[nfb-talk] Audible Walking Signals

Wed Nov 28 21:22:46 CST 2007

Somewhat at the risk of appearing to be a "yes" man, I'd like to second what 
Kaye says here.  To speak plainly, if you don't believe in yourself as a 
blind person, you won't believe in other blind people either, no matter how 
competent they may actually be.  The reason you won't believe in blind 
people of any competency is because of your own incompetency.  On the other 
side of that coin, if you do believe in yourself as a blind person, you will 
believe in other blind people even if they happen not to be very competent 
at the moment.  The reason you will believe in other blind people is because 
of your own competency.  At the heart of it, that's really what the 
Federation is all about; competent blind people who believe in other blind 
people and help those perhaps less competent skill wise to become more 
competent in such things as Braille reading, independent travel and so 
forth.  In short, if you don't believe you can do it, you won't believe any 
blind person can do it; on the other hand, if you know you can do a thing, 
you're more likely to help a blind person who maybe can't do that thing yet 
to accomplish that thing; what ever it may be.
    To summarize the summary, we tend to see ourselves as others see us.

Sincerely yours,
The Constantly Barefooted,
Ray
Home phone and fax:
(985)853-0139
E-mail:
rforetjratbellsouthdotnet
Skype Name:
barefootedray
Blog:
www.raysworld.blogs.com
Podcast .rss Feed:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/worldofray

God bless President George W. Bush!
God bless our troops!
and God bless America
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "kaye zimpher" <kayezimpher at bellsouth.net>
To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Audible Walking Signals


Hi, I do not agree with this message respectfully, I live in a large city
and we too have train stations where trains come in on both sides. For a
long time we did not have tactile warnings and I traveled to and from school
and work on the train and felt very safe. In my opinion, it is a matter of
training and confidence. If one is well trained and believes and knows they
can travel safely they will. When the transportation system decided to place
the tactile warnings down on the platforms. I then began to feel very
unsafe. I wore dress shoes to work every day and I can not tell you how many
times I almost fell in to the train instead of walking on to it because my
heel caught on that silly strip. As far as talking signals go, I find them
quite distracting. I am not sure how traveling would be for a person with a
hearing problem so I will not comment on that, but when I am listening to
traffic sounds I do not like to hear chirp chirp every few seconds. I also
get confused when the signals go off because I am not sure if it is a walk
for my side or a walk for the other side. Now I can determine the answer
quite easily by listening to the traffic, but in that case why use the
signal at all? Totally blind people can do so much more than we are ever
given credit for, all we need is the training and self assurance to get the
job done.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Milissa Garside" <milissa.g79 at gmail.com>
To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 11:20 AM
Subject: [nfb-talk] Audible Walking Signals


