY
ACCOMODATIONS AND THAT ADA STATES "easy to accomplisyh witout much difficulty
or expense."
Although ADA has accessibility guidelines, they do not cover everything, and
there is room to compromize and provide reasonable accomodations. You don't
need to shut your doors to the public. You should, however, call the Justice
Department or one of the regional centers to ask about your responsibility and
what they would consider reasonable accomodations. They have a wealth of
experience and background that can help you.
NOTE that ADA provided funds for the technical assistance regional centers for
the purpose of helping with issues that we are discussing.
Justice Dept. TA line 1-800-514-0301
Great Plains TA line 1-800-949-4232
Jim Budde
K SF & P RR
Randy Treadway
acce...@smart.net (Access Systems) wrote:
>if you make your home into a public accomodation, then that part must be
>open to all.
>public into your house, if you don't then there is no obligation. if you
>invite a few friends in, there is no obligation,
> if you have a PUBLIC open house there IS an obligation, the level of
>that obligation depends on the level of your public invitation.
AHHH, now we're getting down to brass tacks here.
If an individual with a basement layout wants to let it be known that
railroaders can come see it if they wish, but he doesn't want to spend
thousands for exterior ramps and interior elevators, then if he is
smart he will look very closely at the legal definition of what
constitutes a PUBLIC open house in the legal sense- flyers posted on
telephone poles? printed flyers handed out at a convention with
a map printed on the back? Tour sponsorship by the convention
organization?
In the legal sense, what constitutes a PRIVATE invitation to people,
some of whom may be strangers?
If at the bottom of the flyer, you print what the limitations are-
no ramps, no elevator, so that everybody knows before hand, does that
legally make it a 'private' invitation because it puts people on
notice that IF they are not able to live with the physical
limitations of the facility, they are not to consider themselves
part of the 'invited' populace?
Common sense would tell me that if I have a very steep and slick
driveway on the side of a mountain, I should tell people that if
they don't have a 4-wheel drive vehicle, they should consider skipping
this 'stop' on the tour unless they have AAA coverage to come
pull them out of the ditch.
What's the difference here? Isn't open communication of all the
facts a reasonable accomodation in itself, so that there are no
surprises, wasted gas to get there only to have to turn around
and go back home without seeing anything?
R.T.
LINESWEST
To all:
Get out the stereo, dust off the cover of Judy Collins' Greatest Hits and lay
that stylus right down on the the track "Big Yellow Taxi." When Judy gets to
the refrain, "Don't know whatcha got 'til its gone. . . ," pause and think long
and hard about the full meaning of that ppphrase and what it may mean to you
some day.
To the naysaying Dittoheads who replied to this thread. When your body is
working correctly, its very easy to be a crybaby and whine about your rights
being violated. However, when your brain stops synthesizing dopamine, you
quickly learn whining doesn't make your body respond any faster. And hearing
some one who has far more choice than you whine about their real or imagined
inconenience can shorten your patience as you and your family struggle to
understand just what it means for the doctor to say,"I know that at 39 you seem
too young, but you have Parkinson's Syndrome."
I couldn't build a "shake the box" kit for 18 months, much less pursue my
love of scratchbuilding while doctors tried to figure what was wrong with the
right side of my body. I thank the Lord for inspiring the ressearch team that
developed L Dopa and the other drugs that allow me to resume a nearly normal
life. However, if my medication levels are low I may not be able tomove fast
enough for you as you rush through a Train Show. Tim Conway's suffling old man
is funny until you realize that, without your medication, that is how you walk.
When my medication bottoms out, I may freeze, literally unable to move, for
severla seconds. I'm not doing it to inconvenience you. I can assure you,
Freezing is a much greater inconvenience to me. Parkinson's affects my balance,
so I may not be able to negotiate that tight aisle in the layout evern though
I'm on my own two feet. Don't worry, I've gotten good at judging what I can and
cannot do, where I can and cannot go.
Am I disabled. No, not as long as I have access to my medications (costing
more than $300 each month since in the United States it's politically correct
and socially acceptible to profit from the misfortune of others).
Am I concenred about accessiblity issues. Very much so. Eventually,. at soem
time during the next two decades, my body will loose its ability to utilize L
Dopa and will be disabled.
I realize this is a model railroad forum but I am getting sick and tired of
these closet fascists getting up on their soapboxes spouting whatever
half-coolked fairy tales cum anti-civil rights propoganda but threatening those
thoiusands of us, the majority in fact, with flames if we choose to state our
beliefs.
With a wife and sons who are (by most everybody's definitions but mine are
African-American), civil rights is an issue never very far from from this
Bohunk's mind. While I find it unlikely that any of these dittoheads will one
day wake up black, I believe that aging will make them realize the idiocy of
such positions.
I participate in this newgroup to learn about my chosen avocation (my wife
sez afflication). If ya'll want to talk politics, that's fine. I'll be more
than happy to join right in and I don't care if you disagree. If you don't want
to see them then stay in those dark holes where one finds dittohead, skinhead
and militia newgroups and let the rest of us engage in civil discourse.
Ya see, complying with the ADA ain't nothing but common sense and common
courtesy.
Tom Vondruska, Yellow Springs ,Ohio,
"Don't dare call me a liberal! I'm not that conservative."
Proud to be UNION! UFCW Local 1099
Tom Vondruska, Yellow Springs, Ohio; on the old Little Miami Railroad, the
Panhandle's Springfield branch.
David Holliday
bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu wrote:
>
> It would be a great contirbution if Bob's, Jim's, or any other modeler who has
> an accessible layout could be featured in a model railroad journal. Such an
> article could also feature the ADA requirements for conventiosns/meets vs the
> average model layout accomodations, (e.g. mirrors, temporary ramps, remote
> cameras). This information could be used to plans conventions, meets, and our
> layouts.
>
> How about it Bob?
>
I was thinking the same. Bob's ideas on a "background fascia" to handle
wiring sounds great for all of us.
I'm sure MR would like an article showing Bob's layout, what he's done
and the issues he's resolved. It would have a much larger audience
too. And, he could use the article to forward his cause in other areas
then MRR.
The effort used in this newsgroup could be spent on the article, heck,
I'll even help if he want's reviewers.
I don't mind making reasonable adaptatations to my home / layout.
