6718Re: [CF] discrimination
- Jan 1, 2003
> >forms of mobility and access they choose to facilitate and encourage.
> It seems that governments have considerable leeway in determining what
It has to be up to us and other pedestrian advocates to see that any
pro-pedestrian laws and regulations are enforced, and that better laws
and regulations are enacted.
somehow in the back of my mind is a lurking sense of irony... that we often
have to resort to ADA arguments to justify the provision of accessible,
decent-quality sidewalks. I have no problem with ADA regs, I think wheelchair
folks (or folks on crutches, etc) have a right to move about freely like anyone
else... but there's something darkly ironic about it all, that I find hard
to put clearly into words.
one prong of the irony is that ordinary walking, which is healthy and strengthening
(for the community as well as the individual walker) can in some cities and
boroughs only be promoted and protected by invoking legislation intended to
ensure the rights of disabled people...
perhaps another prong is that quite a few disabled people are disabled by
or because of cars and the car-centric culture. plenty of people in wheelchairs
lost their limbs or had their spines damaged in car crashes. not a majority,
I suspect, and some are temporarily disabled (during rehab and recovery) rather
than permanently. but it's a fair number. and then we have to fight the car
lobby for a measly, grudging slice of the funding pie to make our cities
accessible to all, including those whose lives and bodies have been damaged
:De Clarke, Software Engineer UCO/Lick Observatory, UCSC:
:Mail: de@... | :
:Web: www.ucolick.org | Don't Fear the Penguins :
:1024D/B9C9E76E F892 5F17 8E0A F095 05CD EE8B D169 EDAA B9C9 E76E:
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>