Should ADA be Repealed?

[packsaddle]

The idea that we should go back to a system where we do away with all government services and rely on familiy, churches and local communities for help is disturbing.

It's not disturbing.....it's just foreign to you.

It's the way this country was founded and it's the way this country will end.

 

[texasbo]

I have to wonder if California is the only state to codify as statute the ADA? I did a Google search and found nothing on the subject. Building inspectors do not enforce Federal law, ADA, EPA, OSHA, or immigration law, if other states have not codified ADA the subject of disability should only be of interest to California inspectors, contractors, engineers, and architects.

DOJ has certified Texas Accessibility standards as compliant with ADA. So anyone building in Texas can look forward to contending with federal compliance, state review and inspection, and local compliance, as many jurisdictions have adopted the accessibility provisions in the IBC, their own provisions, or a combination. Have a nice day...

I have no problem with limited, measured requirements for handicapped accessibility FOR PUBLIC BUILDINGS ONLY. And by public, I don't mean buildings that the public can enter; I mean buildings paid for with public funds.

A property owner should have the right to allow whoever he wants on his property, to serve whoever he pleases, and to make, or not make the facility accessible as he pleases.

 

[Jobsaver]

The idea that we should go back to a system where we do away with all government services and rely on familiy, churches and local communities for help is disturbing. What you are saying is that anybody who does not have strong local ties, good relations with family, or church membership should be left to suffer.

What a stretch! I recall using clarifying words like "capable people" and "most people".

But, you reinforce my point. Our culture should encourage building ties within communities, maintaining family relationships, and helping out. Many "government services" could be reduced or abolished.

 

[Jobsaver]

I have no problem with limited, measured requirements for handicapped accessibility FOR PUBLIC BUILDINGS ONLY. And by public, I don't mean buildings that the public can enter; I mean buildings paid for with public funds. A property owner should have the right to allow whoever he wants on his property, to serve whoever he pleases, and to make, or not make the facility accessible as he pleases.

Draft the ordinance and send it to my ahj. I'll sign off on it.

 

[brudgers]

What a stretch! I recall using clarifying words like "capable people" and "most people".But, you reinforce my point. Our culture should encourage building ties within communities, maintaining family relationships, and helping out. Many "government services" could be reduced or abolished.

It was called "feudalism."

 

[brudgers]

DOJ has certified Texas Accessibility standards as compliant with ADA. So anyone building in Texas can look forward to contending with federal compliance, state review and inspection, and local compliance, as many jurisdictions have adopted the accessibility provisions in the IBC, their own provisions, or a combination. Have a nice day...I have no problem with limited, measured requirements for handicapped accessibility FOR PUBLIC BUILDINGS ONLY. And by public, I don't mean buildings that the public can enter; I mean buildings paid for with public funds.

A property owner should have the right to allow whoever he wants on his property, to serve whoever he pleases, and to make, or not make the facility accessible as he pleases.

You forgot to change your signature to "whites only."

 

[texasbo]

You forgot to change your signature to "whites only."

Uncalled for, and if you were a decent human being, you'd edit the comment. I won't hold my breath. Can we compromise, and agree on "No brudgers served here"?

I stand by my statement however. The current trend is to adopt anti-smoking laws. I detest smoking, and from a purely selfish perspective, I wish all facilities were non-smoking. However, from a position of fairness, I think it's a travesty. A business owner should have a right to allow smoking, and for those who dislike it, like me, go somewhere else.

I can't wait for smokers to play the "I'm addicted to cigarrettes" card, and claim damages on reasonable accomodation grounds.

 

[texasbo]

Wisdom from the mind of a man with a 13 year old sex slave, literally.I am truly inspired.

So you are willing to diminish one's contributions, based on an alleged incident, supported only by heresay, anecdotal, and time-eroded evidence? You are willing to do so even when such alleged actions were legal and not inconsistent with the conventions of the time in which he lived? It was immoral, by todays standards, for the caveman to club his mate, so I assume you condemn all cavemen?

