Another wilderness tower torn down due to disabilities act

[ArrestMeRedZ]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter

The ADA didn't cause it to rot.

/end of discussion


So, end of discussion means you admit you were wrong?

Then you make 2 more posts after you declared the discussion over.

ADA was typical poorly thought out legislation that sounded good at the time, but had horrible unintended consequences. And you have the audacity to state legislators had forethought and wisdom? Really?

 

[hatt]

Insanity and mental illness rules the day now. I'm waiting for all of the nature trails to be shut down because they aren't paved and accessible to people in wheelchairs or jazzy scooters.

 

[Amkeer]

Put a pulley on the tower with chain or rope. He can pull himself up.

 

[Alfred_B]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
What am I missing? The principle reason cited in the article for tear down is it's structurally unsound. Even if there wasn't a disabled person on the planet the structure has to come down.


It's a good excuse to bash the ADA by people without disabilities.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Originally Posted by Alfred_B
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
What am I missing? The principle reason cited in the article for tear down is it's structurally unsound. Even if there wasn't a disabled person on the planet the structure has to come down.


It's a good excuse to bash the ADA by people without disabilities.

My thoughts exactly...

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted by Alfred_B
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
What am I missing? The principle reason cited in the article for tear down is it's structurally unsound. Even if there wasn't a disabled person on the planet the structure has to come down.


It's a good excuse to bash the ADA by people without disabilities.


OR, it's an example of a policy that was well-intended, but too often has unforeseen and ridiculous consequences. Some (most) people with disabilities still have common sense., and aren't going around imposing their limitations on others. Before you get all offended, I have family members who are disabled.

We were in Yosemite not too long ago. I'm wondering how long it will be before some lunatic gets Half Dome closed to climbing, because there is no wheelchair accessible ramp up the face?

 

[Anon9283]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by Alfred_B
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
What am I missing? The principle reason cited in the article for tear down is it's structurally unsound. Even if there wasn't a disabled person on the planet the structure has to come down.


It's a good excuse to bash the ADA by people without disabilities.

My thoughts exactly...


It's painfully clear how many people haven't lived with or with someone that has a significant disability. Pretty callous replies

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted by Aero540T
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by Alfred_B
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
What am I missing? The principle reason cited in the article for tear down is it's structurally unsound. Even if there wasn't a disabled person on the planet the structure has to come down.


It's a good excuse to bash the ADA by people without disabilities.

My thoughts exactly...


It's painfully clear how many people haven't lived with or with someone that has a significant disability. Pretty callous replies
What does someone else's disability have to do with me enjoying the world? Never mind the majority of the "disabled" these days ate, drank, smoked, drugged, etc, themselves into their current condition.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by Alfred_B
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
What am I missing? The principle reason cited in the article for tear down is it's structurally unsound. Even if there wasn't a disabled person on the planet the structure has to come down.


It's a good excuse to bash the ADA by people without disabilities.


OR, it's an example of a policy that was well-intended, but too often has unforeseen and ridiculous consequences. Some (most) people with disabilities still have common sense., and aren't going around imposing their limitations on others. Before you get all offended, I have family members who are disabled.

We were in Yosemite not too long ago. I'm wondering how long it will be before some lunatic gets Half Dome closed to climbing, because there is no wheelchair accessible ramp up the face?

Too often?..how did you arrive at this conclusion? Can you cite your research...no disabled person(s) is trying to get Half Dome closed or imposing "their limitations" upon you. Wa wa wa.........my life as an able bodied person is so tough if only these disabled people weren't running around ruining everything for me.

