Disney the segway and the ADA

[Chuck S]

It is not conjecture to say you can not seperate the device from the actions of the user. By definition any device does indeed rely upon the actions/behavior of its user. A shovel is a shovel, but it can't dig a hole without being used by someone. A Segway can not run around the park by itself, it requires a rider.

 

[Gwinfred]

It is conjecture to be unable to provide any evidence at all of what would happen given the unsafe behavior of the user.

What is the potential danger for others when confronting a Segway operator who exhibits unsafe behavior, as compared to a power wheelchair or scooter operator who exhibits unsafe behavior.

This is a perfect example of the attitudes which required the passage of the ADA.

 

[Chuck S]

Well, it is certainly common sense to know that being hit with a metal object traveling at 6mph will do less damage than being hit with a metal object traveling at 12 mph. The Segways weight is appoximately the same as an ECV. If you are hit with an ECV traveling 6 mph you would sustain less damage than an ECV traveling at 12 mph. Simple physics. That weight, along with the weight of the rider, is also distibuted between two points of contact with the ground, vs 3 or 4 with an ECV or wheelchair. Making each contact point bear a heavier load if it runs over a foot. Again, simple physics.

 

[Gwinfred]

It would be common sense (although not necessarily true) to conclude that being hit with the same object would do more damage at 12 mph versus 6 mph.

But we are talking about different objects.

A 350 pound power wheelchair for example which continues to move even after striking someone and can break toes and legs when striking them.

Versus a 84 pound device which stops immediately upon contact with another and has been demonstrated to cause no injury when rolling over anothers fingers.

There is no common sense in comparing apples with oranges.

 

[Gwinfred]

Simple Physics?

Would you rather have an elephant standing on your hand or a lady in high heels?

You keep editing your post above without answering my questions.

Are you sure you're not a member of Congress who goes back and edits in their remarks for the record after they've delivered them from the floor?

 

[Gwinfred]

Well, it is certainly common sense to know that being hit with a metal object traveling at 6mph will do less damage than being hit with a metal object traveling at 12 mph. The Segways weight is appoximately the same as an ECV. If you are hit with an ECV traveling 6 mph you would sustain less damage than an ECV traveling at 12 mph. Simple physics. That weight, along with the weight of the rider, is also distibuted between two points of contact with the ground, vs 3 or 4 with an ECV or wheelchair. Making each contact point bear a heavier load if it runs over a foot. Again, simple physics.

You keep editing your post but you're not answering my questions from below.

 

[Chuck S]

If a Segway strikes an object or human at full speed, it can not stop immediately. An object in motion tends to stay in motion. Segways and their riders at full speed have momentum, there is no way for momentum to vanish in to thin air. If the Segway, traveling at 12mph, were to strike a solid object and suddenly stop the rider would most likely be ejected, as the rider would also be traveling at 12 mph. Just like objects in a car continue moving forward after a crash.

 

[Chuck S]

I edit my posts for spelling, and to add a thought. You simply reply at the same time.

 

[Gwinfred]

If a Segway strikes an object or human at full speed, it can not stop immediately. An object in motion tends to stay in motion. Segways and their riders at full speed have momentum, there is no way for momentum to vanish in to thin air. If the Segway, traveling at 12mph, were to strike a solid object and suddenly stop the rider would most likely be ejected, as the rider would also be traveling at 12 mph. Just like objects in a car continue moving forward after a crash.

that is absolutely correct, however

If the Segway were to strike someone or something the power to propel it forward would cease.

If a power wheelchair or an ECV were to strike something or someone the power to propel it forward would continue until removed by the operator.

Apples and Oranges, bad physics, bad math.

 

[Chuck S]

It would be common sense (although not necessarily true) to conclude that being hit with the same object would do more damage at 12 mph versus 6 mph.

But we are talking about different objects.

A 350 pound power wheelchair for example which continues to move even after striking someone and can break toes and legs when striking them.

Versus a 84 pound device which stops immediately upon contact with another and has been demonstrated to cause no injury when rolling over anothers fingers.

There is no common sense in comparing apples with oranges.

Comapring apples to oranges...the weight of a manned power wheelchair to a riderless Segway?

 

[Gwinfred]

But I do enjoy the debate

 

[Gwinfred]

Comapring apples to oranges...the weight of a manned power wheelchair to a riderless Segway?

Not at all, there are many power chairs out there that weigh more than 300 pounds.

 

[Chuck S]

And there are many ECVs that weigh the same or less than a Segway.

 

[Gwinfred]

Well that may be true but that's not the debate.

For instance the Bounder Plus wheelchair can hold users up to 500 pounds and can travel at 11.6 mph. So the chair weighs over 300 pounds and with a 500 pound rider that would be 800 pounds coming at you 11.6 mph.

Completely permissible for use at Disney.

So how do you like those odds in comparison to someone on a Segway?

 

[Chuck S]

How many of those mega-chairs would you see in comparison to the number of folks on a Segway? And how many would you see being used for joyriding as compared to Segways? We aren't talking about unqualified/untrained drivers. We're talking about a way for Disney to legally tell the difference.

 

[Gwinfred]

Well that's a good question, but with the American obesity problem and more people using the sit down scooters as opposed to stand up devices like the Segway for mobility we will unfortunately probably see more of these mega-chairs than Segways in the future.