Do you discount the works of King and Kennedy because they were philanderers?

Or is that pretty much OK with you, since ADA is lucrative for you, and you haven't quite figured out how to make a buck off of cheating husbands?

 

[Jobsaver]

This is what needs to be stopped.http://adaabuse.com/

It is telling that the attorney's own office is in violation. What a hypocrite!

 

[brudgers]

Uncalled for, and if you were a decent human being, you'd edit the comment. I won't hold my breath. Can we compromise, and agree on "No brudgers served here"?I stand by my statement however. The current trend is to adopt anti-smoking laws. I detest smoking, and from a purely selfish perspective, I wish all facilities were non-smoking. However, from a position of fairness, I think it's a travesty. A business owner should have a right to allow smoking, and for those who dislike it, like me, go somewhere else.

I can't wait for smokers to play the "I'm addicted to cigarrettes" card, and claim damages on reasonable accomodation grounds.

Your property rights are secured only by the system of government to which we all consent.

You don't get to pick and choose.

It's a package deal.

Read the last sentence of your post again.

Go ahead and replace "accessible" with "integrated" because it is also justified by your property rights argument.

 

[Rio]

The whole thread's kind of moot because the ADA laws are about as likely to be repealed as a pig is likely to be able to fly to the moon. However, getting some tort reform done and thereby putting things into a little more reasonable perspective is a much more possible goal that might actually be achievable.

 

[brudgers]

So you are willing to diminish one's contributions, based on an alleged incident, supported only by heresay, anecdotal, and time-eroded evidence? You are willing to do so even when such alleged actions were legal and not inconsistent with the conventions of the time in which he lived? It was immoral, by todays standards, for the caveman to club his mate, so I assume you condemn all cavemen? Do you discount the works of King and Kennedy because they were philanderers?

Or is that pretty much OK with you, since ADA is lucrative for you, and you haven't quite figured out how to make a buck off of cheating husbands?

We're not talking about philandering. Today he would be a registered sex offender.

BTW, I love the "it was legal at the time argument." Here's a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Laws

 

[texasbo]

Your property rights are secured only by the system of government to which we all consent.You don't get to pick and choose.

It's a package deal.

Read the last sentence of your post again.

Go ahead and replace "accessible" with "integrated" because it is also justified by your property rights argument.

Agreed. And that is my point; it's reached a point where there is bound to be pushback. Replace "accessible" with "integrated", then replace "integrated" with "redhead", then replace "redhead" with "smoker". I'm not arguing with what it is, I'm arguing with how in a reasonable person's judgement, it should be. There will be change. Whether or not it's before you start drawing Social Security or not is yet to be seen. Cash in while you can.

 

[texasbo]

We're not talking about philandering. Today he would be a registered sex offender.BTW, I love the "it was legal at the time argument." Here's a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Laws

And today George Washington would be labeled a terrorist. Today Curtiss Lemay and Paul Tibbets would be tried for crimes against humanity. Like you said, you don't get to pick and choose. Are we living in today's world, or yesterday's? And I didn't bother to read the Wiki article (the same Wiki, by the way, that you have often discounted in previous posts).

How can you possibly compare laws that were clearly and blatantly passed to discriminate against an entire race of people, with laws that give an extremely small minority of the population virtual unlimited ability to collect damages that they have not suffered? I would argue that your Nuremberg reference is actually more appropriately applied in terms of how the general populace suffers discrimination from the government and the militant handicapped.

Excuse me if I find it difficult to find a similarity between a law that results in decapitation if you make love to a Jewish girl, and one that doesn't allow you to shut a business down because you have trouble getting into the front door in your wheelchair...