I wasn't going to disclose this (because it's nobody's business) but 3yrs ago I almost died of CHF. I had heart failure but didn't recognize the symptoms and it caused a blood clot to form and lodge itself in my lungs (a pulmonary embolism). For the next 6 months I was in and out of the hospital, it was very touch and go... and very hard for me having two young teen children seeing their father like this. Fast forward I'm still here.. thankfully. But I'm not the same. My ability to do activities has been greatly reduced. Living with heart failure (low pumping ability) and reduced lung capacity due to the blood clot that starved a large portion of my lower right long is no picnic, especially for someone like myself who once played semi pro rugby and has walked the Great Wall of China in my youth. I now depend on the assistance of my 2 kids to do things that i took for granted. I depend on being able to park close to a stores entrance in a spot designated for the handicap so I can grocery shop on my own.. again, something I used to take for granted as an able bodied person. I could go on and on about how because of the ADA i can maintain some semblance of a normal life and not be a total burden to everyone around me. This (the ADA) has made it so I can have some quality of life for however long I'm still on this planet.. could be 1 more month, 2 more years or 10..who knows. But I'm grateful (and my kids are too) that I can still do many of the things I used to do and that is due in some part to the ADA. Is it a perfect law, no it's not. But like I said..no law pleases all the people all of the time.

So go ahead and keep blaming those darn cripples and the ADA for your stupid tower coming down, it just makes you all sound whiney and selfish.

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by Alfred_B
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
What am I missing? The principle reason cited in the article for tear down is it's structurally unsound. Even if there wasn't a disabled person on the planet the structure has to come down.


It's a good excuse to bash the ADA by people without disabilities.


OR, it's an example of a policy that was well-intended, but too often has unforeseen and ridiculous consequences. Some (most) people with disabilities still have common sense., and aren't going around imposing their limitations on others. Before you get all offended, I have family members who are disabled.

We were in Yosemite not too long ago. I'm wondering how long it will be before some lunatic gets Half Dome closed to climbing, because there is no wheelchair accessible ramp up the face?


Too often?..how did you arrive at this conclusion? Can you cite your research...no disabled person(s) is trying to get Half Dome closed or imposing "their limitations" upon you.



Just the loser filing frivolous lawsuits all over Apple Valley, Ca is a prime example of "Too often". As for no (mentally) disabled person(s) trying to get Half Dome closed, give it time...

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter

So go ahead and keep blaming those darn cripples and the ADA for your stupid tower coming down, it just makes you all sound whiney and selfish.


I think your closeness to the issue is blinding you to the nuance of this discussion. Nobody is universally condemning the ADA, they are simply stating that there are folks taking advantage of it and in doing so are having an impact on things, like potentially these towers, that would never remotely involve disabled people.

That guy mentioned earlier in the thread, making lawsuits his way of life, that's somebody exploiting the system and we can't hand-wave that away by just talking about the good the ADA does. Good things sometimes have bad (and typically unintended) side effects, and these are two examples of that. Perhaps there should be some amendments made to provide some clarification?

I don't see anybody slamming disabled folks here, simply talking about how policy has inadvertently affected something it really should have no bearing on

 

[totegoat]

Originally Posted by Rmay635703
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.greenbaypressgazette.com/amp/1696610001

Many people have great memories and have fun climbing the old wood towers, the views are amazing..

The cost to repair them is minimal but because it's wood, a lot needs to be replaced meaning the people for disabilities act kicks in which drives the cost from thousands to repair into millions of dollars to instead replace the whole thing with a cement monolith.
The handicapable version is not only ugly but removes the charm of the open climb.

Due to this the towers once common in every park are just being torn down never to be replaced.

I think at some point we need to say shove it.

My father was handicapped and found the fact that eagle tower was torn down due to not being handicap accessible nauseating.

Not sure how one wins this type of battle


I think at some point we need to say shove it. Exactly!!

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Originally Posted by OVERKILL
I think your closeness to the issue is blinding you to the nuance of this discussion..they are simply stating that there are folks taking advantage of it and in doing so are having an impact on things, like potentially these towers, that would never remotely involve disabled people.

Too close to the issue?..I live the issue. Too close is like excluding a cancer patient from any discussion around therapies because... they're "too close" to cancer and incapable of being unbiased.

