In the 70's when Rizzo was mayor in Philly, he tried to stop the passage of
right on red.
He said it was dangerous for pedestrians.
But, his efforts were in vain.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: missed the point
> Colleen,
>
> I'd certainly be interested in substantiation of your claim about audible
> traffic signals. It seems to me again that the NFB is counter-intuitively
> taking the wrong position. In the few intersections where I've had the
> pleasure of encountering an audible traffic signal, they are most helpful.
> If
> you arrive at the intersection after the parallel traffic has started, you
> know whether the "Walk" signal is still on, meaning you have time to
> traverse
> the crossing without waiting through another cycle. Some of the signals
> will
> state the street name, which is sometimes helpful if you are in an
> unfamiliar
> area and don't have access to a talking GPS solution. Finally, on
> low-traffic
> parallel crossings, what with right-turn-on-red and even left-turn on red
> in
> some intersections, there ae times when you wouldn't even know when the
> light
> had changed until it would be too late to safely cross the intersection.
>
> And, furthermore, my question would be if sighted people have an
> indication
> on when it is safe to walk, then why shouldn't the visually impaired?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Colleen Roth" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 8:45 PM
> Subject: Re: missed the point
>
>
> I am proud to say that I have been a Member of the National Federation of
> the
> Blind since 1972.
> While I probably would never drive a car even if I could I am sure that
> those
> working on this Project would never consider driving a car in a Public
> Place
> alongside the Sighted unless it was safe to do so.
> As for the Marking of money it is simply not necessary, would be very
> expensive, and would make people feel that it would not be cost-effective
> to
> hire blind people.
> As far as Traffic Signals which beep, chirp, etc. they are intrusive, not
> reliable and defeat the Tenants of Safe Travel.
> As for Marks on a Subway Platform I am not sure that they would be very
> effective in the snow.
> Why not use your energy supporting legislation to make cars more audible
> while
> maintaining their fuel efficiency and working for Braille Literacy which
> are
> two things the NFB IS DOING.
> Colleen Roth, N8TNV;
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Richard Scott <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: 2009/08/07 18:29:10
> Subject: Re: missed the point
>
>>
>>
>> You go Boy!
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Terri Pannett" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 12:27 PM
>> Subject: missed the point
>>
>>
>> > The NFB, IN MY OPINION, IS OFF ITS ROCKER! They oppose things which
>> > would
>> > really help us, like the street signals, accessible dollar bills, and
>> > the
>> > marks on subway platforms, but they want us to drive cars! Whoopee!
>> > Spend
>> > time and money on a dumb project like an adapted dune buggy so a person
>> > who
>> > is blind can drive a car!
>> >
>> > Aren't there enough sighted drivers on the road who shouldn't be
>> > driving?
>> > Drunk drivers, people on drugs, people who can't see well enough to
>> > drive,
>> > people who don't have quick reaction time, people who don't have full
>> > use
>> > of
>> > their bodies and minds, people who don't use the sense they've got
>> > people
>> > who are too old or too young to drive and you want to add the blind to
>> > this
>> > group? The DMV IS A JOKE! They let people drive who shouldn't be on
>> > the
>> > road!
>> >
>> > Is this project practical? No! Is it stupid? Yes! NFB SHOULD
>> > SUPPORT
>> > adaptive things which would be of practical use instead of wasting time
>> > on
>> > a
>> > dune buggy for the blind!
>> >
>> > Terri Amateur Radio call sign KF6CA.
>> >
|
