[Mt-blind] What's More Important, Safety or Freedom?

Thu Apr 24 18:03:48 CDT 2008

Civil rights protect citizens against discrimination.  The
discrimination blind and visually impaired people face usually comes
in the form of low expectations.  Discriminators tend to think that
blind people cannot do things others do, and they behave in ways that
deny or limit freedoms of the blind.

The civil right to travel independently is one of those things that we
take for granted today, but that society denied us in years past.
Imagine not being allowed to cross the street because of what others
think blind people can do.  Imagine being blamed for any accident even
when the blind person is indisputably in the right.  This sort of
discrimination is what the white cane laws changed.

The Montana white cane law grants blind pedestrians the same rights
any pedestrian enjoys.  When Montana pedestrians, blind or sighted,
step to the street to cross, vehicles are supposed to stop.  Take away
white cane laws, and blind Montanans still enjoy the same legal
priorities all Montanans enjoy.  This begs the question, why do we
have white cane laws, then.  The answer is that the civil rights, the
white cane laws, presume first class citizenship of the blind.  As a
blind person, I know I can cross the street and expect accountability
for my own actions and the actions of others.  It's about more than
safety.   The right of way includes the right to make one's way free
of discrimination.

At the same time, safety is important and should be taken seriously.
My beef is with an extreme emphasis on safety, especially when the
expectation is that others will watch out for blind people and blind
people will not look out for ourselves.  It is possible to take safety
too far.

For example, I prefer wearing T-shirts that proclaim blind power and
humanity than to wear ones that stress safety.  The most important
message I want to send is that blind people are whole people who do
not depend solely on the kindness of strangers.  I do not want others
reading my shirt and thinking blindness is a terrible tragedy.

Another example is that I will not clothe myself from head to toe in
reflective clothing.  Wearing some, reflective clothing makes sense
for any pedestrian, but for blind people to think that we have to
become clownish sideshows to be safe is not only wrong; it's sad.

A last example is that I will not stand before local and state
authorities to send them the unspoken yet obvious message that blind
people are victims.  Prejudices about what it means to be blind are
everywhere, and we must take care to communicate positive messages
about blindness.  We can still advocate for safety, but the context
must be always couched in a firm belief it is OK to be blind.