 

[conarb]

Brudgers:

Interesting that you bring up the Nuremberg Laws but ignore the Nuremberg Defense, as we all remember many universities and public agencies passed laws giving preferential treatment to Blacks and Latinos, much to the disadvantage of Whites and Orientals, in Bakke the Supreme Court ruled preferential quotas unconstitutional, presumably those who conspired to engage in that unconstitutional activity could have been found liable for damages done by their unconstitutional activities (I know of none that were), were the court to ever find that granting preferential treatment to the disabled to be similarly unconstitutional, inspectors claiming that they were just following orders while enforcing that preferential treatment would be barred from asserting the Nuremberg Defense of respondeat superior, just following orders. It's not beyond the realm of possibility with all the illicit legal activity and profiteering going on with ADA that the constitutionality of preferential treatment for the disabled may come before the courts, as preferential treatment for racial minorities did. So far courts that have become disgusted with such activity have only barred lawyers and plaintiffs from filing serial litigation as an abuse of the legal system, but it wouldn't take much for a court to throw the entire system out in disgust, precipitating a constitutional challenge.

 

[peach]

If the whole purpose of ADA is to provide accessibility to the disabled (and I have a disabled child), then that's what civil law suits are for.. force the business into compliance. If I sue a place because it doesn't have hearing assistance, but I'm not the deaf person.. what gives me the right to collect compensation? (should be nothing).. but I could on principle sue and collect monetary damages, even if I'm not the one directly affected.. something is wrong with the law.

 

[Simonsays]

Keep the ADA but completely eliminate all of the various states' access boards.

 

[jpranch]

Required accessibility? Absolutely! ADA? No, no, and no. Get rid of that archaic document. There is a better way. The A117.1 standard. Make it mandatory across the country. At least this standard gets up-dated. And hasn't the DOJ just done a lovely job up-dating ADA? NOT!

 

[Architect1281]

CA I graduated from Architect school way too many years ago (36)

as part of my edumacation we were handed a wheel chair and had to negotiate the school for three days each of us students.

I attended class with a wide variety and age of students.

many of my slightly older clasmates were vietnam veterans some with differing levels of physical ability.

that experience alone has convinced me that all considerations possible should be implemented to make buildings

compatible to all. Have we come to a deep end of the pool - on that I say perhaps.

at the time I was young and scheptical and still politically incorrect and humoursly proposed requlating the same issues for the

vertically enhanced with such items as dual height light switches and multi level door openings.

Just last week I had an individual who bought an older building to convert to a church proudly hand me a DOJ letter

stating that churches were exempt from the ADA criteria and I asked him to get me the same letter telling he was exempt from the building code.

Old Building Change of use F, S, to A3 Church (Compliance is the Alternative - Resistance is Futile)

 

[jpranch]

1281, thank you for helping me make my point. ADA is a POS and not maintained in any fashion. The doj has done us all a great diservice. If you really want to screw something up just let the fereral government take it over.

 

[TJacobs]

JobsaverI believe that you will find that the ability to sue on ADA is tied to the federal law. The reason for bringing ADA requirements into the building code was so that every ADA compliance problem would not have to be litigated.

The idea that we should go back to a system where we do away with all government services and rely on familiy, churches and local communities for help is disturbing. What you are saying is that anybody who does not have strong local ties, good relations with family, or church membership should be left to suffer.

The government didn't create us and it sure shouldn't do anything except what the Constitution authorizes, which isn't much.

 

[KZQuixote]

Wisdom from the mind of a man with a 13 year old sex slave, literally.I am truly inspired.

Dude!

Sally Hemings came to France with Thomas Jefferson and voluntarily decided to return to these United States from France, where she was a free person. She eventually bore six children who were, I believe, honorably fathered by Mr. Jefferson.

Your characterization is myopic and irrelevant.

Mr. Jefferson was and is a GREAT American as was Sally Hemings.

Bill

 

[brudgers]

Sure she had all the freedoms accorded to a 13 year old sex slave (who could not speak French) at the close of the 18th century.

Jefferson had all the powers of a planter in the south and a diplomat abroad.

And you have motorcycle riding as the font of your wisdom

 

[fatboy]

"And you have motorcycle riding as the font of your wisdom"

How is this relevant?

Just curious......