The Ever-Hungry ADA
Michelle Malkin relays a story on a lawsuit accusing Target of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). But there’s nothing wrong with the stores themselves. They have plenty of ramps, wide doors, and whatnot. Target stands accusing of insufficiently accommodating the disabled on their web site:
U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel in San Francisco rejected Target’s request to dismiss the case. She also certified the case as a class action, ruling that all legally blind people in the U.S. who have been denied access to services at Target stores because of deficiencies in the company’s website can join the suit.
Target has failed to use “technologically simple and not economically prohibitive” code embedded in websites allowing the blind to use software that vocalizes the content, according to court filings by the National Federation of the Blind.
The group filed the suit on behalf of Bruce Sexton, a UC Berkeley student who claimed that he couldn’t access some features of Target.com. “It was just gibberish for blind users trying to use the website,” said Larry Paradis, a lawyer for the group.
“Target has argued that no law — neither the Americans with Disabilities Act nor state law — could require it to make its website accessible to the blind,” Paradis said. “Today’s decision completely rejects Target’s argument.”
The problem with laws like the ADA is that they have no inherent limits. As with any liberal sob-story group, the militant disabled can never be satisfied. However much you give them, they’ll always want more.
If you doubt it, consider this story out of Baltimore:
Members of the National Federation of the Blind are picketing today outside the South Baltimore offices of the Maryland Department of Environment.
They want environmental officials to order the makers of hybrid cars to make changes to the environmentally friendly car.
Chris Danielson says the cars are too quiet when running on their electric battery, and that can be dangerous for blind people trying to cross the street.
Danielson tells WBAL News that he has no statistics on pedestrian accidents involving hybrid cars, but he does say there have been several near misses.
So the facts are irrelevant. The picketers have no idea what benefits they’re claiming or what burdens they’re pushing on their fellow citizens, so I assume that they don’t care. They know only the will to power, the desire to control what other people do.
This is another case of abusers and whiners who want handouts and refuse to deal with their disabilities. Stop being a burden to everyone else!
Comment by Louis Michael Mount — October 8, 2007 @ 8:36 pm
It’s not a matter of wanting handouts. It’s a matter of putting a gun to someone’s head and demanding handouts. These first group isn’t asking Target to change its web site; it is demanding the change under threat of government violence. And the second group isn’t appealing to private companies or consumers; it is demanding government action to get its way.
Armed robbery for a good cause is still armed robbery.
Comment by BenBateman — October 9, 2007 @ 11:09 am
How come General Motors isn’t being sued for not making their cars “accessible to the blind”?
Seems to me that if the JAWS reader (voice-browser for the blind) output jibberish for the Target site, then it’s a problem with JAWS.
If MSIE or Firefox didn’t properly interpret the code and simply spit out the HTML source, it would be jibberish for sighted readers as well.
Tell JAWS to fix their browser.
Comment by Marty — November 2, 2007 @ 8:26 am