Eff Google

[Heffay]

You forgot the [/sarcasm]

100% legit! I really want to see how this turns out! Don't you?

[goett047]

Good point. Previous statement suspended

[falgore]

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers." -- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1891

Note he said "rulers" not government.

[Stradawhovious]

Actually, I've changed my mind. I think this is a great idea and I think you should pour every available resource into this. Please record/transcribe your conversations with the ACLU and keep a regular update here for us to follow. I also highly recommend contacting the NRA, since they tend to deal with 2nd Amendment issues more reliably than the ACLU (although any red-blooded American really should be a member of both). Good luck, and don't give up the good fight! Keep us posted!

[goett047]

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers." -- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1891

Note he said "rulers" not government.

Objection! Relevance?

[Holland&Holland]

Now that I think about it, I may actually contact the ACLU on the issue. This defiantly needs to go before the court system. No not for punitive damages, but to have our "access" restored.

Are you also going to take Target to court as well? They don't sell guns. Google won't sell guns at their store either. However, you can certainly still search for guns at Google.

get it out of your head google is not a store per say, it is a door access point. comparing Google to target is a onion to a apple. The nature of their business is totally different. Google business is "access to other businesses and information the content Google deals is is not their property in regards to other businesses" Targets business is physical general goods store with limited shelf space.

Actually now I think about it Google may be committing "anti trust" by blocking businesses from fair trade. depends on how it is worded It can be shown how it is antitrust. see being that Google is in the access business. their actions is making it more difficult for gun dealers to trade on a level playing field. Smarter people than me can figure out the wording I can visualize how it is antitrust I just don't know how to put it in to text context. I am visual person.

This would only be true if Google was the only access or are you saying that Google is now public utility?

Even so, do me a favor, go into google, type in "gun" and you will be able to buy as many as you want. Go on, give it a try. It is not that hard.

Seriously I am not trying to insult you but I am starting to get annoyed. You are not the only person to have to deal with a disability in this world and the ADA does not state that the world is fair or equal for all. It states that reasonable accomodations will be made. So quite trying to twist it around. Google has not taken away your ability to browse guns on-line nor have they taken away your ability to purchase a gun on line. What they have done does not affect only the disabled, it affects everyone the same. By your arguement the fact that any business ever makes any change would be illegal because it could affect someone's ability to get what ever they previously offered.

So get over yourself, if you want to buy a gun go on line and do so, if not quite belly aching about wanting to buy guns when all you want to do is complain about not being able to buy a gun that you obviously can buy.

Furthermore, the gun community is a community filled with people who are the most carring and accomodating you will find in any industry. If you are truely having difficulty accessing guns. Post what you want on this site. We have several dealers on here who would bend over backwards to help you. They would likely send you photos ahead of time and them many would be willing to meet you at a location you can get to to make the transaction, that is by far better service than you would ever have gotten off of google.

H&H out

[Heffay]

This would only be true if Google was the only access or are you saying that Google is now public utility?

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what he's saying. And there is no competition for google either. And it's the shopping.google.com part that is the public utility, not the google.com search engine.

[falgore]

This would only be true if Google was the only access or are you saying that Google is now public utility?

Even so, do me a favor, go into google, type in "gun" and you will be able to buy as many as you want. Go on, give it a try. It is not that hard.

Seriously I am not trying to insult you but I am starting to get annoyed. You are not the only person to have to deal with a disability in this world and the ADA does not state that the world is fair or equal for all. It states that reasonable accomodations will be made. So quite trying to twist it around. Google has not taken away your ability to browse guns on-line nor have they taken away your ability to purchase a gun on line. What they have done does not affect only the disabled, it affects everyone the same. By your arguement the fact that any business ever makes any change would be illegal because it could affect someone's ability to get what ever they previously offered.

So get over yourself, if you want to buy a gun go on line and do so, if not quite belly aching about wanting to buy guns when all you want to do is complain about not being able to buy a gun that you obviously can buy.

Furthermore, the gun community is a community filled with people who are the most carring and accomodating you will find in any industry. If you are truely having difficulty accessing guns. Post what you want on this site. We have several dealers on here who would bend over backwards to help you. They would likely send you photos ahead of time and them many would be willing to meet you at a location you can get to to make the transaction, that is by far better service than you would ever have gotten off of google.