That's just common courtesy. I damned well DO mind being told by a
federal bureaucracy what I MUST do if I'm to invite people into my
home. If I've got to worry about somebody (just one person!) filing a
complaint, creating a hassle for me, the solution is real simple - screw
'em. And, if that's to be the solution, why bother making any
accomodations, they'll never get to see it anyway (unless Allen Keller
gets involved, of course - I wonder if he's related to Helen?).
So, let's get a little more PRO-active here.
Bob, Jim, how do I avoid the above negative effects? As I stated in a
previous message, I'd already planned for wheelchair access, it makes
sense for another reason as well: people entering AND leaving a narrower
aisle are going to crowd each other, lean away and ONTO the layout.
Best wishes to all and looking forward for some constructive ideas.
David
John W Rosenbauer
> On 20 Dec 1997 15:12:24 GMT, acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)
> wrote:
>
>
>if you make your home into a public accomodation, then that part must be
>open to all.
> THAT IS ALL I HAVE SAID, nothing more. no one forces you to invite the
>public into your house, if you don't then there is no obligation. if you
>invite a few friends in, there is no obligation,
> if you have a PUBLIC open house there IS an obligation, the level of
>that obligation depends on the level of your public invitation.
>
Since the original post reffered to CLUBS, I have some questions:
Scenario: NMRA, TTOS, whatever convention
If I were to have a public open house just once in my home and a
complaint were made arising from this open house, would the promise to
not have further public open showings be sufficent to appease the Feds
or would they insist on my compliance with what ever mandates THEY
thought necessary? In the event that a simple "I won't do it again"
would suffice then there is not much risk for a homeowner. HOWEVER, if a
single public event, IN MY HOME, could require ME to spend whatever a
Fed regulator thinks is required to attain the access HE thinks is
necessary, explain to my WHY I would want to take that RISK?
Please note that what a Fed regulator deems "reasonable" could force
some of us OUT of the hobby as it could easily be too expensive to
comply or his suggestion "Just take out this bunch of track here (Main
yard and engine terminal) to make a bit more room in this aisle and
you're OK" would remove the reason for our RR.
Second question:
Scenario: New club finds space they can afford ($100/month) in an old
building, second floor. Building is 70/80 years old and owner has no
money to upgrade.
My reading of this thread would be that they are in violation of the ADA
and shouldn't consider this location. If this is the case, many smaller
clubs will not be able to find quarters for a railroad. If they did
build a RR, the first open house could be their last.
Third question:
Scenario: A club has finally grown large enough to build their "Ultimate
Railroad" in a building that they have purchased/built.
The question of "Ground Zero", the lowest visible point of the RR comes
up. The trend has been to raise the RR to give a more prototypical
aspect for us "TABs" which means around 42"~48" from the floor. 46" is
chosen and construction begins and continues for several years. Someone
confined to a chair joins and thinks the 46" is too high.
What happens.
As a former member of a club that lost four Large railroads due to
losing leases (not our fault, the buildings were sold, twice or fell
apart, twice!) the prospect that years of labor could be lost to
regulation is not a comforting thought.
Stensberg
>> Jim is right in one respect above all others. This has opened debate,
>> and that is a good thing.
>that was the idea!
Well, Bob, you certainly have opened debate. Now, all accross the
nations, thousands will never get to see a operating model railing model
railroad because you have scared us all off. I can't afford the legal
fees of one of your 'right of access' suits, so I just won't bother.
Only the invited will see my layout and it will never be on a tour.
The ADA was intended to give the disabled access, now it is being
perverted by people like you deny access to everybody else. You smugly
write how it's the law and there is nothing we can do, well there is, we
can shut everybody out. Why? Because that is the only option you have
left us.
We can't afford the money to make our basements accessable. It is not
that we wouldn't if we could, the fact is we can't. I don't know about
you, but I can't afford the 40 or so grand for an elevator into my
basement. It isn't a case of a turntable or a power supply in exchange
for handicapped access, it's a year's salary or more for a lot of us.
I suppose I'll get another rabid email from you telling about how I'm,
descriminating against the poor disabled, am a bad person and yada,
yada, yada. Don't give me that crap, because you don't know me. I've
help disabled with voice recognition software to get off welfare and
into the work force, I've helped them get into churches by building
ramps, I've help my vietnam vet. friends get the long-deserved
recognition they deserve from our nation, I've help women and minorities
get the promotion and salaries they have deserved. I've helped fight
the fight, but assholes like you piss me off, because when one person
can do what you can and enjoy it as much as you obviously do, then there
is something wrong in this country.
Joel
PS, it is going to really suck when I have done some much for the
advancement of the disabled and minorities to have my EMail forwarded as
hate mail. I suppose you're going to start on repealing the First
Amendment next because heaven forbid I have a contrary opinion.
Peter Olivola
>
>if you make your home into a public accomodation, then that part must be
>open to all.
> THAT IS ALL I HAVE SAID, nothing more. no one forces you to invite the
>public into your house, if you don't then there is no obligation. if you
>invite a few friends in, there is no obligation,
> if you have a PUBLIC open house there IS an obligation, the level of
>that obligation depends on the level of your public invitation.
>
>HOW CLEAR DO I HAVE TO MAKE IT!
That's what you claim. Is there case law supporting your position on
this or, more likely, is this just your overreaching interpretation?
Peter Olivola (poli...@advsoftech.com
GP40X
In a message dates 12/19/97 Access Systems wrote:
>or it may open some of the hobby up for all of us, and get much needed new
>blood into the hobby. (or do you believe that people with disabilities
>are unable to build and run model trains?)
Ok Bob, put your money where your mouth is {as the old saying goes},
I look at it this way, if you have the will & desire to contribute to the
hobby, there are ways to work around any problems. I am currently in the
design stages of building a home layout. It will be in an enclosed one car
garage {10'X26'} of my home {built in 1960}. The layout is going to be an
around the wall layout point to point in N scale. After I actually start
construction of the layout {as time & funds permit}, I may decide to show it as
part of a layout tour. What are the minimum isle widths I will have to set up?
Will I have to provide accessable restroom facilities even though they are in
a different part of my home & will not be accessable by anyone except my
immediate family? What are the minimum door width that ADA considers
accessable? I can understand leaving my driveway open for Van access. & I can
build a small ramp to get over the rear door sill {public access will be around
the back}. Will I have to pour a concrete walkway to my back yard & to the
door? Will I have to put up steel hand rails from my driveway to the back yard?