Jim Marks
blind.grizzly at gmail.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mt-blind-bounces+d28rik=msn.com at nfbnet.org
> [mailto:mt-blind-bounces+d28rik=msn.com at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Hutch
> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 8:09 AM
> To: blind.grizzly at gmail.com; Montana Association for the Blind List
> Subject: Re: [Mt-blind] What's More Important, Safety or Freedom?
>
> Throughout history, the cane, staff, and stick have existed as traveling
> aids for the blind and visually impaired. Dating back to biblical times
> records show that a shepherd's staff was used as a tool for solitary travel.
> The blind used such tools to alert them to obstacles in their path.
>
>
>
> For centuries, the "cane" was used merely as a tool for travel and it was
> not until the twentieth century that the cane, as we know it today, was
> promoted for use by the blind as a symbol to alert others to the fact that
> an individual was blind.
>
>
>
> This new role for the white cane had its origins in the decades between the
> two World Wars, beginning in Europe and then spreading to North
> America. James Biggs of Bristol, England, claimed to have invented   the
> white cane in 1921. After an accident claimed his sight, the artist had to
> readjust to his environment. Feeling threatened by increased motor vehicle
> traffic around his home, Biggs decided to paint his walking stick white to
> make himself more visible to motorists.
>
>
>
> Also in 1931, in France, Guilly d'Herbemont recognized the danger of blind
> people in traffic and launched a national "white stick movement"
> for blind people.  She donated 5,000 white canes to people in Paris.
>
>
>
> In the United States, the introduction of the White Cane is attributed to
> Lion George A. Bonham (Peoria Lions Club).  In 1930, he observed a man who
> was blind attempting to cross the street with a black cane that was barely
> visible to motorists against the dark pavement.  The Lion offered to paint
> the cane white to make it more visible.  By 1931, the Peoria Lions Club
> approved the project and white canes were made and distributed.  The Peoria
> City Council adopted an ordinance giving the bearers the right-of-way to
> cross the street.  The news of the club's activity spread to other Lions
> Clubs, and the white cane became known by the blind and sighted alike as a
> means of identifying the safe mobility needs of the visually impaired.  In
> 1931, Lions Clubs International began a program promoting the use of White
> Canes for people who are blind.
>
>
>
> In the United States, laws vary from state to state, but in all cases, those
> carrying white canes are afforded the right of way when crossing a road and
> when in a public place
>
>
>
> For further information about white can and O&M;
>
>
>
> http://www.aerbvi.org/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=44
> <http://www.aerbvi.org/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=44>
>
>
>
>
>
> Now, Jim, please explain to me and to the list, just how the white cane
> is a matter of civil rights and not about safety.  The beginning history
> of the white cane in Europe and the United States did not start and
> never was a civil rights issue, it started about safety.  And it
> continues to be about safety!   Safety for the blind or low vision
> individual who has the right to use the sidewalks and to cross
> roadways.  Every state in the United States mandates that drivers, all
> drivers, are to yield to persons carrying a white cane and to all
> pedestrians who wish to cross a street or roadway.  Check the law!
>
>
>
> The problem is that we make the laws but we can not get drivers to be
> courteous, attentive drivers who will take the time and yield to those
> pedestrians who by law have the right of way.   Drivers continue to kill
> and injure pedestrians around the state and throughout the country
> because the drivers are not obeying the law.  And the laws are not being
> enforced!
>
>
>
> And by the way, this issue is not just about the blind and those with
> low vision, it is a matter of safety for all pedestrians, sighted or
> vision impaired, young and old alike.
>
>
>
> Only by strong and active enforcement of the laws that are currently on
> the books against poor judgment in driving practices by those who have
> no respect for others and do not pay attention to situations around them
> while they drive, can we who use white canes feel safe when we travel.
>
>
>
> Again, how is this a civil rights issue?
>
>
>
> Jerry Hutch
>
>
>
> Jim Marks wrote:
>
> >Things have been slow on the list, so I thought I would bring up a topic
> >from last fall's MAB Convention.  During the Chapter President's meeting,
> we
> >discussed chapter projects that promote safety for blind Montanans.  At
> >least part of the discussion focused on white cane laws.  Jerry Hutch told
> >us about the Helena Chapter's efforts on improving safety.  I tried to
> >correct Jerry's misunderstanding about white cane laws.  He said he thinks
> >of the laws as primarily safety laws.  Actually, white cane laws did not
> >come about due to safety.  On the contrary, they were civil rights oriented
> >laws that did away with a major prejudice.  Before white cane laws, society
> >assumed that accidents involving blind pedestrians and vehicles were caused
> >by the blind person.  Most people believed that blind people could not
> >function, and so they had to be at fault in pedestrian-vehicle accidents.
> >White cane laws forced a change in this thinking.  These civil rights laws
> >put blind people on equal footing with the sighted so that authorities
> would
> >look at accidents involving blind pedestrians and vehicles on a factual
> >rather than a prejudicial level.  In other words, sometimes an accident may
> >be the blind person's fault.  Sometimes it's the driver's fault.
> >
> >I believe there is a very real danger in getting overzealous about safety.
> >If we go too far, we need up taking away freedoms.  Safety is very, very
> >important.  It starts with personal responsibility, uses lots of common
> >sense, and holds all parties accountable.  Safety should never, never rob
> >people of their freedoms, though.  If we go safety goofy about white cane
> >laws and such, we put blind people in a dependent role.  We could expect
> >society to watch out for us so much that we end up bringing back to life
> the
> >very prejudices that brought about white cane laws.  All that's necessary
> is
> >to strike a balance.  Blind people should not expect others to watch out
> for
> >us.  We should watch out for ourselves.  At the same time, we should expect
> >others to hold up their end of the bargain.  Negligence should not be
> >tolerated no matter whether it comes from a vehicle driver or a blind
> >pedestrian.
> >
> >I mention all this because the MAB really needs to watch out for extremist
> >approaches to safety issues.
> >
> >What do you think?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-------
> >Jim Marks
> >blind.grizzly at gmail.com
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Mt-blind mailing list
> >Mt-blind at nfbnet.org
> >http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/mt-blind
> >To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Mt-blind:
> >http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/mt-blind/modrepro%40mt.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Mt-blind mailing list
> Mt-blind at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/mt-blind
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Mt-blind:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/mt-blind/d28rik%40msn.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mt-blind mailing list
> Mt-blind at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/mt-blind
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Mt-blind:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/mt-blind/blind.grizzly%40gmail.com
>

-- 
Jim Marks
blind.grizzly at gmail.com