It's not like they bought tickets, and then got there and they said "nope sorry, you can't ride". It's clearly a policy of Amtrak.. Not like the conductor was in a bad mood. I agree with the policy too, if the kid had a reaction, it would be "on the train crew" (when it shouldn't be) to do something when while his parent is absent and his brother is a minor.. And even then you may likely end up with another law suit if something like that happened.but Amtrak said no when their mother tried to buy tickets.
I totally agree. I also don't think a disability is something physical, like needing a wheelchair, or being mentally disabled. Being deathly allergic to something is not a disability, it's a condition. If the kid is between 13-15 with a nut allergy and could die if there are peanuts onboard, then he really should not be on the train without an adult, if at all.YpsiAmtrakBoy wrote:It's not as bad as it sounds imo..
It's not like they bought tickets, and then got there and they said "nope sorry, you can't ride". It's clearly a policy of Amtrak.. Not like the conductor was in a bad mood. I agree with the policy too, if the kid had a reaction, it would be "on the train crew" (when it shouldn't be) to do something when while his parent is absent and his brother is a minor.. And even then you may likely end up with another law suit if something like that happened.but Amtrak said no when their mother tried to buy tickets.
Honstly the way society is going just bugs the crap out of me.. It's all about "me me me" and no one cares to follow rules that are plain as day. Amtrak will probably just pay hush money or give the kid a ticket and we will be on our way.. but seriously just read the rules and follow them, what are you teaching your kids by suing when you don't get your way?
I think I first heard about not bringing nuts in 5th or 6th grade... that'd be about 2000 or 2001, collecting the information is even newer than that. It took them a few years to go from "please don't bring them" to "any allergies to food that we should be aware of". The bigger problem is why all these folks suddenly have all these allergies to food, particularly peanuts.MQT3001 wrote:This is why schools collect these sort of medical things before each year: so they can handle reactions knowing what it is. Obviously schools must be able to respond for simple logistics reasons (parents can't all be there!), and kids are there long-term and schools tend to have a medical response team nowadays. But imagine if Amtrak had a reaction on board? What is the cause? How do we treat it? Now we need medical folks on board. And paperwork on each passenger. Seems clear to me why their policy is the way it is: so someone with knowledge of how to deal with it is there in case.
There might be more, but it seems to me that has at least something to do with it...
Not trying to be ignorant of the situation or the danger of some allergies (I did allergy shots for over a decade) but I think it would suck to eat something, only to find out you are allergic to it, but before you start having your reaction you like the food. Like if a young kid ate a PB&J only to find out he can't have peanuts.ns8401 wrote:I think I first heard about not bringing nuts in 5th or 6th grade... that'd be about 2000 or 2001, collecting the information is even newer than that. It took them a few years to go from "please don't bring them" to "any allergies to food that we should be aware of". The bigger problem is why all these folks suddenly have all these allergies to food, particularly peanuts.MQT3001 wrote:This is why schools collect these sort of medical things before each year: so they can handle reactions knowing what it is. Obviously schools must be able to respond for simple logistics reasons (parents can't all be there!), and kids are there long-term and schools tend to have a medical response team nowadays. But imagine if Amtrak had a reaction on board? What is the cause? How do we treat it? Now we need medical folks on board. And paperwork on each passenger. Seems clear to me why their policy is the way it is: so someone with knowledge of how to deal with it is there in case.
There might be more, but it seems to me that has at least something to do with it...
It would be apparent right away from what I understand, I know these things can develop and come and go but still.MQT1223 wrote:Not trying to be ignorant of the situation or the danger of some allergies (I did allergy shots for over a decade) but I think it would suck to eat something, only to find out you are allergic to it, but before you start having your reaction you like the food. Like if a young kid ate a PB&J only to find out he can't have peanuts.ns8401 wrote:I think I first heard about not bringing nuts in 5th or 6th grade... that'd be about 2000 or 2001, collecting the information is even newer than that. It took them a few years to go from "please don't bring them" to "any allergies to food that we should be aware of". The bigger problem is why all these folks suddenly have all these allergies to food, particularly peanuts.MQT3001 wrote:This is why schools collect these sort of medical things before each year: so they can handle reactions knowing what it is. Obviously schools must be able to respond for simple logistics reasons (parents can't all be there!), and kids are there long-term and schools tend to have a medical response team nowadays. But imagine if Amtrak had a reaction on board? What is the cause? How do we treat it? Now we need medical folks on board. And paperwork on each passenger. Seems clear to me why their policy is the way it is: so someone with knowledge of how to deal with it is there in case.