{I would have to go to my Planning & Zoning Commision's Adjustments & Appeals
Board for the steel railing as it violates city zoning laws}. These are some
concerns I have that have been brought up by these threads. Any help would be
greatly appreciated. I am also posting this to the newsgroup for discussion.
I will have to decide if my home can be accessed with reasonable expendatures.
Bill Belsher
Modeling the Fort Worth & Denver in Nscale {got bit by the prototype bug}
Trinity Ntrak {URL: http://members.aol.com/GP40X/TrinityNtrakindex.html }
Fort Worth, TX
GP...@aol.com
Access Systems
> <Rick_VB@NOSPAM!msn.com> writes:
> >
> >There seems to be a total lack of common sense and degree in the
> >application of all law these days. Pushing for access to essential
> >
> And here is one other thing. Every post from Access I've read, tells
> EVERYONE ELSE, what to do to accomodate THEIR needs. So here's a
> suggestion to them...why not tell us what YOU'LL do to help YOURSELVES
That is what I am doing.
> give you an idea. What is the PERFECT medium in which handicapped
> people of all types can learn this hobby and enjoy it? What sort of
there is no perfect for everyone, and that is why the exsisting clubs and
shows need to open up for all.
> How about...you....personally...take steps to start a nationwide
> modular club for the handicapped? One on the model of N-trak? With
> local chapters. A ,odular layout can be made fully accessable...right
> from the get-go. It can be set up in malls and other public places
> where your message of access could not only be spoken...but SHOWN. You
> can by example, show people what you need to be able to enjoy a hobby
> like ours, plus showcase what I'm sure must be thousands of great
THIS IS THE EXACT opposite of what we are trying to accomplish, establish
a disabled getto for modelers "Who are not good enough for people like
you" so shunt us off so we will not have to be tolerated.
It is this very attitude that the ADA is intended to eradicate.
> modelers' work. And maybe YOUR company can invest some of YOUR capital
> to come up with standards for the modules that accommodate your
> constituency, and maybe YOUR company can spend the money needed to
> organize and run such an organization. Buy the ads, invest in the first
> 10 modules maybe. I would BET...that if you did...you'd soon pull in
> other modelers without handicaps who would want to join. How about it
> my friend? Are you willing to put YOUR money where your mouth is?
And then you suggest that I rip off my brothers and sisters with
disabilities.
I hope you are merely misguided.
it is this concept and ideas that we have been fighting.
segregation is evil in all it's forms, We wished to be judged on our
abilities not on our disabilities, in an integrated setting.
that is the bottom line, we wish to share, not be a continual reciepient
of your handouts.
let us in, don't shut us up in our own little enclaves of charity!
Bob
GP40X
I put the question to Bob & here is his answer. I have also posted my private
response to him to clarify my home design. Luckily I have a single level home
with no basement. I am using a "Texas Basement" i.e enclosed garage for my
layout.
Subj: Re: Club Open Houses & Disabled
Date: 97-12-20 20:55:19 EST
From: acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)
To: gp...@AOL.com (GP40X)
On Sat, 20 Dec 1997, GP40X wrote:
>
> Ok Bob, put your money where your mouth is {as the old saying goes},
always willing to
>
> I look at it this way, if you have the will & desire to contribute to the
> hobby, there are ways to work around any problems. I am currently in the
> design stages of building a home layout. It will be in an enclosed one car
> garage {10'X26'} of my home {built in 1960}. The layout is going to be an
> around the wall layout point to point in N scale.
you will probably be able to be accessible with little or no cost or
modification to your plans.
> What are the minimum isle widths I will have to set up?
36 inches - 32 to pass an obstruction
> Will I have to provide accessable restroom facilities even though they are
in
> a different part of my home & will not be accessable by anyone except my
> immediate family?
no, you will not have to provide a restroom, (although you may want to so
you do not drag RR dirt into the house)
> What are the minimum door width that ADA considers
> accessable?
32inch clear opening (also makes it easier to bring in model stuff
> I can understand leaving my driveway open for Van access. & I can
not needed really
> build a small ramp to get over the rear door sill {public access will be
around
> the back}
that would probably help you too, since you could use a dolly or hand
truck to move stuff
>. Will I have to pour a concrete walkway to my back yard & to the
> door?
??? don't understand, if you are building it in the garage, and the
driveway goes up to the garage entry, why would you need to pour
anything?? I would think you would put an entry through the area where
the garage door was?? seems easiest to me, I am not vizualizing something
right here?? sorry
> Will I have to put up steel hand rails from my driveway to the back
yard?
Nope, (ADA only specs the shape of the handrail not the materiel it is
made out of anyway)
> concerns I have that have been brought up by these threads.. Any help would
be
> greatly appreciated. I am also posting this to the newsgroup for discussion.
> I will have to decide if my home can be accessed with reasonable
expendatures.
>
I hope this helps, I cannot post from mail to a news group so I would hope
you would do me the favor of posting the answer for me
Thanks
good luck on your modeling
Bob
Here was my response to clarify my home design:
<<Subj: Re: Club Open Houses & Disabled
Date: 12/21/97
To: acce...@smart.net
Bob,
Thanks for your response. The reason I ask about a concrete walkway to the
back door is the rear door to my home enters into the garage. The current
garage door will be removed & a wall with a small window will be installed in
its place {I need all the wall space I can get for the layout}. While our home
really needs a second restroom, I do not want to dig up & repour the concrete
foundation. We already have enough foundation problems around here due to 3-5
feet of black loamy soil covering 1500 feet of calache rock {plays hell with
foundations around here & you have to blast if you want a basement}. No use
giving it {the foundation} another weak point to find. I will post your answer
& the explanation to the news group. I will have to ck the width of the rear
door to see it will comply. If it is wide enough no problem, but if it is too
narrow I can not tear out a load bearing brick wall to widen it at this time.
I'll have to see. Thank you again for courteous & civil response. I will cut
& paste your response to the newsgroup.>>
We were able to discuss this issue in a civil tone. I think if every one will
sit back, take a deep breath, & THINK for a moment, this can turn into a
constructive discussion on how to work out acess problems. There are a couple
of Ntrak web sites that show what their clubs have done to provide access for
their disabled members. In some cases it may not be possible to provide for
full access but the idea here is to provide as much access as you possibly can
{some may have to use some of the alternative access solutions stated here &
elsewhere}.
