Perhaps one of the reasons why we don't have traveling academy's anymore

[swampgator]

I don't find the current solution a win for either Mr. Huntley or SS. What really bothers me is that we have someone who is physically impaired, but maybe not sufficiently to stop using this type of tool. Who determines if this person is able to perform safely on this type of machine? Which functions is he to be restricted from as a result of his impairment? This list of questions could go on and on. But, the point is rather clear.

If SS should take on a signer to the TA, then the company is giving the appearance of supporting impaired users to use this equipment. If they take on a signer, the company would have the expense employing this person, paying traveling expenses, maybe have to have a special insurance like doctors in the event of one of these impaired folks get injured and then file a suit against the company. Should we set up some kind of laws that prohibit folks who are so impaired by sight, hearing, mobility or dexterity like the states don't allow blind people to drive? If the person is impaired, they need to learn to live with that restriction and we shouldn't need someone with authority to tell us not to jump the Grand Canyon. But, then some folks will try to jump the Grand Canyon without safe guards or practical assistance. The same should be that folks who have extremely poor hearing or sight not operate a table saw, shaper or any component that could produce of serious endangerment. Sorry, when life slows you down, you need to take some responsibility for your own safety.

Some months back, I did see in a woodworking magazine who has Multiple Sclerosis (MS) use his wheelchair to get to his stool to park himself in front of his power tools. From living with a wife who has MS, these folks should not be around table saws and such because of the lack of dexterity. JMHO.

[woodburner]

And the blame game keeps on going.

If you are that concerned that Mr. Huntley, a person with a hearing impairment, brought the TA to a halt, then write a letter to Shopsmith and ask them. Enough with the guessing and blaming. If you really need to know, contact them.

I myself have had surgery that required a spinal fusion. I now have to walk with the help of a cane. Does that mean I should not be a woodworker because I cannot stand for long peroids of time, or I walk a bit slower these days? NO! I was born with hip dysplasia and have suffered on and off all my life with it, but I haven't let it stop me from anything I have wanted to do in my life.

It is my knowledge, from my friend Rick Davis (the last TA instructor Shopsmith had on their payroll) it was money, the lack of it, that brought the TA to an end. If you all remember, that was the same reason Nick Engler's online program came to an end. Or, was it because someone who was blind couldn't watch it on a computer?

I also read the comment that because it has been three years since the ADA papers were signed, and that was the probation length, that now it is hopeful Shopsmith can start the TA program again. The ADA papers have nothing to do with it. This legal document did not stop Shopsmith from conducting the TA program. The program was able to continue with the conditions agreed to.

To Dusty: Yes, you did in your own way blame Mr. Huntely for the end of the TA. You also blamed him for others not being able to attend the TA classes because Shopsmith put an end to them. You also went so far as to blame people with disabilities (quote: those few) for causing the majority of the public to go without certain things. Dusty, and everyone else here who is judging Mr Huntely unfairly, be grateful you are not in the same position as Mr Huntely, myself, and all the others out there who do their best to live a normal life under extraordinary conditions. Don't judge until you've walked in our shoes for just one minute, and then times that with a lifetime.

The ADA papers show that Mr. Huntely did request help. It also shows that Shopsmith failed to comply with his request. A big plus side for Shopsmith though is that they agreed that they will not overlook the physical needs of those who attend any future functions promoted by them. To me, that is a big feather in their cap.

To those who are blaming a person with a disabilty for the end of a program that Shopsmith did not need to end, except by their own choice, shame on you.

[foxtrapper]

Some months back, I did see in a woodworking magazine who has Multiple Sclerosis (MS) use his wheelchair to get to his stool to park himself in front of his power tools. From living with a wife who has MS, these folks should not be around table saws and such because of the lack of dexterity. JMHO.

Since I have MS, I find myself tempted to write a rather scathing reply.

Entertaining how the very same folk who rail *against* the sawstop thingie are quite enthusiastic about taking tools away from people...in the name of "safety".

How very.... thoughtfull.

[dusty]

"Perhaps one of the reasons why we don't have traveling academy's anymore"

This was the starting premise of this thread with which I happen to agree.

And after reading my contributions to the thread several times, I now acknowledge that I expressed that blame several times throughout the thread.

However, I continue to believe that situations like these do not belong in court.

Perhaps Mr Huntley was angered by not being provided a signer so that he could benefit from the TA but he was not injured (by Shopsmith). He signed up for the class knowing exactly what it was and what was being offered.

Therefore, it is my opinion that Shopsmith owed him nothing.

It is also my opinionthat incidents like this make it difficult for Shopsmith (any small company) to remain in business.

No, I do not know that this played directly into the demise of Shopsmith's Traveling Academy. Financial issues are far more likely the real cause. But having had the potential expense of this settlement imposed by the ADA (our Government) certainly does nothing to help them decide to return either.