There might be more, but it seems to me that has at least something to do with it...
I never heard about food allergies in school I graduated from high school in 1990.ns8401 wrote: I think I first heard about not bringing nuts in 5th or 6th grade... that'd be about 2000 or 2001, collecting the information is even newer than that. It took them a few years to go from "please don't bring them" to "any allergies to food that we should be aware of". The bigger problem is why all these folks suddenly have all these allergies to food, particularly peanuts.
I've heard pollution may not help much either but I have heard the not-enough germs argument too, I think they don't know what really is doing it. They served peanut butter sandwiches to us until I got out of 5th grade in 2001 in Ann Arbor. They were more like Graham Cracker sandwiches... not actually that bad. But the first kid I remember with it was that year and I remember the teacher getting up there and practically begging us not to bring anything with peanuts to school. Now I understand they have an entire table at the elementary school that is peanut free.Jochs wrote:I never heard about food allergies in school I graduated from high school in 1990.ns8401 wrote: I think I first heard about not bringing nuts in 5th or 6th grade... that'd be about 2000 or 2001, collecting the information is even newer than that. It took them a few years to go from "please don't bring them" to "any allergies to food that we should be aware of". The bigger problem is why all these folks suddenly have all these allergies to food, particularly peanuts.
Schools sometimes served peanut butter sandwiches for lunch, and there was no issue with food allergies. (I think the only issue with the peanut butter sandwiches was that they were prepackaged and stale...but that's a whole different issue.)
At Halloween, there was no restriction on candy you could bring to school. I'm sure many schools would not allow Snickers or Peanut M&Ms.
I'm not sure why there are so many cases of food allergies now, unless it has something to do with hand sanitizers and having to have everything "germ free.", thus preventing kids' immune systems from developing strongly.
Back when I was in elementary school we had a table for kids with peanut allergies with a giant paper peanut on it that said "NO PEANUTS". When middle school and high school came around it was all about Latex. No Latex balloons in schools.Jochs wrote:I never heard about food allergies in school I graduated from high school in 1990.ns8401 wrote: I think I first heard about not bringing nuts in 5th or 6th grade... that'd be about 2000 or 2001, collecting the information is even newer than that. It took them a few years to go from "please don't bring them" to "any allergies to food that we should be aware of". The bigger problem is why all these folks suddenly have all these allergies to food, particularly peanuts.
Schools sometimes served peanut butter sandwiches for lunch, and there was no issue with food allergies. (I think the only issue with the peanut butter sandwiches was that they were prepackaged and stale...but that's a whole different issue.)
At Halloween, there was no restriction on candy you could bring to school. I'm sure many schools would not allow Snickers or Peanut M&Ms.
I'm not sure why there are so many cases of food allergies now, unless it has something to do with hand sanitizers and having to have everything "germ free.", thus preventing kids' immune systems from developing strongly.
Or somebody got fed with a silver spoon as a kid and thinks that they can get whatever they want when they want it. When someone tells them no they gotta throw a fit.ConrailMan5 wrote:This may come across as ignorant, but I'm assuming that the penut allergy is a self reporting policy. Why even bother to report that the kid has the allergy? He gets a to ride, odds are he won't have an issue, and if he does most responsible people are prepared for such a situation by themselves if they are aware of their allergy. No lawsuit, everybody gets along just fine.
But judging by the fact that they are suing, I'm going to go out on a limb and say these people generally don't like to take responsibility for their own actions. This just makes me sick.
Right. It's well understood throughout society that peanut allergies exist. The airlines don't even ask. When a person makes a big deal of notifying Amtrak in advance that they're bringing a peanut allergy person on board: they are trying to transfer responsibility for this onto Amtrak, and want to formally record this fact so they can use it in a lawsuit later.ConrailMan5 wrote:This may come across as ignorant, but I'm assuming that the penut allergy is a self reporting policy. Why even bother to report that the kid has the allergy? He gets a to ride, odds are he won't have an issue, and if he does most responsible people are prepared for such a situation by themselves if they are aware of their allergy. No lawsuit, everybody gets along just fine.
Don't get sick on society for that. Suing someone DOESN'T mean they'll win. It only means they paid the $31 filing fee at the courthouse. We can't judge America's core values by what some fringenut does with his $31.But judging by the fact that they are suing, I'm going to go out on a limb and say these people generally don't like to take responsibility for their own actions. This just makes me sick.