Tony Polson
>>WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO TERRY FLYNN?
>One word. Helium <g>
Careful what you say about Terry. Before too long it'll be:
" I'm ba a a a a ck !!! "
And he'll have read everything we've said about him in the interim on
DejaNews.
For the record, I think Terry Flynn's a great guy, full of intelligent
comment and constructive ideas ...
And I believe Santa Claus is real.
--- Tony Polson, Haywards Heath, West Sussex, England ---
--- http://www.polson.demon.co.uk ---
--- to reply, REMOVE antispam from return address ---
Anders Svensson
Tom Vondruska wrote:
> I realize this is a model railroad forum but I am getting sick and tired of
> these closet fascists getting up on their soapboxes spouting whatever
> half-coolked fairy tales cum anti-civil rights propoganda but threatening those
> thoiusands of us, the majority in fact, with flames if we choose to state our
> beliefs.
I have been watching this thread go on and on - with greater disbelief
for every day.
I have made up my mind on the issue long ago - anyone disabled need
whatever help and support they can get - if it's from the society or
from individuals is no concern for me even if I live in a traditional
'welfare' country.
I have also learned that the urge for selfsufficence and independendence
grows rather than diminishes when people get disabled. This has probably
to do with dignity, self respect and sheer will of life - so the ways of
helping may not always be clearcut or straightforward from a able
bodieds way of thinking. If I break a leg, I know it is temporary so I
accept a lot of help and that I cannot participate in all activitys - if
the loss of walking abilities is permanent, I probably would reason a
lot differently...
What Bob (Access Systems) have achieved with his anger is just to
alienate a lot of ordinary people for a just cause. He is making a lot
of noise, and his posts rise a lot of questions whereas he gives very
few answers:
ADA may be a rightful law - but does it really extend to private
property - into the basements?
Is a guy opening the basement for a look-see once every year really a
problem?
What about a lot of other handicaps that does not involve wheelchairs or
walking disabilities? What use is a video or a mirror for a blind
person?
Is all cooperative or individual public efforts to come to a standstill
because of the possibility that someone with a disability will come
along some day - and the requirements of that person may (or may not -
but there is no way of telling beforehand) make it finacially or
practicaly impossible to comply or continue?
These are valid questions, and none of them have a straight and easy
answer.
Don't let Bob's anger shade the fact that a lot of disabled people will
have a lot to gain just from small adjustments - easily made when
designing or planning - hard to do after completion.
IMHO, doing something, even a little, is much preferred to doing nothing
- but Bob's posts may lead people to believe that it's a all-or-nothing
situation.
Anders Svensson
LINESWEST
In article <349C70...@NOSPAMwpa.net>, John W Rosenbauer
<jlr...@NOSPAMwpa.net> writes:
>If I were to have a public open house just once in my home and a
complaint
>were made arising from this open house, would the promise to
not have further
>public open showings be sufficent to appease the Feds
or would they insist on
>my compliance with what ever mandates THEY
thought necessary? In the event
>that a simple "I won't do it again"
would suffice then there is not much risk
>for a homeowner. HOWEVER, if a
single public event, IN MY HOME, could require
>ME to spend whatever a
Fed regulator thinks is required to attain the access
>HE thinks is
necessary, explain to my WHY I would want to take that RISK?
If you were going to open your house to the general public on a regular
basis you'd probably hear fro some other groups LONG before you'd hear from
federal regulators. The first you'd hear from is your neighbors you'd be
complaining about parking and litter problems. You then might here from the
police your neghbors called about the parking problems. Local zoning official
might investigate after your neghbors say that you've started using you house
for something other than a single-family residence. The Zoning officials might
call your fire department who'd investigate to see if you house met fire safety
standards. . .
Despite the politically correct urban fables Rush Limbo, Paul Harvey, Cal
Thomas and countless other commentators on the Right pass off as fact, this
country is still a reasonable place and in most places, other than Sen. Jesse
Helms office suite, common senseee sill applies.
You're home is not now nor will it eveer bee consideered a public place. The
access police will not storm your house to forcee widening of that 18-inch
aisle you've long regetted happening because of the large number of
waistline-related derailments that occur there.
If you sponsor homee layout tous, let people know which layouts are fully
accessible. If you're planning a layout open to the public, accessibility will
be taken into account because it means the space will be more comfortable for
everyone.
A little less far right paranoia please. all that's needed is commonsense
and common courtesy.
Tom V.
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad bChuck <bmb...@sk.REMOVE.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Sorry to post to this again, as last time I only made things worse, which
> was not my intent, but...:
> I must say that accesability has always been an issue for me. I really feel
> that everyone needs to make an effort. I am not currently disabled, but
> I'm a pastor (I know, you wouldn't know it from my last post on this topic,
snip of great actions
> needed minor reno's to make it accessable. It worked because it was a
> priority.
> We now have a model railroad club that meets in our building. We have an
> accessable club. We need to work on the modules, but one step at a time.
> BTW, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that the NMRA standards for
> modules states that they must be 48" high. That is probably something that
> should be looked at.
hmm I'm not sure, my modules are built to the East Penn standards,
however the height standard is only for the interface. there can be lower
or higher or other non standard interfaces among 1 or more units, as long
as the interface where they join the common modules are at the set
standard.
Also 48" (if that is the standard) is not too high, it is not even above
the ADA codes which for reach range can be as high as 54 inches. however
children are another matter!
> So much for my self-agrandizing boasting.
boast you earned it!
> What I really wanted to ask is this:
> Have you noticed that most new houseing is not accessable? I wonder why
> that is. I wonder how the various gov'ts allow it. Oh well. Sorry that
> this went off topic, but I was wondering. About the NMRA modules too I
> guess.
believe me we know and are working on it!
5% of all assisted (even with mortgage assistance or closing cost's) are
supposed to be fully accessible, and there is a move afoot to write into
the codes that ALL newly constructed single family homes have one 32 inch
no step entry. (it is already law in a few places like Atlanta, and has
had no effect on house design or prices)
Condo's and Apartments have been covered for years
> Jim wrote in message <67d4h6$s...@news.myriad.net>...