> Hi Joseph,
>
> I must respectfully disagree with your assertion that audible traffic
> signals do not help the blind. As a person who is totally blind and who
> has
> a slight hearing impairment, audible traffic signals are extremely helpful
> to me. Certainly, I don't think they need to be installed at every
> intersection but, I do feel that they are needed at a great deal of
> intersections and fighting the ACB on this issue is pointless.
>
> I have found that in talking to NFB folks, it depends on where you live
> and
> your experience traveling decides one's opinion on audible traffic signals
> and tactile warning strips on subway platforms. For example, I live and
> Boston where we have crazy drivers, offset complex intersections, and
> subway
> platforms which have 6 foot drop offs. I don't care how well someone is
> trained, some intersections around here are impossible to cross without
> audible traffic signals. In terms of the subways, we have subway platforms
> that have trains coming in on both sides. Basically, there is a platform
> that has a 6 foot drop off on both sides; there is no wall for a blind
> person to use as a guide to travel on the platform. I don't care how much
> training one has but, maneuvering a platform which is open on both sides
> and
> there is no tactile guide to follow is asking for trouble. I'm not saying
> that it can't be done but, it is extremely dangerous.
>
> Here is one area I do not agree with the NFB. If traffic lights are
> available to sighted people for a reason, why then should they not have an
> audible signal for the blind? Also, since subway platforms have a visual
> yellow line for sighted people, why not then make the yellow line tactile
> so
> that blind people can have the same safety information? I think that the
> NFB
> some times gets to carried away with what blind people can do with proper
> training. If safety information is already there for sighted people, there
> is no reason why it shouldn't be there for blind people. Obviously,
> traffic
> lights and yellow lines on platforms are a safety measure for the sighted
> and I find it piposterous when blind people say that we do not need the
> same
> type of safety information simply because we can be trained to the point
> where we don't need it. I find that most people who cling to the idea that
> proper training can concor all are generally those who have not
> experienced
> living in big cities like Boston and other big cities. When making traffic
> lights and platform edges accessible for the blind, we are not asking for
> "special treatment" we are entitled to the same safety measures that are
> put
> in place for the sighted.
>
> Milissa
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "T. Joseph Carter" <tjcarter at bluecherry.net>
> To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 5:21 AM
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] NFB and ACB
>
>
>> Mike,
>>
>> Of course we should fight their position when it is destructive.
>>
>> Squawking signals are the perfect example of what I mean about how we do
>> so being such a key point, however.  When we address these signals, it is
>> important that we discuss the merits in our position and the flaws in
>> theirs.  For example, the fact that a walk signal does not in fact mean
>> that you can safely cross the street and that loud noises make it more
>> difficult to judge the real cues of when it is safe to cross--namely the
>> sounds of traffic.
>>
>> What we should not do is say that the ACB is just whining that they need
>> something to tell them when to cross the street because they apparently
>> lack proper training necessary to cross a street without them.  This kind
>> of argument isn't helpful, even if it is offered as a means to vent some
>> steam about their stubborn insistence on putting these damned things at
>> every intersection in America.
>>
>> The former argument justifies our position in opposing these things.  The
>> latter argument suggests that we have so little real support for our
>> position that we must resort to attacking our philosophical opponents in
>> order to try and win the debate.  That simply isn't true--we have tons of
>> evidence to support that these signals are not needed and that when they
>> are used, they impede the skills of a competent blind traveler.
>>
>> My nearest city, good ol' sunny Salem, Oregon is a place where we have
>> failed to be convincing in our arguments to that effect.  We either did
>> not or could not effectively compete against the combined lobbying
>> efforts
>> of the ACB and AARP to push for these things to be installed all over the
>> place.
>>
>> I don't think we presently have the strength needed to get them removed.
>> Nor do I believe we can stop new ones from being installed.  We lost that
>> fight for the time being.  I do think we can influence what sort of
>> signal
>> gets installed to ensure that this misfeature need not be forced upon us.
>>
>> It still means the money to install them is going to be wasted.  That's
>> very unfortunate.  I wish we had managed to prevent them adopting the
>> policy to roll these things out whenever they service a traffic signal,
>> but we weren't able to do that.  At least they're doing it only when a
>> signal needs to be serviced--that reduces the cost substantially.
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 05:28:21PM -0800, Mike Freeman wrote:
>>> Joe:
>>>
>>> But it goes beyond what you call "the feud". If ACB truly is doing
>>> something we of NFB view as destructive, do we not have a duty to fight
>>> it? Most assuredly, we cannot fight every battle. TYou don't see us
>>> saying much, for example, about ACB's "Video Restoration Act". It won't
>>> pass. But if the currency suit has even the remotest chance of doing
>>> harm, do not we have a duty to at least consider responding?
>>>
>>> Let me assure you that ACB surely complains when we oppose audible
>>> traffic signals because we consider them dangerous and misleading. What
>>> I
>>> am saying is that in saying we shouldn't deal with ACB and just let it
>>> do
>>> its thing, what often effectively happens is that we abandon the field
>>> of
>>> battle to them. Is this not an abrogation of our responsibilities as an
>>> organization fighting for what we believe to be the welfare of the
>>> blind?
>>> And let me assure you, ACB leaders are trying their darndest to keep
>>> alive the false notions they so cherish of what they believe NFB to be.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From:
>>> mailto:tjcarter at bluecherry.net T. Joseph Carter
>>> To:
>>> mailto:nfb-talk at nfbnet.org NFB Talk Mailing List
>>> Sent:
>>> Sunday, November 25, 2007 1:46 PM
>>> Subject:
>>> Re: [nfb-talk] NFB and ACB
>>> William,
>>> It is then our responsibility to not reciprocate the cycle. I realize
>>> that seems counter-intuitive--after all why should we not impede their
>>> operations if they impede ours?
