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.
And any reasonable person, disabled or not, when offered by the other bus patrons another seat of her choosing so that the man in the wheelchair could ALSO be accommodated, would have taken them up on their offer. Being disabled doesn't exempt you from common courtesy, especially to other disabled persons.
Unless you have a handicap, or mental illness that can’t be seen..... it is not about “common courtesy”, it is about disability.
I’m not even going to list the types of mental illness / ptsd, etc.... that could cause her to not give up her seat.
No one has any idea about her, she might be a vet, hers may be much worse than a wheelchair.
And any reasonable person, disabled or not, when offered by the other bus patrons another seat of her choosing so that the man in the wheelchair could ALSO be accommodated, would have taken them up on their offer. Being disabled doesn't exempt you from common courtesy, especially to other disabled persons.
No. A REASONABLE person would not expect one disabled person to be put at disadvantage by another. She was sitting where she was supposed to sit. I explained why it is unsafe for many of us to try to sit where the non-disabled people sit. That's why they HAVE such sections. Just because she was NOT in a wheelchair doesn't mean she isn't allowed to sit in the disabled/elderly seating section - those sections are designated for disabled AND elderly, not just wheelchairs.
Next you'll say someone in a wheelchair already using that space should be forced to get off and wait for the next bus.
I just called Ktla, and asked them to look into this further, instead of giving just one side. They were very nice about it and thought it worth considering.
Now off to call metro, and The ADA.
The seat she was sitting on needed to fold up to make room for the wheelchair. She was sitting in a seat designated for Seniors and Persons With Disabilities. She is clearly a senior. She is an obnoxious *****, but she was within her legal right not to give up her seat. That is why the bus driver and his supervisor allowed her to remain seated and asked the man in a wheelchair to wait for the next bus.
So what, she's a senior. One with legs that work, whereas the man in the wheelchair has legs that don't. She is not disabled, he is, so she can be generous and sit in any other seat on that bus to make room for him. I know a lot of seniors who would gladly have acquiesced and moved, because they have the class and good manners to do so and don't walk around with entitlement chips on their shoulders. They understand the concept of "but for the Grace of (God, Fate, Karma, the Universe, etc.) go I."
And why should he have to wait for the next bus? What if this scenario were to wash-rinse-repeat with that 2nd bus?
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 12 days ago)
35,640 posts, read 17,994,810 times
Reputation: 50681
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContraPagan
So what, she's a senior. One with legs that work, whereas the man in the wheelchair has legs that don't. She is not disabled, he is, so she can be generous and sit in any other seat on that bus to make room for him. I know a lot of seniors who would gladly have acquiesced and moved, because they have the class and good manners to do so and don't walk around with entitlement chips on their shoulders. They understand the concept of "but for the Grace of (God, Fate, Karma, the Universe, etc.) go I."
And why should he have to wait for the next bus? What if this scenario were to wash-rinse-repeat with that 2nd bus?
It won't be, is why. Normal people don't act like that.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 12 days ago)
35,640 posts, read 17,994,810 times
Reputation: 50681
Quote:
Originally Posted by budlight
It's not against the law to be an a$$.
It's against the law to park in handicapped parking if you don't have a sticker, and against the law to block an ambulance EVEN if they are parked in your reserved parking space.
So I wonder how close this woman is skirting those laws? Taking up space designated for the handicapped on public transportation and refusing to move?
And no, being difficult and ornery and an a$$ isn't usually considered a recognized disability.
If you were the bus driver you would have been fired for violating the company policies. She was sitting in a seat designated for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities. As the report stated she appeared to be a senior. That's why after the bus driver and his supervisor conferred they allowed her to remain in the seat.
She looked at least 65 years old and she might have had a disability. It appears she couldn't speak English to communicate that. And if she was truly disabled and she got in the seat first, she would have had priority. So she would be correct here.
I watched the entire video.
For those of you saying she had no disability, you don't know that.
On our buses here (which run nowhere near the very 10 mins, but closer to 30-60) there is a large disabled/elder section up front. However, that whole section does not accommodate wheelchairs. Meaning you can only have one wheelchair in its designated spot but have 3-5 ambulatory “disabled” or elder people on the bus. The bus in th video appeared on a be set up like that. Meaning, she was not only blocking him but preventing him from sitting. There appeared to be plenty of available seating, including passengers willing to relocate. I don’t buy the argument of suffering a PTSD breakdown from “navigating the narrow bus”.
The current code may not speak of disabled vs disabled scénarios especially when it comes to the only wheelchair spot vs other empty disabled seats. I wouldn’t be surprised if after this their terms are amended.
Common sense and courtesy do not go into the dumpster once you reach 65 or obtain some degree of disability.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 12 days ago)
35,640 posts, read 17,994,810 times
Reputation: 50681
Quote:
Originally Posted by walmill
On our buses here (which run nowhere near the very 10 mins, but closer to 30-60) there is a large disabled/elder section up front. However, that whole section does not accommodate wheelchairs. Meaning you can only have one wheelchair in its designated spot but have 3-5 ambulatory “disabled” or elder people on the bus. The bus in th video appeared on a be set up like that. Meaning, she was not only blocking him but preventing him from sitting. There appeared to be plenty of available seating, including passengers willing to relocate. I don’t buy the argument of suffering a PTSD breakdown from “navigating the narrow bus”.
The current code may not speak of disabled vs disabled scénarios especially when it comes to the only wheelchair spot vs other empty disabled seats. I wouldn’t be surprised if after this their terms are amended.
Common sense and courtesy do not go into the dumpster once you reach 65 or obtain some degree of disability.
Bottom line: the lady is a prick.
I agree. It seems the charge of "obstructing public right-of-way" or "obstructing public access" would be appropriate. It's about as serious as a traffic ticket, but would get the message across.
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.