> <<really big stinking snip>>
> >I will be the first to admit that there are those that abuse ADA, and that
> >there are instances where ADA does go too far, but I would like for you to
> >consider the millions of us that, were it not for ADA, would be shut-ins.
maybe, but haven't heard too many say there are places where ADA doesn't
go far enough.!! (I can give one case where a commuter Railroad reduced
the level of accessible service based on ADA, their comment, "we don't
have to and were not gonna!" direct quote of the director!) so it works
both ways!
Bob
LINESWEST
In article <349CE8...@swipnet.se>, Anders Svensson
<anders.-.ei...@swipnet.se> writes:
>
These are valid questions,
>and none of them have a straight and easy
answer.
Don't let Bob's anger
>shade the fact that a lot of disabled people will
have a lot to gain just
>from small adjustments - easily made when
designing or planning - hard to do
>after completion.
IMHO, doing something, even a little, is much preferred
>to doing nothing
- but Bob's posts may lead people to believe that it's a
>all-or-nothing
situation.
Anders Svensson
Hi Anders,
I'm getting up on my soapbox again. This time on a issue.other than fire
hazards of polystyrene foam based layouts.
A bit further back in this thread, someone asked how many disabled people
will pick up the model railroading hobby. Probably very few, a miniscule
fraction of the overall population.
However, it's more cogent to ask how many current model railroaders will
become disabled. I was scratchbuilding and researching prototype for nearly 10
years before I was diagnosed with Parkinson's. My diagnosis has not diminished
my interest. My medications have allowed me to resume my model building
activities. I enjoy going to model railroad shows, open houses and lay oiut
tours. If anything can be done to make them more accessible, that means there
will be more for me to visit when (maybe if, if new treatments pan out) my
mobility decreases.
The bottom line is simple, accessible design is usually good design for
everyone. I don't; know anyone who enjloys 18" aisles or duck unders (brow
bumpers). Layouts that are easy to move around are more nejoyable for everyone,
operators,ibbitzers and spectators alike.
You ask some pertinent questions:
>ADA may be a rightful law - but does it really extend to private property -
>into the basements?
The ADA covers public areas and workpllaces. A basement of a family's home
is not usually either. Opening thee basement to an annual layout tour will not
change this
"Is a guy opening the basement for a look-see once every year really a
problem? "
Nope. But those organizing those layout tours can help greatly by indicating
which layouts are fully accessible.
"What about a lot of other handicaps that does not involve wheelchairs or
walking disabilities? What use is a video or a mirror for a blindperson? "
Good point. One of my biggest problems right now is the balance impairment all
Parkinsonians experience. I've traveled many basement stairs in my lifethat now
could be an impassable obstacle."
"Is all cooperative or individual public efforts to come to a standstill
because of the possibility that someone with a disability will come
along some day - and the requirements of that person may (or may not -
but there is no way of telling beforehand) make it finacially or practicaly
impossible to comply or continue? "
Since you're in Sweden, Anders, you may not be aware of all the naunce of
political debate in the United States. Unfortunately, what you're saying is
nearly true. After the sucess of the Civil Rights movement 30 years ago, the
racist and extremist right shifted gears. They created the myth of reverse
racissm, claiming that rich, white males are the victims of racism if they
don't continue to get all the benefits of being a rich white male in aamerican
Society. They declared that racism has ceased to exist in the United States and
that today everyone is judge solely on personal merit. Large segments of our
population know better but the conservative dominated news media will only
parrot the extremists' line.
Is private or public cooperation possible. One wonders on hopes that it still
is. The American Right's incrasingly shrill whining and covert or overt threats
when cnfronted with the truth is becoming more and more of a problem. Even
though they live in the least obtrusive, least taxed society on Earth, these
Right Wing extremists have creasted the myth that Some sinister force called
liberalism or humanism or the U.N.or some such dribble is about to make this
country a police state and that only unlimited access to fully automatic
weapons and all forms of explosives can stop this (Remember Oklahoma City).
The situation is getting eeriely like the Wiemar Republic. Back then the
German Right demanded erof the German Left because of the Left's supposed
terrorism despite that more than 50 leftists were being murdered for their
politic for every right winger similarly slain. Since Amerileft was effectively
eliminated from public debate 50 years ago during McCarthyism, Ameerican
political debate is a bit skewed, some would say twisted toward the far right
by alarge numberof extremists who repeatedly have shown themselves willing to
accpt annonymousd, unattributed or unsubstantiated internet postings as fact.
What is needed is good doses of common courtesy and common sense.
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu wrote:
> In article <67gn8o$an3$1...@news.smart.net>, acce...@smart.net (Access Systems) writes:
> > In rec.models.railroad Rick Vera-Burgos <Rick_VB@NOSPAM!msn.com> wrote:
> >> Access Systems wrote:
> > THAT IS ALL I HAVE SAID, nothing more. no one forces you to invite the
> > if you have a PUBLIC open house there IS an obligation, the level of
> > that obligation depends on the level of your public invitation.
> >
> > HOW CLEAR DO I HAVE TO MAKE IT!
> >
> WHAT YOU HAVE NOT MADE CLEAR IS THE ISSUE OF REASONABLE AND TEMPORARY
> ACCOMODATIONS AND THAT ADA STATES "easy to accomplisyh witout much difficulty
> or expense."
Actually the code says "Easily accomplishable and able to be carried out
without much difficulty or expense.!"
there is a difference in meaning.
unfortunately in the area of model railroading there is very little
precadence to define "reasonable"
in some areas' reasonable is defined as having a value not more than 20%
of the cost! (cost of what? is not clearly defined in the home layout
context)
a single open house would probably be considered temporary, if it were
held on a recurring basis, such as an "annual" open house it may not be
considerd as such
> Although ADA has accessibility guidelines, they do not cover everything, and
> there is room to compromize and provide reasonable accomodations. You don't
> need to shut your doors to the public. You should, however, call the Justice
> Department or one of the regional centers to ask about your responsibility and
> what they would consider reasonable accomodations. They have a wealth of
> experience and background that can help you.
but remember just like the IRS the advice has no legal standing, just the
past experience. they are very knowledgable but unless you are very lucky
you are not likely to find someone who even knows what a model railroad
is!
I have posted some suggestions, these have no force of law either but are
based on much past experience. and I am a model railroader and consumer
Bob
John W Rosenbauer
LINESWEST wrote:
> Since you're in Sweden, Anders, you may not be aware of all the naunce of
> political debate in the United States. Unfortunately, what you're saying is
> nearly true. After the sucess of the Civil Rights movement 30 years ago, the
> racist and extremist right shifted gears. They created the myth of reverse
> racissm, claiming that rich, white males are the victims of racism if they
> don't continue to get all the benefits of being a rich white male in aamerican
> Society. They declared that racism has ceased to exist in the United States and
> that today everyone is judge solely on personal merit. Large segments of our
> population know better but the conservative dominated news media will only
> parrot the extremists' line.