I'm not blinded, what I read are random brain droppings about how the ADA has ruined some able bodied persons life or hypotheticals about how wheelchair people are gonna get Half Dome shut down.. almost like there's this deep state of disabled persons out to get able bodies....‚... Besides, the thread title literally says "...due to the Disabilities act" and not "..due to some yahoo idiot"..if the focus of the thread and ensuing discussion was about people using the ADA to exact some agenda for personal enrichment, than I could go there with you on that because I do believe that is a problem, albeit not a significant one but a problem none the less..... But that's NOT what the thread was titled nor is it found anywhere in it's opening statement.

 

[Anon9283]

It's painfully clear how many people haven't lived with or with someone that has a significant disability. Pretty callous replies[/quote]
What does someone else's disability have to do with me enjoying the world? Never mind the majority of the "disabled" these days ate, drank, smoked, drugged, etc, themselves into their current condition.
[/quote]

Why is my wife less deserving of trying to enjoy the same things as you in life just because she needs to use a cane occasionally? Her issues are no fault of her own btw, and that's a pretty blatant assumption by you. Most people acquire some sort of disability in their life at some point and the ADA has done some great things to help. Be grateful for your good health

Ps sorry for screwing up the quotes.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted by Aero540T


Why is my wife less deserving of trying to enjoy the same things as you in life just because she needs to use a cane occasionally? Her issues are no fault of her own btw, and that's a pretty blatant assumption by you. Most people acquire some sort of disability in their life at some point and the ADA has done some great things to help. Be grateful for your good health

Ps sorry for screwing up the quotes.
Needs to use a cane once in a while? I just had bilateral knee replacements. I've been in pain for over 20 years since my early 20s. There was plenty of stuff I couldn't do. I didn't whine about it. I did things I could do. You also never saw one of those handicapped placards around my vehicles.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by Aero540T


Why is my wife less deserving of trying to enjoy the same things as you in life just because she needs to use a cane occasionally? Her issues are no fault of her own btw, and that's a pretty blatant assumption by you. Most people acquire some sort of disability in their life at some point and the ADA has done some great things to help. Be grateful for your good health

Ps sorry for screwing up the quotes.
Needs to use a cane once in a while? I just had bilateral knee replacements. I've been in pain for over 20 years since my early 20s. There was plenty of stuff I couldn't do. I didn't whine about it. I did things I could do. You also never saw one of those handicapped placards around my vehicles.

My brother, before he passed, had both knees replaced so a lot of people do just fine returning to their normal activities after knee surgery. I don't think you would have even qualified for a placard given your mobility. You have to meet certain definitions and one is not being able to walk a distance of something like a hundred feet or something like that...i forget exactly what it is as it's been some time since I had to fill one out...and maybe some states differ but here in WA a Dr. has to certify that you satisfy a list of things that must exist in your medical history.

Fwiw, I don't smoke and don't drink and while I'm not at my target weight I'm certainly not obese...heart issues just run in the family. That's what killed my brother at 42. Went to sleep one night and never woke up. So my having cardiovascular issues is hardly a surprise to my cardiologist... could be worse I suppose, early onset Alzheimer's also runs in the family on my mother's side.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Too close to the issue?..I live the issue.


As does my mother, as I said, I'm not taking fault with the motivation for the act, but rather those that choose to intentionally exploit it or to use it to do what's been laid out in the OP.

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Too close is like excluding a cancer patient from any discussion around therapies because... they're "too close" to cancer and incapable of being unbiased.

No, because those therapies aren't having an unintended impact on other people, those two things aren't close to the same. This is a well meaning government initiative that has unfortunately been used to cause harm outside of the areas in which it was meant to help. I think we can agree on that.

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
I'm not blinded, what I read are random brain droppings about how the ADA has ruined some able bodied persons life or hypotheticals about how wheelchair people are gonna get Half Dome shut down.. almost like there's this deep state of disabled persons out to get able bodies....‚... Besides, the thread title literally says "...due to the Disabilities act" and not "..due to some yahoo idiot"..if the focus of the thread and ensuing discussion was about people using the ADA to exact some agenda for personal enrichment, than I could go there with you on that because I do believe that is a problem, albeit not a significant one but a problem none the less..... But that's NOT what the thread was titled nor is it found anywhere in it's opening statement.


