[Seattle3503]

In defense of the school, this forces everyone to confront how bad handicap accessibility is. Before, only a minority of people had to deal with only having two entrances available, so nothing was going to force the issue.

[tivert]

>> University administration declared that from now on, 100% of doors on campus must be handicap accessible.

>> A week later, six doors were removed from my building...

> In defense of the school, this forces everyone to confront how bad handicap accessibility is.

No, that can't be a defense of the school. The decision-makers could have decided to make improvements so at least some of those six doors became handicap accessible, but they didn't. Instead they decided to take a cheap action that imposed costs on others in order to make an empty statement.

[pjio]

On one side yes, on the other side those two entrances are now more crowded, making it even worse for handicapped people, possibly for the time to come.

[prirun]

> My dorm building in college had eight entrances, of which two were handicap accessible.

Around 13% of Americans have disabilities according to Google. 25% of the doors at this school were handicap accessible. I don't get "how bad handicap accessibility is" from this example.

Closing 6 doors to comply with a policy of course is completely stupid.

[gameman144]

Did anything actually force the issue though? The comment said that they closed the other six doors, but I don't see any implication that people pushed back in any way that improved the new two-door situation.

[cameldrv]

Handicap accessibility in the U.S. is the best in the world.