>
> Is private or public cooperation possible. One wonders on hopes that it still
> is. The American Right's incrasingly shrill whining and covert or overt threats
<snip>
The only whining encountered in this NG has been from the left.
<snip>
>when cnfronted with the truth is becoming more and more of a problem. Even
> though they live in the least obtrusive, least taxed society on Earth, these
> Right Wing extremists have creasted the myth that Some sinister force called
> liberalism or humanism or the U.N.or some such dribble is about to make this
> country a police state and that only unlimited access to fully automatic
> weapons and all forms of explosives can stop this (Remember Oklahoma City).
<snip>
Remember the Unibomber? Uh Oh, I think he's from your side.
<snip>
> The situation is getting eeriely like the Wiemar Republic. Back then the
> German Right demanded erof the German Left because of the Left's supposed
> terrorism despite that more than 50 leftists were being murdered for their
> politic for every right winger similarly slain. Since Amerileft was effectively
> eliminated from public debate 50 years ago during McCarthyism, Ameerican
> political debate is a bit skewed, some would say twisted toward the far right
> by alarge numberof extremists who repeatedly have shown themselves willing to
> accpt annonymousd, unattributed or unsubstantiated internet postings as fact.
>
> What is needed is good doses of common courtesy and common sense.
<snip>
Common courtesy??? So far you're the only one using names to defame
people who simply disagree with your point of view. In an earlier post
you dersively use the term "dittohead", misspell Rush Limbaughs name and
nickname Pat Buchanan "Adolph". If you listened to Rush you would find
that he does not resort to these tactics with liberal callers, in fact
they get MORE time than folks who agree with him.
<snip>
> Tom V.
> Tom Vondruska, Yellow Springs, Ohio; on the old Little Miami Railroad, the
> Panhandle's Springfield branch.
I apoligise to the other subscribers of this group for the political
tone of my reply and I will not continue this thread here. I could not,
however, sit here and read Toms remarks without responding at least
once. Tom, if you wish to continue contact me directly and let the NG
get back to trains.
Thanks,
John W Rosenbauer
Access Systems wrote:
>
> On Sat, 20 Dec 1997, John W Rosenbauer wrote:
> > >
> > >if you make your home into a public accomodation, then that part must be
> > >open to all.
> > >invite a few friends in, there is no obligation,
> >
>
> >
> > If I were to have a public open house just once in my home and a
> > complaint were made arising from this open house, would the promise to
> > not have further public open showings be sufficent to appease the Feds
>
<snip>
Then you have made my point. I'm NOT willing to take the risk of
"Probably" when it concerns a beuracrat, especially at the Fed level.
> >
> > Please note that what a Fed regulator deems "reasonable" could force
> > some of us OUT of the hobby as it could easily be too expensive to
> > comply or his suggestion "Just take out this bunch of track here (Main
> > yard and engine terminal) to make a bit more room in this aisle and
> > you're OK" would remove the reason for our RR.
>
> that is why as a model railroader myself I am trying to help. I know
> changing a ruling grade to 8% to get over a high duckunder would not be
> reasonable to me either
>
> > Second question:
> >
> > Scenario: New club finds space they can afford ($100/month) in an old
> > building, second floor. Building is 70/80 years old and owner has no
> > money to upgrade.
>
> this is the toughy.... the reason he can't rent it to anyone else maybe
> the lack of ADA access.
> >
> > My reading of this thread would be that they are in violation of the ADA
> > and shouldn't consider this location. If this is the case, many smaller
> > clubs will not be able to find quarters for a railroad. If they did
> > build a RR, the first open house could be their last.
>
> this is a real problem, and I do understand it, hopefully a little
> ingunuity (something modellers are very good at) might overcome the
> problem. I am not a lawyer, I cannot advise you what to do, but I
> would not want to invest many years in building a layout that might be
> forced to remain private or be forced to close.
>
> not to mention getting all that model stuff up the steps is a pain too!
> How many 2X4's or sheets of homasote do you want to carry up those steps
> (and homasote is HEAVY). A nice wide level entry makes building a model
> RR a lot easier.
>
> > Third question:
> >
> > Scenario: A club has finally grown large enough to build their "Ultimate
> > Railroad" in a building that they have purchased/built.
> >
> > The question of "Ground Zero", the lowest visible point of the RR comes
> > up. The trend has been to raise the RR to give a more prototypical
> > aspect for us "TABs" which means around 42"~48" from the floor. 46" is
> > chosen and construction begins and continues for several years. Someone
> > confined to a chair joins and thinks the 46" is too high.
>
> ??? for viewing I have on my layout most of my high scenery sloping
> down to the front so that even though the rail is maybe 46" the front of
> the layout is at 42" or lower. (I have a pass on my railroad that is over
> 60" high, but because it is up a canyon wall it is still visible from the
> floor. I have a removable plexiglas front for protection of runaway equip)
> for a member there could be a drop into the aisle raised section that
> could be put in place for kids shows or for getting up to work on the
> layout. and one club I belonged to many years ago had some old office
> chairs that were cut off and had casters on the bottom of the seat,
> everyone who had to go under the layout fought to use em. finally made
> about 5 so I could have a chance at getting one
<snip>
This does not answer my question. Could someone use the ADA to require
lowering or scraping a RR based on the height? This third question is
not hypothetical, the last club I belonged to set ground Zero at 48".
The summit is over 60" and on the end of a peninsula so there is no
possibility to make the track visible to short folks as the aisle here
is narrow. This was disscused during planning as we had some members
short enough that they couldn't see but we chose to do this because of
the RR we wanted to represent. Kids we handled with small benches, but
folks in chairs are out of luck as the aisles are fairly narrow and
couldn't accomodate platforms. This was required to get the track plan
we wanted.
I repeat: What happens??
<snip>
> > What happens.
> >
> > As a former member of a club that lost four Large railroads due to
> > losing leases (not our fault, the buildings were sold, twice or fell
> > apart, twice!) the prospect that years of labor could be lost to
> > regulation is not a comforting thought.