No, but that's where the thread seemed to head. Perhaps it could (should) have been titled better, but I didn't get a feeling the OP was out to get disabled folks because their act was causing the loss of these towers, rather that the Act was being used to remove them due to poor interpretation. In my mind that's grounds for an amendment, not any sort of initiate against the act itself or the folks whose lives it aims to improve

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Too close to the issue?..I live the issue.


As does my mother, as I said, I'm not taking fault with the motivation for the act, but rather those that choose to intentionally exploit it or to use it to do what's been laid out in the OP.

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Too close is like excluding a cancer patient from any discussion around therapies because... they're "too close" to cancer and incapable of being unbiased.

No, because those therapies aren't having an unintended impact on other people, those two things aren't close to the same. This is a well meaning government initiative that has unfortunately been used to cause harm outside of the areas in which it was meant to help. I think we can agree on that.

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
I'm not blinded, what I read are random brain droppings about how the ADA has ruined some able bodied persons life or hypotheticals about how wheelchair people are gonna get Half Dome shut down.. almost like there's this deep state of disabled persons out to get able bodies....‚... Besides, the thread title literally says "...due to the Disabilities act" and not "..due to some yahoo idiot"..if the focus of the thread and ensuing discussion was about people using the ADA to exact some agenda for personal enrichment, than I could go there with you on that because I do believe that is a problem, albeit not a significant one but a problem none the less..... But that's NOT what the thread was titled nor is it found anywhere in it's opening statement.


No, but that's where the thread seemed to head. Perhaps it could (should) have been titled better, but I didn't get a feeling the OP was out to get disabled folks because their act was causing the loss of these towers, rather that the Act was being used to remove them due to poor interpretation. In my mind that's grounds for an amendment, not any sort of initiate against the act itself or the folks whose lives it aims to improve

Fair points... and the people that do exploit the ACT for some personal gain are dirt bags IMO. That's not what it was intended for and legislative clarification to mitigate this might be called for.

I don't understand why the tower isn't designated a historical landmark? That designation carries with it some flexibility when it comes to compliance/rehabbing and the ADA. But who knows, maybe they looked into that and it wasn't a viable option for some reason.🤔

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter

Fair points... and the people that do exploit the ACT for some personal gain are dirt bags IMO. That's not what it was intended for and legislative clarification to mitigate this might be called for.

I don't understand why the tower isn't designated a historical landmark? That designation carries with it some flexibility when it comes to compliance/rehabbing and the ADA. But who knows, maybe they looked into that and it wasn't a viable option for some reason.🤔

Think we are on the same page at this point.

 

[Anon9283]

Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by Aero540T


Why is my wife less deserving of trying to enjoy the same things as you in life just because she needs to use a cane occasionally? Her issues are no fault of her own btw, and that's a pretty blatant assumption by you. Most people acquire some sort of disability in their life at some point and the ADA has done some great things to help. Be grateful for your good health

Ps sorry for screwing up the quotes.
Needs to use a cane once in a while? I just had bilateral knee replacements. I've been in pain for over 20 years since my early 20s. There was plenty of stuff I couldn't do. I didn't whine about it. I did things I could do. You also never saw one of those handicapped placards around my vehicles.


I don't need to explain her health issues to you but suffice it to say she's likely lived with significantly more pain than you ever will. Be glad about that. And I'm not trying to make it a competition because what it boils down to is respect. I won't judge you or anyone based on what it appears they may be going through. It's a blessing she was finally diagnosed (at 20 and now 31) and can at least treat symptoms better. She doesn't whine. She deals. She got her masters in rehab counseling to help people with disabilities and then became a lawyer to help further. Yes some days she needs a cane. Others she's in bed all day. Even others I need to call an ambulance to go to the ER. Stop judging is all I'm saying.
She also doesn't have a handicap placard even though her doctor said she can. Because of this exact reason