I've found most people to be lazy, lazy people don't use Segways they use scooters, even though the Segway is a healthier proposition for them, standing is work.

and by the way I am not implying that all people who use scooters are lazy. scooters are a very valuable mobility tool, they are affordable and effective particularly for those where finance or standing is an issue.

and there are plenty of people who can stand but have mobility problems that shouldn't use a Segway. (In my opinion)

 

[fredkap]

Chuck, Iam glad that we are in agreement that disabled Segway users that will use their Segway in a safe manner are entitled to use their Segway in a Disney park and that the problem is how to keep out non-disabled "joy-riders."

You feel that there should be a certification process. I have a drivers license not a certification. Neither my driving school instructor (going back quite a number of years) nor the State want to be liable for "certifying" that I am a good driver. If Disney were to test Segway users or have them go through their class, could they not be liable for incomplete or poor instruction if someone did something unfortunate after going through their test or class? An organization such as draft (Disabled Rights Advocates for Technology) would also be opening itself up to litigation if it tried to determine who is a qualified disabled person and who isn't. The answer is what is done with all other disabled individuals and service animals etc which is that you ask and rely on the answer.

BTW It appears to be illegal to require a disabled individual to prove that they have insurance. A surprisingly high percentage of Segway owners have insurance. My policy with Progressive costs me $120 and covers both theft and $250,000 worth of liability insurance.

 

[Chuck S]

But the state of CA did give you a drivers license based on the fact that you exibited competency behind the wheel of your car...you had to pass a test. A rose by any other name. Simply because you would carry a certificate that you passed and completed a Segway safety course would not make the state liable any more than they are liable if you have an auto accident. Actually, I think insurance is also a great idea, I didn't know they'd write a policy for Segway use. I wonder why it is illegal to require folks to show proof of insurance or self-insurance to use it in public places...we have to in order to get a car license & tags. Unless Segway theft is a poblem, insurance rates could be highly discounted for those that complete a safety course. There are a lot of changes that could be made to the ADA to make it both more protective for the disabled and easier for public venues to determine who is and is not using a device for medical/mobility issues.

As another poster said, service animals in training have to be identified with special vests. Most service animals also have special harnesses and grip handles, easiliy identifying them as a trained service animal when they are "on duty." It is pretty easy to tell an "in service" animal from a family pet.

 

[Gwinfred]

I wonder why it is illegal to require folks to show proof of insurance or self-insurance to use it in public places...we have to in order to get a car license & tags.

As another poster said, service animals in training have to be identified with special vests. Most service animals also have special harnesses and grip handles, easiliy identifying them as a trained service animal when they are "on duty." It is pretty easy to tell an "in service" animal from a family pet.

I think that one of the reasons that proof of insurance is prohibited for people with disabilities is that when you're using an assistive device that device whether it's a wheelchair or a scooter or a Segway allows you to do things that those without a mobility related disabilities do.

Since we don't require individuals to be insured to walk through the park then there shouldn't be a requirement for people with disabilities to be insured to roll through the park.

With regard to service animals in training, there is absolutely no protection under the ADA for service animals in training, with or without a vest. Service animals are protected, those in training are not. To be sure most of them are accommodated but you can't transport them on an airline unless the airline agrees to allow it to with or without a vest.

And while you are correct that the presence of harnesses and grips are helpful in identifying service animals they like vests are not required and indeed many service animals perform other functions for people with disabilities including opening doors, retrieving items, even dressing them.

So it's not so easy to tell when you see a monkey setting on the shoulder of a guy in a wheelchair.

 

[eternaldisneyfan]

Gwinfred- I must make a correction to your post saying that electric wheelchairs don't stop automatically. I have used an electric wheelchair full-time for 11 years (3 different models from Invacare). Every electric wheelchair has a built in automatic electric brake. Once you let go of the toggle, the brake initiates. The brake stays on until you push the toggle again. I've had employees of Disney and hospital workers try with all their might to push my chair with the automatic electric brake on with no success. You can also pull the toggle backwards to stop faster.

Your comment about service dogs is also incorrect. My mom trained service dogs for the leading provider in Oklahoma. In order to be trained or allowed in a public area, they must have a distinguishing therapeutic vest and a leash. The owner is responsible for the dog's bathroom duties. Miniature Horses (another service animal) are held to the same standards. Monkeys have not been helpful as aids because they cannot be leaned on & used for stability like service animals that help with dressing must be able to. They also are not able to guide the blind...

As far as 'what if's' they are an integral part of law making. In the Student Congress I was involved in, part of the debating of the bill/resolution was to ask what if's and clarifications of the bill/resolution. Also hospitals cover what if's. Ethic committees-what if the patient isn't capable of making a decision?

Power wheelchair danger vs Segway danger tests. This study has a flaw-Unrepresentative Sample. This means that there is not a proper range of Segways being used in indoor public places as compared to power wheelchairs being used in indoor public places to do a proper study. A branch of Psychology is devoted to evaluating the conclusiveness of tests/studies. By their evaluating criteria, this study is null and void.

Finally, I posted this solution twice already:
I do think that qualified and trained people with disabilities should be allowed to use Segways. The solution: Handicap placards numbers are in a system that links the name to the person. My hospital (UCSF) gives free parking to people with disabilities. You give them your placard, they write it down, and your first initial and last name. They check the system to see if it's you. Now what if Disney had the user bring their disability placard & an ID. Then no one could use another person's placard. Then show proof of purchase of the Segway (with date). A certification-'license ' would be ideal but I'd say 6 months use should be enough. Finally, the guest signs a waiver saying they don't hold Disney liable for their injury and take legal responsibility for the injury of other park goers.

Can anyone find a problem with this solution or at least comment on it, now that it's been posted for the third time?