>
> been there, done that, ;8*{
>
> Hope this helps
> good luck and happy holidays and wishing you
> nothing but green boards and run 8 for your new year
> Bob
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu wrote:
> It would be a great contirbution if Bob's, Jim's, or any other modeler who has
> an accessible layout could be featured in a model railroad journal. Such an
> article could also feature the ADA requirements for conventiosns/meets vs the
I have posted some "hints" for conventions and clubs and home layouts on
this board.
> During the NMRA convention in Long Beach, I went on a tour to a club that
> had (I believe) an accesible environment. It might have been the Alhambra RR
> tour bus did not have a lift, so an accessible environment didn't help.
in California, there is absolutely no excuse what so ever, California has
long before ADA had a state law requiring ALL buses to be accesssible.
the LAMTC is 100% accessible, where did they get the buses?? Mexico. they
had to work hard even to find an inaccessible bus in that State.
> Again individuals with disabilities can help develop reasonable accommodations.
> What about a video tour, pooling accessible vans, a barrier free tour, etc.
has any convention committee even invited someone.
> How about it Bob?
I posted some hints here, heck I don't even know where the 98 NMRA
convention is, like I said I stopped going, had a life membership
account within $25 of being paid off and let it drop!
Bob
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Randy Treadway <ko...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> acce...@smart.net (Access Systems) wrote:
> > THAT IS ALL I HAVE SAID, nothing more. no one forces you to invite the
> >public into your house, if you don't then there is no obligation. if you
> >that obligation depends on the level of your public invitation.
> AHHH, now we're getting down to brass tacks here.
> If an individual with a basement layout wants to let it be known that
> railroaders can come see it if they wish, but he doesn't want to spend
> thousands for exterior ramps and interior elevators, then if he is
not likely needed anyway, there are many other ways to be accessible, read
some of what was posted
> constitutes a PUBLIC open house in the legal sense- flyers posted on
> In the legal sense, what constitutes a PRIVATE invitation to people,
> some of whom may be strangers?
good question, it is probably a sliding scale, but strangers do probably
make it "public"
> If at the bottom of the flyer, you print what the limitations are-
> no ramps, no elevator, so that everybody knows before hand, does that
> legally make it a 'private' invitation because it puts people on
absolutely not
> notice that IF they are not able to live with the physical
> limitations of the facility, they are not to consider themselves
> part of the 'invited' populace?
No actually that might be an "invitation" to confrontation.
Like posting a notice "no blacks welcome" or "Jews not welcome"
> Common sense would tell me that if I have a very steep and slick
> driveway on the side of a mountain, I should tell people that if
a warning is different from a limited invitation.
> What's the difference here? Isn't open communication of all the
> facts a reasonable accomodation in itself, so that there are no
> surprises, wasted gas to get there only to have to turn around
> and go back home without seeing anything?
telling someone they are not welcome is not "reasonable accomodation" and
I doubt that any judge would buy into that!
my personal opinion is your train of thought here is on a very slippery
slope and you are standing on a bannana peel
Bob
RPearce900
In article <67bdq4$mgk$3...@news.smart.net>, acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)
writes:
>been there, done that, you didn't listen then either! so talk to the
>judge, you will finally pay attention, it is called "empowerment" when I
>was powerless I was ignored, now I have the RIGHT to file against you and
>you say "be nice" not a chance, talk to the judge!
Like I said before, the problem with America is that Litigation and Legislation
have replaced common sense. I forgot common courtesy. Perhaps Bob used to know
what that meant, but he certainly shows no sign of remembering.
I don't care whether you think it may be your most effective approach, the
simple fact is that people who go in with a "see you in court" attitude don't
deserve to get anything. If you can't treat us able bodied people with respect
and courtesy then you don't deserve respect and courtesy yourself, disability
or no disability. The law is there to give you a fair chance - it does NOT
entitle you to be abusive and threatening to everyone else.
Rob
Chief Engineer of the Sump, Laisse and Huneausware Railway
Come visit http://members.aol.com/rpearce900/
RPearce900
In article <67c9ak$pbq$1...@news.smart.net>, acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)
writes:
>> As time went on the postings from Access Systems got more shrill. After
>
>I guess it depends on weather your on the outside trying to get in or on
>the inside
No, not at all. Your tone progressed from moderately reasonable at first,
through unjustified whining, shrill screech, teddy-out-the-pram and finally to
threatening.
>> I posted a notice about my club's annual show I got a personal E-Mail
>> scolding me about wheel chair access when our show was held in a fully
>> compliant facility! I decided to ignore the message, to me it looked as
>
>if you were sent a private e-mail it was because it was the "for more
>info" address in the announcement. those are standard request for
>information notices, as other people with disabilitys ask me what shows
>are accessible and I post some of the info on disabled related news
>groups, if you did not respond you were not "scolded"
The recipient obviuously felt he was. Perhaps you're phrasing needs attention
even in your "standard" messages.
<snip>
>the tone is very simple.
>
>my tone,- I have a right to access
>responding tone - no you don't
I don't recall seeing any posts which could reasonably be interpreted as "no
you don't". What has been said throughout all these threads is "you have a
right to reasonable access, but not to demand the unreasonable". We might
quibble over what constitutes "reasonable". I myself have posted a comment
regarding what I felt was an example of totally inadequate disabled provision,
clearly done to comply with regulations rather than for the benefit of disabled
people. Perhaps you feel that polite persuasion will not get results, but the
truth is that whilst faster, the results you get by threats of litigation will
never be as good as those you obtain by winning people over to the side of
compassion and care. But you seem rather lacking in compassion from what you
write, so perhaps I shouldn't expect you to understand that.
I note from another sub-thread that you admit to not being as "tactful" as the
"very militant" disabled rights leaders you clearly hold in high regard. The
problem is, militancy needs to be balanced with tact to be really effective. I
suggest you work on your tact rather than trying to emulate their militancy.
Then I won't get wound up and antagonised by your efforts to achieve something
I fundamentally agree with.
Access Systems
In rec.models.railroad Peter Olivola <poli...@advsoftech.com> wrote:
> On 20 Dec 1997 15:12:24 GMT, acce...@smart.net (Access Systems)
> >
> >open to all.
> > if you have a PUBLIC open house there IS an obligation, the level of
> >that obligation depends on the level of your public invitation.
