my crippled friends, etc.

midnight rain · 12-10-2012, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burning Down

I see installing ramps, etc, as a common courtesy and the government shouldn't really be telling anybody to become 100% accessible.

But if it's not a profitable move, then there is no incentive to do it so why would anybody? Part of the point of these kinds of legislation is to lend a helping hand cause otherwise there would be no incentive.

Face · 12-10-2012, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop

Property rights are important, & the Government trampling them is worth bitching about.

Fire alarms, safety drills, cleanliness, food safety, lighting, temperature etc are all regulated, you aren't complaining about that. Disability access is regulated where it is for businesses/developments where it is reasonable to do so.

It seems you're only picking on disabled access because it doesn't specifically benefit you.

Trollheart · 12-10-2012, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger ?

Of course if disabled people got off their fat arses and invented these...

You wouldn't need ramps or anything like that.

Hah! NOW I finally know what to get my sister for Chrismas! And just in time, too!

Seriously, everyone whining about "cripples" (horrible word, nobody uses it anymore, so if you do you're just showing your ignorance) should think about how they'd feel if they were in a wheelchair, totally dependent on another person. In fact, I'd recommend anyone who doesn't understand "what the big deal is" to volunteer to push a wheelchair with a disabled person in it for a day. You'll soon see how disabled-unfriendly this world is. A simple thing like crossing the road can be a harrowing experience! Believe me, I know whereof I speak!

Unknown Soldier · 12-10-2012, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ki

I've been thinking about this for a couple days and I wanted to give my two cents on it again. I've come to a point where I feel that if a private business doesn't have handicap accessible ramps, it should be their choice whether they want to put them in or not. I'm only basing this off the notion that their private business is located on their own private property. I looked at it from a POV of someone who used to work for a company that was home office based. If somebody came to the house and demanded it to be handicap accessible, I would definitely see the issue that would arise with the owner of the property.

However, with public businesses such as a restaurant and a grocery store, they should be made to become handicap accessible if the issue were to rise. I don't think it's appropriate for somebody to complain about it for no reason. I would say under certain circumstances i.e. an employee is handicapped and needs an easier form of getting into the workplace, than yes, I do think that there should be a ramp installed, even if it's a metal ramp that could be taken down if need be.

There is not really much to debate here. If the private company wants greater business then maybe they should put ramps in for disabled people. They put in on-site car parks to generate more business, have drive-throughs and ramps are just another business proposition for them. It's not exactly going to be a huge money spinner but it would have good marketing value.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop

No, I don't hate cripples, If crips don't like it, they could just take their business elsewhere. had to carve this monstrous complex of zigging & zagging ramps & a few elevators so cripples could make it up the hill.

For somebody that supposedly doesn't dislike disabled people, you do a great job of tarring them with your negative brush.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop

Eh? should be forced by the law to accommodate crips?

"crips" as usual you've got a lovely way of expressing yourself.

hip hop bunny hop · 12-10-2012, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuna

But if it's not a profitable move, then there is no incentive to do it so why would anybody? Part of the point of these kinds of legislation is to lend a helping hand cause otherwise there would be no incentive.

There's an incentive from a pubic relations stand point.

That being stated, even if such a thing is helpful, why should it be the domain of Government?

midnight rain · 12-10-2012, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop

There's an incentive from a pubic relations stand point.

That being stated, even if such a thing is helpful, why should it be the domain of Government?

Because the Government has a responsibility to look out for it's people.

And I'm not sure a vocal minority would be enough in this case. It's not like refusing to serve blacks, where the restaurant is doing it solely based on skin color, and at no cost to their establishment (in fact, refusing to serve blacks would be a cost in itself).