Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Every thing I have ever read about the ADA revolves around "Reasonable Accommodation".
"Reasonable" generally means it does not cause undue cost and hardship on the business.
Unreasonable would be a person paying 12 bucks for a movie ticket and expecting a 'tactile interpreter' that would probably cost 100 bucks an hour to be provided by a movie theater.
It is reasonable to have handicapped access but if the man needs and interpreter, then he needs to bring one with him at his own expense.
The price of tickets will go up if theaters have to have interpreters "on call" just in case.
In practice compliance in these sort of ADA extreme cases is economically impossible so you have a small group of trial lawyers who find a highly disabled person to work with them who then get rich shaking down businesses. It is cheaper to just pay off the legal pseudo-mafia than it does to change practices so that's what happens. Lawsuits like this are relatively rare and happen because someone made the misstep of not paying their bad-legal-system protection money.
Every thing I have ever read about the ADA revolves around "Reasonable Accommodation".
"Reasonable" generally means it does not cause undue cost and hardship on the business.
Unreasonable would be a person paying 12 bucks for a movie ticket and expecting a 'tactile interpreter' that would probably cost 100 bucks an hour to be provided by a movie theater.
It is reasonable to have handicapped access but if the man needs and interpreter, then he needs to bring one with him at his own expense.
The cost would run in the hundreds as it requires two tactile interpreters and may require a minimum number of hours for both.
Presumably, this person has support staff who accompany her/him places. They wouldn't just put him/her in a cab, and these support staff individuals would also need to be able to communicate.
I wonder why the insistence that the theater provide services that he/she already has.
Such as it is in a culture that has allowed the left to purge all but the last molecules of common sense. The ADA is right up there with the most ridiculous Federal legislation ever enacted.
The acres of never used and wasted parking space that surrounds office buildings has, for years, been reason enough to repeal it. And that's clearly only the tip of the iceberg.
Quoted for truth.
One of my favorite grocery stores has lost my business because they have a zillion handicapped parking places and if you don't have the permit, you have to park a very long way from the building. Normally, a walk like that wouldn't bother me, but the last 2 times I went there, I just had a couple of things to buy, pretty much all the handicapped parking was empty, and it just pizzed me off. A few reserved parking places is fine, but literally the first quarter of the entire parking lot was reserved (and empty).
Such as it is in a culture that has allowed the left to purge all but the last molecules of common sense. The ADA is right up there with the most ridiculous Federal legislation ever enacted.
The acres of never used and wasted parking space that surrounds office buildings has, for years, been reason enough to repeal it. And that's clearly only the tip of the iceberg.
Yes, but the ADA was signed by George HW Bush in 1990, not a lib.
I think the number of people requesting this is going to be very low. Most people are probably not going to want to pay the price of a movie ticket when they're both legally deaf and blind because there's no benefit in doing that. The only reason people go to the movies now is they either have to be the first to say they saw a movie or to get the big-screen big-sound they can't get at home. Since legally blind and deaf people can't benefit from the latter, only the former would compel them to make such a request.
This may have even been one of those lawsuits filed just to force an issue.
I think you're getting upset about nothing, particularly if you prefer to watch movies at home.
If a person is blind and deaf, do they even know what a movie is? I'm not trying to be funny.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