> That's what you claim. Is there case law supporting your position on
> this or, more likely, is this just your overreaching interpretation?
well someone else, who didn't believe me called the Dept of Justice and
posted the answer on this thread.
the basic answer is Yes!
Bob
> Peter Olivola (poli...@advsoftech.com
bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
There seems to be a bit of confusion.
Bob stated that his posts were directed at clubs, conventions, and meets and
the facilities in which they are held--not individual layouts. This was not
completely clear.
The list of accommodations Bob provided that included high ticket items such
as elevators, electric doors, etc. would not be considered for the average
layout as "easy to accomplish without much difficulty or expense." I can not
say that I am an expert, so I again urge you to call the U.S. Dept of Justice
TA center or one of the regional centers that were funded through ADA. Thier
purpose was to help you. The individuals that I talked to were understanding
and helpful.
Bob indicated in an Email to me that he did carry a mirror that could be used
to assist with layout viewing. There are probably many more low-cost and
low-tech accomodations that could be used for the average layout.
In my communications with Bob, I have to tell you that he described some
innovations for his layout that the average modeler might consider. For example
he runs his power lines down or behind the facia of his layout. This would
provide easy access for any of us, and there are probably some ways to hide the
wires or make them look pleasing. He also has a means of getting to his layout
from above.
I would hope that we could get beyond the retoric and share some of the ideas.
Jim Budde
K SF & P RR
In article <34a50067...@news.zippo.com>, ko...@earthlink.net (Randy Treadway) writes:
> acce...@smart.net (Access Systems) wrote:
>>if you make your home into a public accomodation, then that part must be
>>open to all.
>> THAT IS ALL I HAVE SAID, nothing more. no one forces you to invite the
>>public into your house, if you don't then there is no obligation. if you
>>invite a few friends in, there is no obligation,
>> if you have a PUBLIC open house there IS an obligation, the level of
>>that obligation depends on the level of your public invitation.
>
> AHHH, now we're getting down to brass tacks here.
> If an individual with a basement layout wants to let it be known that
> railroaders can come see it if they wish, but he doesn't want to spend
> thousands for exterior ramps and interior elevators, then if he is
> smart he will look very closely at the legal definition of what
> constitutes a PUBLIC open house in the legal sense- flyers posted on
> telephone poles? printed flyers handed out at a convention with
> a map printed on the back? Tour sponsorship by the convention
> organization?
> In the legal sense, what constitutes a PRIVATE invitation to people,
> some of whom may be strangers?
> If at the bottom of the flyer, you print what the limitations are-
> no ramps, no elevator, so that everybody knows before hand, does that
> legally make it a 'private' invitation because it puts people on
> notice that IF they are not able to live with the physical
> limitations of the facility, they are not to consider themselves
> part of the 'invited' populace?
> Common sense would tell me that if I have a very steep and slick
> driveway on the side of a mountain, I should tell people that if
> they don't have a 4-wheel drive vehicle, they should consider skipping
> this 'stop' on the tour unless they have AAA coverage to come
> pull them out of the ditch.
> What's the difference here? Isn't open communication of all the
> facts a reasonable accomodation in itself, so that there are no
> surprises, wasted gas to get there only to have to turn around
> and go back home without seeing anything?
> R.T.
Mike Chapman
In article <19971221212...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
LINESWEST <line...@aol.com> wrote:
>Since you're in Sweden, Anders, you may not be aware of all the naunce of
>political debate in the United States. Unfortunately, what you're saying is
>nearly true. After the sucess of the Civil Rights movement 30 years ago, the
>racist and extremist right shifted gears. They created the myth of reverse
>racissm, claiming that rich, white males are the victims of racism if they
>don't continue to get all the benefits of being a rich white male in aamerican
>Society. They declared that racism has ceased to exist in the United States and
>that today everyone is judge solely on personal merit. Large segments of our
>population know better but the conservative dominated news media will only
>parrot the extremists' line.
Ah yes, demonize your enemies. A fine lesson you've learned from the
fascists.
> Is private or public cooperation possible. One wonders on hopes that it still
>is. The American Right's incrasingly shrill whining and covert or overt threats
>when cnfronted with the truth is becoming more and more of a problem. Even
>though they live in the least obtrusive, least taxed society on Earth, these
>Right Wing extremists have creasted the myth that Some sinister force called
>liberalism or humanism or the U.N.or some such dribble is about to make this
>country a police state and that only unlimited access to fully automatic
>weapons and all forms of explosives can stop this (Remember Oklahoma City).
YOU'RE the one fantasizing about bizarre sinister forces. YOU'RE the
one calling people who think Bob is an overbearing asshole NAZIS.
> The situation is getting eeriely like the Wiemar Republic. Back then the
>German Right demanded erof the German Left because of the Left's supposed
>terrorism despite that more than 50 leftists were being murdered for their
>politic for every right winger similarly slain. Since Amerileft was effectively
>eliminated from public debate 50 years ago during McCarthyism, Ameerican
>political debate is a bit skewed, some would say twisted toward the far right
>by alarge numberof extremists who repeatedly have shown themselves willing to
>accpt annonymousd, unattributed or unsubstantiated internet postings as fact.
>
> What is needed is good doses of common courtesy and common sense.
You are far too paranoid, and I dare say too stupid, to post your opinions
in public. You are precisely what you accuse others of being, a paranoid
nut who will demonize anyone who disagrees with him as a closet Nazi.
Kindly fuck off. That's all the courtesy you deserve.
Mike Chapman
In article <1997Dec2...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>,
<bu...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> wrote:
>It would be a great contirbution if Bob's, Jim's, or any other modeler who has
>an accessible layout could be featured in a model railroad journal. Such an
>article could also feature the ADA requirements for conventiosns/meets vs the
>cameras). This information could be used to plans conventions, meets, and our
>layouts.
Oh, that doesn't sound *nearly* confrontational enough for Bob. Maybe if
he could sue Kalmbach to force them to publish it.
Guy Everhart
LINESWEST wrote:
<I claim Jimmy Carter (who didn't sell himself out to
<the Japanese as soon as he left office) for his caring, loving and
<giving
<ifestyle in the public eye.
But he (Jimmy Carter) was responsible for the almost complete
distruction of our military and intelligence system. I consider him to
be the most ineffective and and sorriest excuse for a president we have
ever had (that is until slick willie got elected by a minority of the
American people).
Guy