H&H out
.

[/quote]
Public accomidation
Yea that was the argument used to justify blacks getting a lesser education that there are more out there The key is NONE are better than Google right now. Thus less equal in their access.

Follow this guy history in regards to the schools separate but not equal. "Thurgood Marshall" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._B ... _Education
What you look at Quote:
"The plaintiffs in Brown asserted that this system of racial separation, while masquerading as providing separate but equal treatment of both white and black Americans, instead perpetuated inferior accommodations, services, and treatment for black Americans. Racial segregation in education varied widely from the 17 states that required racial segregation to the 16 that prohibited it. Brown was influenced by UNESCO's 1950 Statement, signed by a wide variety of internationally renowned scholars, titled The Race Question.[2] This declaration denounced previous attempts at scientifically justifying racism as well as morally condemning racism. Another work that the Supreme Court cited was Gunnar Myrdal's An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (1944). Myrdal had been a signatory of the UNESCO declaration. The research performed by the educational psychologists Kenneth B. Clark and Mamie Phipps Clark also influenced the Court's decision.[3] The Clarks' "doll test" studies presented substantial arguments to the Supreme Court about how segregation had an impact on black schoolchildren's mental status."

how does this regard to disability? Google having no equal, in regard to access, discriminates against a protected class, disabled. Since many disabled can't go physically their access is virtual (GOOGLE) and any other is of lesser access. which is in direct reference to the bold above.

There is a parallels with his landmark winning and my reference to google access vs being told to use a lesser search engine by disabled or people with disabilities..

It isn't about public utility. Google is a "public accommodation". Do you even understand the American with disability act of 1990? been in place for 22 years and it protects in access of 20% of our population and rising as the baby boomers age and get frail.. That was put in place to address public accommodation like google?

title 2
Quote:
"No qualified individual with a disability shall, on the basis of disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any public entity."

Also title 3 which reflects "public accommodation" which Google falls under in trade, commerce, communication, http://www.ada.gov/reg3a.html#Anchor-36000

Now the key is is to link the 3 and boom nail google to the wall, for violating "equal" access, of "public accommodation". I am not a lawyer, But I can see the connections and how the 3 interact. My mom told me I should have been a lawyer. Do you know my response was. I don't know how to "lie" convincingly and I refuse to assist "accused guilty" parties.

bing and google vs other "ACCESS services. Google was superior(brown vs board of ed.) Shows that insisting using a lesser service is unconstitutional in regards to equality of a "protected class". Connect that to the fact that disabled don't have the same resources as normals, which interferes with their ability to physically get to place of public accommodation. So in order for a disabled to have equal access they need to be able to have the same level of access as those going physically, by participating electronically(Google "access", Title 2/3 ADA)

It is not the gun community that is at odds here, in my book. It is GOOGLE refusing to allow "ACCESS" for a "protected class" to "access" of said gun community, when it banned the shopping feature. Especially when that access was there before.

There is clear violation from a protected class stand point.

Then you ask why hasn't anyone done anything yet?

Simple resource limitations of the weak vs taking on Goliath of unlimited resources. This is main reason I have not gone after google myself, on behalf of all disabled, who use electronic means for equal access. With the goal to reinstate our access. To me that is more valuable than punitive damages. if it hit another protected class, like race or women, they would get punitive damages as well on top of the reestablishing rights..

[Holland&Holland]

Your opinion is not fact. Get over it. Google is not a public accomodation and your response shows that you are not as familiar with the americans with disabilities act as you would have us beleive.

If you want to be a lawyer then go to law school. I know serveral lawyers who have made their carreers by NOT lying.

[falgore]

Adding to my previous post.

of saying suck it up and use a lesser service, is inequality . That is what your telling me to do?

Typing in gun and shop is not the same level as using shopping feature

Using standard search take a lot of time .

Just because you feel that it is ok to degrade us to accept being a third class citizen is ok. IT IS NOT TO ME.

Very few disabled get punitive damages awarded. EVEN when it is proven beyond any doubt that discrimination occurred.

