[backupcavalry]

While I get what you mean, he's right: there's a line that's going to get drawn somewhere, like as not. Now where exactly is something beyond my ken but there are definitely things that will never be viable for the disabled.

In all honesty? I'd rather devote the resources to helping disabled people function fully (or near-fully) again. But that in of itself is sort of wishful thinking.

[mondoshawan]

I would love to be able to walk just like anyone normal. Instead, I deal with major pain every day of my life because assholes like you refuse to build in basic, small things like a fucking chair to sit on while waiting, usually because "it would hurt the asthetics" or some dumb notion like it (ie: apple store, malls, amusement parks...).

ADA is the lowest common denominator. Its not asking for you to rebuild a whole building -- it asks for reasonable concessions to be made -- and its absolutely amazing how business owners go out of their way to make it harder on themselves and the disabled.

What I don't understand is this "line" that "must be drawn" I've seen from you and others: the point is to negotiate and find a compromise between the disabled and the owner within reasonable limits. The fact that businesses and public institutions are unwilling to play ball and throw their toys out of the pram every time this comes up is amazing and sad that it even comes to that point. Usually because upfront investment in the material/business is smaller and usually beneficial for everyone in the long run!

In TFA, crema bought the location years after ADA was already law. The fact that it became a risk to them now is unsurprising, and the fact that they're closing that location is sad for both parties.

The fact that it's also possibly a predatory lawsuit is also sad, and I hope something that can be rectified -- but I'm also not surprised to hear of such high numbers of lawsuits over the problem, given how old the law is now, and given how many places I have been to in the valley that don't have ramps.