Associated Services For The Blind

Muslim cabbies tell airport they won't bend in alcohol dispute

PATRICK CONDON
Associated Press

BLOOMINGTON, Minn. - For Abdi Mohamed, it's not a question of whether he'll carry passengers with alcohol in his cab. The question is whether he'll get punished for refusing to do so...

...Much of the hearing was dedicated to concerns over whether Muslim cabbies would also refuse service to blind passengers with trained guide dogs, because of Muslim prohibitions against interacting with dogs..."

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities /news/breaking_news/16796944.htm?templat e=contentModules/printstory.jsp

PETA is busy out killing animals in the name of mercy.

2007-03-01 17:48:50 by ursustrader

One of many calls and emails of the day. Associated Services for The Blind & Visual Impaired (215) 627-0600 919 Walnut St Philadelphia, PA ...

I've seen a number of comments from people who are upset because they see people taking a dog into a store or other non-pet-friendly place. They assume that because it's a small dog, or it's a breed they don't associate with service dogs, it must be just a pet. But they don't bother to ask the person whether it's a service dog or not. They just get annoyed and assume that it must be a pet where pets don't belong.

Many people with seizure disorders, deafness, diabetes or panic disorders use service dogs. They aren't just for blind people.

You can't tell by looking at someone whether they suffer from something like seizures or deafness. Not all disabilities are easily visible.

Service dogs are not required by law to be labeled or wear ID showing that they are service dogs, and they can be any breed or size. Other types of animals, such as monkeys, can also be trained as service animals. Service animals are not pets--they are highly trained to offer assistance in mitigating a person's diability.

Why do people assume that if they see a little dog in someone's shopping cart, it must be a pet? A little dog can help with many disability-mitigating tasks just as well as a large dog can.

How can disabled people with service dogs help to educate the public so that they understand that service dogs can be any size and breed, and that they have a right to have their service dog in any public place to assist them with their disability?

I'd like to hear anyone's suggestions on good ways to help educate the public about service dogs and hidden disabilities. How can we make it less of a struggle for people with hidden disabilities to get access to take their service dogs with them wherever they need to go? And, how can we help more people in the general public know how to behave appropriately around service dogs and their handlers (i.e. not harrassing or scowling at the person, not asking them for details of their disability, and not distracting or trying to pet the dog while it's working)?

The ADA's FAQs about service animals: http://www.ada.gov/qasrvc.htm

ADA business brief on service animals: http://www.ada.gov/svcanimb.htm

By federal law, a service dog is not required to wear any sort of identification or be registered or certified, although some individual states do have differing requirements. The ADA supercedes state law.

The problem with requiring a service dog to be certified, marked, etc. is that it can cause barriers for a disabled person. Many disabled people cannot afford to lay out tons of money to get their dog certified or buy special vests, etc. for them. Some dogs don't do well wearing a vest or scarf, especially in hot weather or if they do a task that requires them to be very active.

For seizures, diabetes and many other conditions, dogs are often trained to give the handler a signal to tell them they are about to have a seizure or that their blood sugar is elevated. These are called medical alert dogs.

It can be lifesaving to have a dog tell a person they are about to have a seizure, in time for them to get to a safe place before it hits. No other medical equipment can do this.
No, service dog owners are not required to carry any proof that their dog is a service dog or that the person is disabled, according to the ADA.

The ADA website (links above) says:

"Businesses may ask if an animal is a service animal or ask what tasks the animal has been trained to perform, but cannot require special ID cards for the animal or ask about the person's disability."

"Some, but not all, service animals wear special collars and harnesses. Some, but not all, are licensed or certified and have identification papers. If you are not certain that an animal is a service animal, you may ask the person who has the animal if it is a service animal required because of a disability. . . . documentation generally may not be required."

If you think someone is taking a pet where it shouldn't be, just ask, "Is that a service dog?"

If it is, leave them and their dog alone. If not, feel free to complain to the manager and have the animal removed.
For those wondering what kinds of tasks service dogs do to help people with various disabilities, here's a list of just some of the tasks service dogs commonly do: http://www.iaadp.org/tasks.html

It lists different tasks that are frequently trained for guide dogs, hearing dogs and other kinds of service dogs.
Service dogs are already required to do tasks to mitigate a disability AND to be well-behaved in public by law.

Requiring certification or labeling would add nothing to that except creating more barriers for disabled people. Owner-trained dogs already must meet the same requirements and public access skills as organization-trained dogs.

http://www.iaadp.org/iaadp-ada-training- requirements.html

Anyone can slap a vest on their dog. Dogs aren't robots, and certification is no guarantee that the dog will never misbehave in public.

By law, access for a service dog is dependent on the dog's behavior. It's that simple.

If the dog is behaving appropriately, the worst that happens is that an extremely well-trained pet walks through the store without bothering anyone. If not, it needs to be asked to leave even if it is a service dog.

Better a few well-behaved pets get through than that one disabled person be denied access with their necessary service dog.

I see comments to this asking a few questions.

1.Dogs have been shown to be very good at predicting seizures and alerting their handler before it happens. Dogs can also be trained to get help for a person if they become unconscious, lead them to a safe place, bring their medication, tell a parent a seizure is coming if it is a child...The list goes on.

2.It does not matter what the state laws are regarding Service Animals. Federal law is higher. In the cases where state laws give the most protection to people with disabilities, the state law prevails. For example, if a state says service dogs in training are given the same rights as fully trained service dogs, the state law would prevail because the federal law does not give the same rights to service dogs in training.

I would suggest everyone look it up and learn what is legal in your area. It is best that people assume all animals in stores are Service Animals. Always ask to pet an animal, never talk to the dog without asking the handler, never try to distract a service animal. You never know if your distraction could harm that person the animal is working with.

***Edit***
I am editing my post because of the answers that I have seen here. Owner trained dogs are very common and in some cases better trained than program dogs I have met. Personally my dog is owner trained. Now this does not mean what you think it does. I have not done it all on my own. I have help of a very qualified training team. We take very advanced training classes (competition level classes), work hard every day, video tape training sessions, keep a log about it, ask people in online groups, and meet with other owner trainers to test each others dogs around other dogs.

My dog and I just came back from a trip to Washington DC for 5 days. We were there for a training seminar and meet up of other service dog handlers. I met some dogs that were not so great in training, some that were awesome, and above them all my dog was one of the best trained there.

My dog alerts to two different kinds of attacks before they happen. Some he gives me 20-40 minutes notice for, and the other is only a few minutes before it happens. He has a different alert for each attack. He can guide me to a safe place by being taught to find certain things like benches and exit doors. He can find my car from over 100 yards away if I become disoriented and cannot find it myself. He can find my husband if I need him to get me help. He responds to attacks while they happen to help them be shorter and not as dangerous. He keeps me focused while driving by nosing my arm every few minutes. He can turn around and back under a chair with nothing more than a hand signal. He does almost everything with only a hand signal.

We have worked very hard together, and are still working on some things. We will be working and training forever, perfecting our skills together, becoming even more fluid. He has impressed his trainers on many occasions and impressed me. He has a list of over 100 commands he knows and 20 hand signals, as well as two separate alerts. That is pretty impressive for a young Labrador retriever.

The laws state that certification is not required and there are reasons for such things. Service animals are not required to wear a uniform, and I know plenty who don't vest their dogs just to educate people. It is to make these resources available to everyone who needs them. Now keep in mind that the newest laws protect even more people. Please try to get away from making assumptions about service animals. People I know who owner train their dogs, take 2-3 years to train their dogs and then keep going with it through out the dogs life. Some people start with a puppy, some start with adult dogs.

Not all dogs that come from a program can fit every disability. There just aren't enough schools for that. I also know some people who have admitted to raising a puppy for a school just to try to ruin the dog and get a free puppy out of it.

Also, just because a dog is having a bad day that day or acts out does not mean it is poorly trained. I have run into on at least two occasions a dog that was labeled as a program dog who barked and lunged at my dog who did not react at all. Now that does not mean that dog is not trained, but it does mean that dog was having a bad day. The other incident was of a guide dog nearly pulled his human into a parked car running to get to my dog. I informed the handler that I had a service dog in training with me and she said that explained it. I always inform guide dog users that I am near them with a service dog. But because that dog reacted like that to me does not mean he was not well trained, it just means he might need a refresher course or something. So please don't assume that a dog that misbehaves is not a service dog.

Places of business always have the option to ask a service dog team to leave if they are causing problems. If you have a problem with a service dog team, tell management and inform them that they are within their rights to ask the team to leave. That person is allowed under law to return without the dog that day, but the dog will need to stay in the car or something. This does not mean that person is banned forever, it just means that dog needs some more training before they should come back. If you want to know if a dog is a service dog, just ask. By law you have to take that person's word for it.

For future reference, taking a dog on a plane is a very hard thing to do, and there really is no way to fake it anymore. It does make things harder for the service dog users but I suppose it is worth it in order to have less fakers on planes.

2008-10-11 23:17:41 by Purple_Kangaroo

Obama’s misnamed “Financial Regulatory Reform Plan” is a brazen attempt by the bankers to consolidate their power.




Obama’s plan will be run out of the Treasury under former New York Fed Grand Poobah Timothy Geithner.


Obama — or rather, the bankers who own Obama — has devised something called a “Financial Services Oversight Council” to be chaired by the bankster dominated Treasury Department. This uber-council would call the shots for every financial firm in the country and supposedly refer “emerging risks to the attention of regulators with the authority to respond,” even as Obama plans to call for the U.S. Office of Thrift Supervision to close under the direction of the Federal Reserve.

Instead of independent bank regulators, Obama proposes a “National Bank Supervisor” who would have “separate status within Treasury and be led by a single executive,” according to Clusterstock. The NBS czar would occupy a centralized post in enemy territory and “take over the prudential responsibilities of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which currently charters and supervises nationally chartered banks and federal branches and agencies of foreign banks.”

Next up, Obama tells us he wants to create a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, a laughable proposal if it wasn’t so criminally dishonest. It would be charged with protecting consumers of credit, savings, payment and financial products and services, or so we are expected to believe. It will be another government behemoth beholden to the same financial elite that has so far ransacked the nation to the tune of trillions of dollars.

“The CFPA will be a massive new agency that will impact everyone in the United States in some form,” writes Andrew Busch, a markets strategist at BMO Capital Markets in Chicago. “Providing this much power to one agency is truly frightening as they will get to set the rules and pick the winners/losers for the financial sector.”

You know, the same “winners” now ruling the roost.

Then there is the Office of National Insurance, also to set up camp in the Treasury. It will allegedly improve and broaden the regulation of insurance companies and affiliates on a consolidated basis, including affiliates outside the traditional insurance business, and will offer consistent consumer protection for insurance products and practices.

The excuse for this one is the failure of AIG. On September 16, 2008, AIG suffered a liquidity crisis following the downgrade of its credit rating. It needed a $85 billion credit infusion from the money out of thin air folks over at the Federal Reserve. The Fed basically ended up owning AIG and its boatload of toxic debt.

If you check the Federal Reserve Act, you will see there is nothing in there about the ability to buy up insurance companies. But then, since the Fed is not actually a part of the U.S. government and is a private banking corporation owned by a consortium of private banks, it is not beholden to no stinking act passed in the dead of night during a Christmas recess way back in 1913.

•It wasn’t insurance losses that nearly toppled AIG — it was the actions of secretive unit that caused more than $18 billion in losses for the world’s largest insurance company. AIG Financial Products was run like a hedge fund out of London and Wilton, Connecticut, and specialized in derivatives masquerading as “financial products.”

Do you think the Treasury, run by little Timmy Geithner — who was president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, worked for the master criminals Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers, spent time at the CFR and learned a trick or two under the direction of Herr Kissinger and Associates — will “regulate” derivatives pretending to be “financial products” for insurance customers?

Please.

Wall Street and its international offshore banker overlords are addicted to derivatives. “These derivatives now amount to a total worldwide notional value that can be estimated between 1 quadrillion and two quadrillion US dollars. This sum is so large that it dwarfs the total value of the entire planet earth and all those who live here,” notes Webster G. Tarpley.

If you think Obama and crew plan to do something about this massive black hole, I have a bridge to sell you on Krypton.

Obama’s “Financial Regulatory Reform Plan” is but another bankster scam. It is an obvious plan to grab up more industries and goodies under the guise of “regulation” and (ack) “consumer protection.” So contemptuous of you and your family are the bankers they don’t even attempt to make this threadbare nonsense plausible. It is thievery right out in the open.

Our only hope at this point is the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, HR 1207, now up to 232 co-sponsors. It needs a two-thirds vote with 290 members on board so the bankster tool Obama will not veto it.

On that day of its passage there will be a short cry of hosanna — and then we will open the Fed’s books and begin

Is our president obama relying on americans disinterest in politics to rob the united states blind?

No. President Obama is hiding nothing. He and his administration has been quite transparent about their agenda. His and his administration's agenda has a serious social component which requires a bit of tyranny to be achieved. The agenda is oriented to draw away individual liberty towards central government authority. Their team will use and has used terminology like "personal mandate" or "community focused".

The problem is not public disinterest. The problem is that a large outspoken part of the public favors this agenda. Culturally, the public has grown used to the lowered level of liberty that previous politicians have left them. Giving up a little more freedom in exchange for some government entitlements has huge precedent. LG

2009-06-17 23:21:16 by Slappy~Soundzzz

1. Gender:
2. Age:
3. Location:
4. Occupation
5. Income:
6. How long have you been single?
7. Do you find it difficult to meet men/women?
8. What type of relationship are you looking for?
9. What was the reason for you last break up?
10. Where do you go to meet single people?
11. Do you find it difficult to have or maintain a relationship in your location?
12.What do you think of matchmaking services?
13. Do you or have you ever used a social networking or matchmaking website as a means of dating?
14. What were the advantages or disadvantages associated with that?
15. What would make you consult a matchmaking service?
16. Would you prefer an online or face-to-face matchmaking service? Why?
17. Have you ever tried blind dating or would you ever? Why or why not?
18. What credentials would you expect a professional matchmaker to have? Example: education in matchmaking
19. How much are you willing to pay for a matchmaking service?
20. How do you think matchmaking services can be improved upon?
21. Has somebody ever tried to set you up? Was it successful?

1. female
2. 15
3. usa
4. student
5. none
6. 2 weeks
7. no
8. a boyfriend
9. he cheated
10. school
11. yes
12. ehhh there ok i guess
13. no
14. none
15. if i was 50 never married and a virgin, but im only 15 and not a virgin so im all set
16. online bc less personal
17. havent but would
18. common sense
19. $0
20. haven used one!!!!
21. yes and yes

2008-12-27 18:23:29 by Michelle B

I am applying for law school. The question asks:
"Were you ever accused by an employer, supervisor, or associate, of dishonesty in connection with any employment or occupation, or have you ever been discharged by an employer"

the next question asks "Have you ever been suspended, disqualified or otherwised disciplined as a member of any profession, or military service"

I was fired at an internship working for a Circuit Court. I tried to explain exactly what happened and why I got fired. While truthful, I am aware that my story sounds like a load of crap.

This is what I put (so far), it is the truth. (The Judge was old and blind as a bat). Do you have any suggestions on what I should do or say?

"In the spring semester of my junior year in college I was fired from my internship working at the -th District Circuit Court in NAME, STATE. My job involved pulling files for the judge along with other various administrative tasks.
ince the judge was on vacation, I was allowed to spend some of my time monitoring other cases that occurred in other courtrooms. The incident occurred after I was monitoring a court case in a different judge’s courtroom. During the proceedings, the defendant’s mobile phone rang. It continued to ring throughout the trial (despite the very angry judges warning).

The next morning I got a call from my professor who arranged the internship for me. He notified me that I was fired.
The Judge thought it was my cellphone!

Just explain that you were let go from an internship due to a misunderstanding and then explain the misunderstanding. Being let go from one job for reasons other than dishonesty or something illegal WILL NOT keep you from being admitted to the bar. Trust me.

2007-01-15 07:55:46 by NotoFroto