Foxtrapper: Thank you for your posting. It has really made me ponder on how I feel about people and on how I react to things I can not control.

[8iowa]

I didn't realize that my posting would become such a highly debated topic. This was certainly not my intention. I'll emphasize my original premise, which was "perhaps".

That said, this week-end, along with my son and son-in-law, I'll be attending the Woodworkers in America conference in Covington, KY. I was there last year, and although the convention center complies with the requirements of the ADA, there were no "signers" in the classrooms or vendors hall.

This is not to criticize Popular Woodworking magazine. Virtually every woodworking show and many other types of conventions and classes are vulnerable to lawsuits as well.

[dusty]

I didn't realize that my posting would become such a highly debated topic. This was certainly not my intention. I'll emphasize my original premise, which was "perhaps".

That said, this week-end, along with my son and son-in-law, I'll be attending the Woodworkers in America conference in Covington, KY. I was there last year, and although the convention center complies with the requirements of the ADA, there were no "signers" in the classrooms or vendors hall.

This is not to criticize Popular Woodworking magazine. Virtually every woodworking show and many other types of conventions and classes are vulnerable to lawsuits as well.

You posted BUT you are not responsible for the activity the ensued. Each of us, when we respond, are responsible for what we write here. I readily accept that responsibility.

I am not surprised at all that there are no "signers" at the convention. As I implied earlier, if someone needs a "signer", that someone should be the one who provides same. My opinion and I'm sticking to it.

As for vulnerability to lawsuits, yes we are. The legal system has done well to make sure of that. We have become a greedy society that seems to believe we as individuals have "no responsibility for ourselves".

[JPG]

You posted BUT you are not responsible for the activity the ensued. Each of us, when we respond, are responsible for what we write here. I readily accept that responsibility.

I am not surprised at all that there are no "signers" at the convention. As I implied earlier, if someone needs a "signer", that someone should be the one who provides same. My opinion and I'm sticking to it.

As for vulnerability to lawsuits, yes we are. The legal system has done well to make sure of that. We have become a greedy society that seems to believe we as individuals have "no responsibility for ourselves".

Amen!!!!!!!!

[foxtrapper]

Actually, there may well have been signers (called "interpreters" actually) there, and you just didn't see them. They tend not to sign if there is no one there to sign to.

ADA is just plain murky. There is no single hard and fast rule about what acomodations have to be made. But lets play and explore a little with it.

First, there has to be a need, or the reasonable expectation of a need. If there is no deaf person present, an interpreter doesn't need to be there.

Second is effectiveness. You don't see interpreters at Home Depot because communication with a deaf person can be accomplished via a pencil and paper. That is sufficient...usually. It is for shopping at Home Depot. It wouldn't be in a classroom. There an interpreter or closed captioning would be needed.

Third is size. A large corporation with comparatively deep pockets and more significant public involvement is held to a higher standard than a small sole proprietership. That's why a department store has to have wide aisles, to accomodate wheelchairs, while a home based plumber can indeed operate out of his attic if he wishes. Though that plumber cannot run away from a wheelchair bound customer and hide in his attic just to avoid them.

This link is one of the simplest and clearest explanations I've run across for ADA, and ADA and deafness. It's good, clear and short.
http://www.coloradodeafcommission.com/P ... s%2008.pdf

Dusty, I tip my hat to you sir. Your introspective ponderings are a tribute to the character of the man. While I may disagree with your conclusions, I respect your willingness to reconsider your words and actions and thinking. A very admirable trait.

[swampgator]

You posted BUT you are not responsible for the activity the ensued. Each of us, when we respond, are responsible for what we write here. I readily accept that responsibility.

I am not surprised at all that there are no "signers" at the convention. As I implied earlier, if someone needs a "signer", that someone should be the one who provides same. My opinion and I'm sticking to it.

As for vulnerability to lawsuits, yes we are. The legal system has done well to make sure of that. We have become a greedy society that seems to believe we as individuals have "no responsibility for ourselves".

Amen to that! If it is not safe to do it, then don't. Easy.

Foxtrapper, sorry that you have MS. It is an illness that can be extremely minor to seriously major and for years. I have been facilitating a support group for the past 7 years, was involved in another support group for 10 years. I have been around several hundred folks with it. My point is, when the user realizes it is not safe for him/her they should back off. Another option is to apprentice someone by giving instruction and observing. This way, they can still get some satisfaction of getting the task completed and someone else learned. Let's stop putting companies out of business or offshore because we don't take personal responsibility.
Again, MHO.

[curiousgeorge]

I know a man in Australia (Tom O'donnel) that teaches a routing class to blind students. Believe it or not they turn out some beautiful work. My point being that no one (especially the government) owes you anything. If you really want to do something it is up to you and no one else to find a way to do it. Being handicapped is a terrible burden but, IMHO, it should not be used to force someone else to make up for it for you.