But how do you know that's what they are trying to do by notifying Amtrak in advance? Is it not also possible they really were doing just that? Of the three that you listed, Prenda is in some form still rolling as a case, they are on the contempt charges and it's expected out in 2015. Righthaven is required reading in media law courses now that it is mercifully dead. Molski is like Robert Davis who files all sorts of lawsuits in Detroit, mainly against actions by the city the so-called "activist" doesn't like.Robert MacDowell wrote:Right. It's well understood throughout society that peanut allergies exist. The airlines don't even ask. When a person makes a big deal of notifying Amtrak in advance that they're bringing a peanut allergy person on board: they are trying to transfer responsibility for this onto Amtrak, and want to formally record this fact so they can use it in a lawsuit later.ConrailMan5 wrote:This may come across as ignorant, but I'm assuming that the penut allergy is a self reporting policy. Why even bother to report that the kid has the allergy? He gets a to ride, odds are he won't have an issue, and if he does most responsible people are prepared for such a situation by themselves if they are aware of their allergy. No lawsuit, everybody gets along just fine.
That ALONE is reason to refuse them.
Don't get sick on society for that. Suing someone DOESN'T mean they'll win. It only means they paid the $31 filing fee at the courthouse. We can't judge America's core values by what some fringenut does with his $31.But judging by the fact that they are suing, I'm going to go out on a limb and say these people generally don't like to take responsibility for their own actions. This just makes me sick.
Now, if you take a look at cases where the gavel actually falls, you see reason. Look up Mokski, Righthaven, Prenda and enjoy the sight of a judge dispensing righteous whoop-ass upon a troll. The system works.
You should be sick about the coward losers who settle with trolls. They encourage it which spreads the disease, just as irresponsible as the "ebola, fly anyway" woman. They are cowards because they didn't stop it, and losers because they paid instead of winning sanctions.
Anyway back to OP, you can't refuse to carry someone protected by ADA, but you can refuse people with a reputation as a lawsuit troll. If Amtrak can show they were aware this person likes to engage in troll lawsuits, they are in the clear.
Of course ADA lawsuits are useless for trolling because they only force compliance, they don't allow the award of money judgments. That's on purpose to prevent lawsuit trolls. That's also true in Federal court. I don't see any payday here. This seems to be a "social justice warrior" thing.
Your allegorical description of the chance of contracting Ebola is probably accurate, for the time being. The problem with epidemics is that they spread. Each victim CAN infect dozens more. We are in the early phases of this epidemic. Time will tell how far and how fast Ebola will spread. I am not advocating mass hysteria or draconian measures. We all need to be aware of the issue and take the proper precautions. We should all get our flu shot as well.ns8401 wrote: You have better odds of winning the lottery while you simultaneously repeat Ben Franklins "Key" experiment then getting this virus.
Agreed, I think it's slow spread here (6th person now) is an indication of how hard it truly is. None of those 6 are outside the medical community with direct exposure to someone in the epicenter.Standard Railfan wrote:Your allegorical description of the chance of contracting Ebola is probably accurate, for the time being. The problem with epidemics is that they spread. Each victim CAN infect dozens more. We are in the early phases of this epidemic. Time will tell how far and how fast Ebola will spread. I am not advocating mass hysteria or draconian measures. We all need to be aware of the issue and take the proper precautions. We should all get our flu shot as well.ns8401 wrote: You have better odds of winning the lottery while you simultaneously repeat Ben Franklins "Key" experiment then getting this virus.
You guys ever read Tom Clancy's book, Executive Orders? Someone went to a lot of work to orchestrate a terror event in the US using Ebola in the book, but the things preventing the spread of the disease in real life are pretty much the same things that worked against it in the book as well. Even though it was written almost 20 years ago, it seemed to have a more accurate game plan for dealing with the disease than the health care system had in place...ns8401 wrote:Agreed, I think it's slow spread here (6th person now) is an indication of how hard it truly is. None of those 6 are outside the medical community with direct exposure to someone in the epicenter.Standard Railfan wrote:Your allegorical description of the chance of contracting Ebola is probably accurate, for the time being. The problem with epidemics is that they spread. Each victim CAN infect dozens more. We are in the early phases of this epidemic. Time will tell how far and how fast Ebola will spread. I am not advocating mass hysteria or draconian measures. We all need to be aware of the issue and take the proper precautions. We should all get our flu shot as well.ns8401 wrote: You have better odds of winning the lottery while you simultaneously repeat Ben Franklins "Key" experiment then getting this virus.