>>> We should not because we have better things to do with our time,
>>> resources, and membership. If they try to function as the anti-NFB, as
>>> many here (myself included) believe has been the case, they won't exist
>>> in
>>> thirty years, because new members aren't going to want to get involved
>>> with that.
>>> However, my point has been and remains that it holds true for the
>>> Federation as well. Prospective new members like Corey have no interest
>>> in joining the feud. Those of us my age and younger who aren't too
>>> self-absorbed to get involved with something bigger than ourselves are
>>> interested in seeing that things get done.
>>> On Sun, Nov 25, 2007 at 10:00:52AM -0500, Wm. Ritchhart wrote:
>>> > Joseph,
>>> >
>>> > Unfortunately, what has occurred in South Carolina in regard to
>>> > Newsline
>>> > has occurred in many places across the country. Here in Indiana
>>> > though,
>>> > the NFB kept right on fighting until we got Newsline funded.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > William
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>>> [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>>> > On Behalf Of T. Joseph Carter
>>> > Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 5:25 AM
>>> > To: NFB Talk Mailing List
>>> > Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] NFB and ACB
>>> >
>>> > I don't know the circumstances of that issue, but I think I would be
>>> > hard
>>> > pressed to see the value in the ACB opposing Newsline. I've seen in
>>> > the
>>> > past few years one or two people try to disrupt it in a few places
>>> > just
>>> > to
>>> > screw with the NFB on behalf of the ACB, and I hope that this was not
>>> > one
>>> > of those instances.
>>> >
>>> > I would hope that the leadership of the ACB would consider such
>>> > spiteful
>>> > attempts to undermine the Newsline specifically because of its
>>> > connection
>>> > to the NFB as disdainful as I do. That kind of behavior is beneath
>>> > their
>>> > dignity. As would it be for us to engage in the same kind of behavior.
>>> >
>>> > If indeed the situation in South Carolina was political sabotage, I
>>> > would
>>> > consider it not a victory, but a shameful act to be neither repeated
>>> > nor
>>> > reciprocated. Neither organization can be totally successful fighting
>>> > for
>>> > the blind if we distract ourselves by fighting against the blind based
>>> > on
>>> > the initials they wear on their t-shirts.
>>> >
>>> > I have lived places where the NFB was not a strong organization. In
>>> > California, the NFB is pretty weak. In Oregon, neither organization is
>>> > particularly strong at the moment. I maintain my membership in the NFB
>>> > because I generally believe in the NFB's approach. I know for certain
>>> > that if I wait for an accommodation from the powers that be, I'll
>>> > fail.
>>> >
>>> > Now, I could let myself fail and then try to fight for what was denied
>>> > me,
>>> > or I can choose not to let them have the power to impede my progress.
>>> > I
>>> > have enough experience to know that not only do they tend to drag
>>> > their
>>> > feet at every turn, but that I am better at providing for myself than
>>> > they
>>> > ever have been.
>>> >
>>> > The ACB simply does not reflect those values, so I have always
>>> > supported
>>> > the NFB. To do otherwise would be like joining the dominant political
>>> > party in the area simply because they are more popular. The party
>>> > would
>>> > surely welcome my support to increase their popularity, but that
>>> > doesn't
>>> > mean they're going to vote the way I want when the bills come their
>>> > way.
>>> > (Of course, I believe that's true of both political parties, but the
>>> > analogy stands..)
>>> >
>>> > I know where the NFB will stand on most issues. Often, I understand
>>> > and
>>> > agree with the Federation's position automatically. Sometimes, I need
>>> > to
>>> > be convinced it's right.
>>> >
>>> > Sometimes I'm just going to disagree period--as in this case with the
>>> > currency thing. I think we should neither support nor impede the ACB's
>>> > legal action. We should prepare to combat the public misconception
>>> > that
>>> > failure of this legal action means that blind people can't work with
>>> > money
>>> > in the case that the ACB fails. At the same time, we should prepare a
>>> > proposal for the US Treasury Department both on what sort of
>>> > adaptations
>>> > to the currency are pragmatically applicable along with a fiscally
>>> > responsible transition plan in the case that the ACB succeeds.
>>> >
>>> > Our stated opinion in the NFB is that there are far more important
>>> > things
>>> > for us to worry about than whether our money is all the same size and
>>> > shape or not. I mostly agree with that. I think it cannot hurt to be
>>> > prepared for the outcome, but beyond that I would rather work on the
>>> > bigger issues of employment and education.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 09:35:17AM -0500, David W Bundy wrote:
>>> > > Corey,
>>> > > The power in both the NFB & ACB is a collective voice. When we speak
>>> > as either NFB or ACB, those to whom we are speaking hear us much more
>>> > loudly than if we speak as David and Corey & we are much more likely
>>> > to
>>> > get what it is we are asking for. I recall once Dr. Jernagan saying
>>> > that you should join which ever organization is more likely to get you
>>> > the results you seek--If you are in an area with a strong NFB
>>> > presence,
>>> > then join NFB, but if you live in an area without a strong NFB
>>> > presence
>>> > but a Strong ACB group, then by all means Join ACB--But whatever you
>>> > choose, join something so your voice will be heard. In South Carolina,
>>> > The NFB is a powerbul force with a strong track record while the ACB
>>> > presence is little more than token. NFB has two to three hundred at
>>> > our
>>> > convention each year while I,m told that ACB's convention averages 15
>>> > or
>>> > 20. NFB has been successful in passing a number of laws in SC,
>>> > incleuding establishment of the Commission for the blind & several de!
>>> > fe!
>>> > > ats of attempts to restructure it out of existance, as well as bills
>>> > to require that TVI's be trained in Braille to name a few. The only
>>> > ACB
>>> > legislative victory for ACB in SC that I am aware of, aside from those
>>> > times when they joined with us for obvious things, was the withdrawal
>>> > of
>>> > funding for Newsline. So clearly, in SC, the wise choice would be NFB.
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > nfb-talk mailing list
>>> > mailto:nfb-talk at nfbnet.org nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > nfb-talk mailing list
>>> > mailto:nfb-talk at nfbnet.org nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>> mailto:nfb-talk at nfbnet.org nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk

_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk