MFFY du jour...

Big Bill > wrote in
:

> On 14 Mar 2005 15:07:44 GMT, Jim Yanik .> wrote:
>
>>Big Bill > wrote in
m:
>>
>>> On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 21:47:50 GMT, Arif Khokar >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Big Bill wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also no medical knowledge.
>>>>> But don't let that stop you.
>>>>
>>>>Would the reason you're alluding to have anything to do with
>>>>claudication? If so, a periphral vascular bypass operation should
>>>>solve that problem.
>>>
>>> You and Daniel are showing a problem in your attitudes and
>>> knowledge. It's not up to you to make any judgements in the use of
>>> handicapped plates/plackards, or offer medical advice. That's a
>>> verifiable fact.
>>>
>>
>>As citizens,we have every right to make judgements.
>>Or question a possible misuse of handicapped placards or parking
>>spaces.
>
> Ok, let's take that at face value. You have that right.
> Is it a smart thing to make those judgements public, and defend them
> after it's been shown that you don't have the wherewithall to make
> such judgements accurately?

But it has NOT been shown.
People CAN tell when a person is definitely not handicapped,without the
benefit of medical files.
The system is definitely abused.

> I think not.
> Obviously, others disagree.
>

There should be expiration dates on all handicapped tags,with a limited
lifetime.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

>>> I think you need to read better.
>>> I have a handicap plate.

>> A handicap plate on your vehicle does not mean that anyone driving it
>> is entitled to park in handicap spaces, even if he isn't handicapped.
>> And in fact, a lot of these vehicles are used by family and friends who
>> aren't, who then cheat. If you don't believe it, pull your head out.

> A caveat, which I just learned last night: able-bodied drivers are allowed
> to use the handicap spots if the car has plates or a placard, and if they
> are transporting someone who is handicapped.

I have no objection to that. A lot of handicapped folks need somebody
else to drive them around.

Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:10:14 GMT, "Skip Elliott Bowman"
> > wrote:
>
>>>>How many aliases do you have?
>>>
>>> You sound confused.
>>
>>I am. I thought you were Scott, but then when I ask a question of
>>someone else you answer as if you were them.
>
> We've covered this ground before. If you want to get answers SOLELY
> from one person, I recommend you use email. When you post to this
> group, it's fair game for anyone to answer.
>
>>Yes. You embroidered on that point, though--I never once said he
>>should just sit there and block a lane for 20 minutes. You made
that
>>up. What, you've never stopped to drop someone off and blocked a
lane
>>(never more than 15 seconds) before?
>>
>>Am I right about you having only able-bodied people in your
>>family/circle of friends?
>
> It's clear that this is the case for you. Otherwise you wouldn't
have
> this ridiculous notion that it takes only 15 seconds for a
> wheelchair-bound person to exit a vehicle.
>
>

I drive senior citizens, it takes anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes to
load or unload a wheel-chair. Some of our customers require being
escourted to the door of the establishment, blind for instance.

DYM

"Jim Yanik" .> wrote
> There should be expiration dates on all handicapped tags,with a limited
> lifetime.

AFAIK, there is (in WA state). The original application filled out by the
MD has a permanent or expiration. The DOL issues the permit (or re-issues
them yearly) based on that. HarryK may have more specific info.

Floyd

fbloogyudsr wrote:
> "Jim Yanik" .> wrote
> > There should be expiration dates on all handicapped tags,with a
limited
> > lifetime.
>
> AFAIK, there is (in WA state). The original application filled out
by the
> MD has a permanent or expiration. The DOL issues the permit (or
re-issues
> them yearly) based on that. HarryK may have more specific info.
>
> Floyd

Gee thanks. I had to put shoes on and stagger out to the garage to
check. Just got off the garage roof from re-roofing.

Yes, WA does have expiration. It is punched into the card rather
prominently so can't be faked. I don't know how often it gets renewed,
hers is currently good to Mar 06 and she -thinks- she gets a new one
every 3 years.

There are also temporary ones. I had one last year after some hip
surgery, good for, IIRC, 6 months and a disctinctly different color.

Harry K

Big Bill wrote:
>
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:43:18 -0800, The Real Bev
> > wrote:
>
> >Arrogance (like greed) is in the mind of the wimpy observer. Each of us
> >deeply disapproves of those who are seen to be milking the system in
> >ways that we ourselves cannot do.
>
> I think you need to read better.
> I have a handicap plate.

I saw that. You did something really difficult that you should be proud
of, but you come off as a whiner. Doesn't make sense.

--
Cheers,
Bev
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Save the whales for dessert

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:29:37 GMT, "Skip Elliott Bowman"
> > wrote:
>
>>>>I'll rephrase: the plates and placards are for the cars used by the
>>>>people
>>>>who drive but can't walk a long distance.
>>>
>>> Not solely. As has been pointed out to you already (by multiple
>>> people), "abled" drivers are also allowed to park in these spaces when
>>> transporting the handicapped.
>>>
>>> If you have facts to the contrary, you are hereby called upon to cite
>>> them.
>>
>>I've been informed by an expert on Oregon Revised Statutes (my wife, who
>>used to be in the legislature) that I've held the wrong idea. It seems
>>you
>>and the others are right about this; people transporting the handicapped
>>and
>>have plates or placards are allowed to use those handicap spots.
>
> That was very gracious. My respect for you just went up a couple
> notches.
>
> I would like to apologize for calling you a moron earlier.
>

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:29:37 GMT, "Skip Elliott Bowman"
> > wrote:

>>> If you have facts to the contrary, you are hereby called upon to cite
>>> them.
>>
>>I've been informed by an expert on Oregon Revised Statutes (my wife, who
>>used to be in the legislature) that I've held the wrong idea. It seems
>>you
>>and the others are right about this; people transporting the handicapped
>>and
>>have plates or placards are allowed to use those handicap spots.
>
> That was very gracious. My respect for you just went up a couple
> notches.
>
> I would like to apologize for calling you a moron earlier.

I knew if I waited long enough and dug deep enough, I'd find some class in
there Don't ever change.

"Daniel J. Stern" wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, The Real Bev wrote:
>
> > > Because anyone sufficiently hale and hearty to climb up into (and down
> > > out of) a monster truck, and operate its manual transmission, is
> > > almost certainly sufficiently hale and hearty to walk seven additional
> > > parking spaces to the goddamned grocery.
> >
> > Suppose the truck belongs to a newly blind (gasoline explosion, maybe)
> > person who has a friend drive him/her to the market?
>
> ...which would of course explain why the *lone* driver parks the truck in
> the handicap space, hops down, saunters jauntily into the coffee shop,
> flirts with the barista, orders something expensive, saunters jauntily
> back out to the parking lot, climbs up into the driver's seat and drives
> off, right?

Sure, why not as long as (s)he's blind? Probably needs a tall vehicle
so (s)he can use those Braille drive-up ATM machines. Ain't technology
wonderful?

--
Cheers,
Bev
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Save the whales for dessert

Matthew Russotto wrote:
>
> In article .com>,
> The Office Jet > wrote:
> >Nothing makes me more angry than when someone parks in a handicap spot
> >without being handicapped.
>
> After having limped past (sometimes on crutches) acres of empty
> handicapped spots after a hip operation, I say to hell with it. The
> handicapped spots weren't there for me when I could have used them,

You could have got a temporary placard. Didn't your doc mention that?
Probably not, they're not all that attuned to reality...

> so why (aside from the fine) should I give them any respect? Most of the
> time they're used, they're used by reasonably-healthy people anyway
> (limped past a few of them as well).
>
> --
> There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
> result in a fully-depreciated one.

Isn't that 'fully-deductible'?

--
Cheers,
Bev
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Save the whales for dessert