That`s got Monty Python written all over it. When they can`t storm the building with no ramp, the ADA SWAT team then begins to angrily attempt to penetrate the evil fortress by sending nasty text messages to the evil empire inside the building. But alas, the messages also can`t break through because the business does not meet ADA compliant text message standards either!
Then, the door to the building opens and a five year old boy comes out, picks a flower, then runs back inside. And now for something completely different.........
Okay...I agree with some of what has been said...and I personally don`t foresee any RAIDS happening over a site that isn`t compliant. I agree that requiring private companies to make their sites accessible is asinine...I DO believe that government sites should be though...and should be required to be. Having some law that requires it for private companies is definitely not the way to go...but I would have to say that for LARGE corporations that cater to LARGE populations (ie: Target, Walmart, etc.) why wouldn`t you want to be accessible??? Approximately 50 million disabled just in the US (and yes...I agree...some of those shouldn`t be on the list) and the approximately 600,000 legally blind (not visually impaired but completely blind) add an additional 2.4 million visually impaired in the US alone...that isn`t counting those around the globe...I would hardly say those are small pickins!?
I agree it should continue to be a choice made by companies on their own grounds and in their own way. I don`t think that making a site accessible requires it to be of prehistoric programming (the internet has only been around for like 10-15 years). I hardly think it will set the internet back to the ice age!? Again though...my question is this...why wouldn`t you want to make your site accessible to as many people as possible!? I think you forget that along with the 2.4 million who are visually impaired you have to add to that the other estimated 70 million who are disabled or mobility challenged across the globe!! No offense...but that hardly seems like a SMALL amount of people!!
Again...I fully agree that it should not be REQUIRED to do such changes...but dude...why the wouldn`t you WANT to!? You are basically alienating, at the VERY minimum, 2.4 million Americans (doesn`t include the rest of the world) from your site and thus your products or services! Aren`t we in this game of business to ATTRACT clients and customers!? Don`t we spend the stupid amount of time and money on creating websites so we can attract more clients and customers?
One principle that seems to be lost in this conversation is the tyranny of the majority. Just a few decades ago, inter-racial marriage was not just frowned upon by the majority. Civil rights as well. It`s pretty easy to be a rich, white male, and believe that the needs of the few should not override the rights of everyone else. In fact, it`s generally easier to be a straight white male than a man or woman of any color. There is so much institutional discrimination in this country that legislation is sometimes required to protect people from the majority. I hear a lot of Rush Limbaugh in some of the comments made here, and America needs fewer people like him. Not more.
On the other hand, we don`t need laws for everything. But that does assume that people are willing to make changes when someone speaks up. There would be no laws against sexual harrassment without the act of sexual harrassment. If more businesses were simply considerate ... perhaps the ADA would not be necessary. But you know what a lot of people hear when they ask for safe passage through society? A chorus of "f*** off". The white male aristocracy in this country - not all of it - has an astonishing sense of entitlement.
Target.com was the subject of a lawsuit brought under the ADA. This is a 25 billion dollar company that can`t make its web site accessible? Maybe the CEO of Target should take a few less flights on that jet of his.