I draw the line when said public accommodations interfere with my ability to participate on an equal basis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_men_are_created_equal

If you "think and practice" that this does not apply to all of us BORN in the USA. Then in my book your a traitor. For your weakening the integrity of the Constitution and seriously injuring the parent nation(USA).

Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aiding or involved by such an endeavour.

you "injure" by declaring that not all shall be equal by exclusion or segregating to a lesser class.

Yea your right, its not equal.

Doesn't mean we should quit striving to make it equal. The day we quit striving to make it equal is the day I surrender my citizenship, because USA will not be the nation I grew up being told it was.

[Holland&Holland]

Adding to my previous post.

of saying suck it up and use a lesser service, is inequality . That is what your telling me to do?

Typing in gun and shop is not the same level as using shopping feature

Using standard search take a lot of time .

Just because you feel that it is ok to degrade us to accept being a third class citizen is ok. IT IS NOT TO ME.

Very few disabled get punitive damages awarded. EVEN when it is proven beyond any doubt that discrimination occurred.

I draw the line when said public accommodations interfere with my ability to participate on an equal basis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_men_are_created_equal

If you "think and practice" that this does not apply to all of us BORN in the USA. Then in my book your a traitor. For your weakening the integrity of the Constitution and seriously injuring the parent nation(USA).

Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aiding or involved by such an endeavour.

you "injure" by declaring that not all shall be equal by exclusion or segregating to a lesser class.

Yea your right, its not equal.

Doesn't mean we should quit striving to make it equal. The day we quit striving to make it equal is the day I surrender my citizenship, because USA will not be the nation I grew up being told it was.

Um, when did I say that?

1) Google is not an accomodation, you make like it, but it is not an accomodation, it is a company that can offer what services it wants.

2) The change affects everyone regardless of who they are.

Your arguement is akin to stating that polariod camera's should not have been discontinued because some folks are unable to get to the store to develop film and they do not have the funds to go digital.

Good luck with this arguement.

[goett047]

3) You have all the time in the world as you are too lazy to go out and get a job anyways. Easier to sit at home and troll the internet in someone else's dime.

[falgore]

Your opinion is not fact. Get over it. Google is not a public accomodation and your response shows that you are not as familiar with the americans with disabilities act as you would have us beleive.

If you want to be a lawyer then go to law school. I know serveral lawyers who have made their carreers by NOT lying.

Quote from title 3
"I. Who is Covered by Title III of the ADA

The title III regulation covers --

Public accommodations (i.e., private entities that own, operate, lease, or lease to places of public accommodation),

Commercial facilities, and

Private entities that offer certain examinations and courses related to educational and occupational certification.

Places of public accommodation include over five million private establishments, such as restaurants, hotels, theaters, convention centers, retail stores, shopping centers, dry cleaners, laundromats, pharmacies, doctors' offices, hospitals, museums, libraries, parks, zoos, amusement parks, private schools, day care centers, health spas, and bowling alleys.

Commercial facilities are nonresidential facilities, including office buildings, factories, and warehouses, whose operations affect commerce.

Entities controlled by religious organizations, including places of worship, are not covered.

Private clubs are not covered, except to the extent that the facilities of the private club are made available to customers or patrons of a place of public accommodation.

State and local governments are not covered by the title III regulation, but rather by the Department of Justice's title II regulation."

II. Overview of Requirements

Public accommodations must --

Provide goods and services in an integrated setting, unless separate or different measures are necessary to ensure equal opportunity.

Eliminate unnecessary eligibility standards or rules that deny individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to enjoy the goods and services of a place of public accommodation.

Make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, and procedures that deny equal access to individuals with disabilities, unless a fundamental alteration would result in the nature of the goods and services provided.

Furnish auxiliary aids when necessary to ensure effective communication, unless an undue burden or fundamental alteration would result.

Remove architectural and structural communication barriers in existing facilities where readily achievable.

Provide readily achievable alternative measures when removal of barriers is not readily achievable.

Provide equivalent transportation services and purchase accessible vehicles in certain circumstances.

Maintain accessible features of facilities and equipment.

Design and construct new facilities and, when undertaking alterations, alter existing facilities in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines issued by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board and incorporated in the final Department of Justice title III regulation.

A public accommodation is not required to provide personal devices such as wheelchairs; individually prescribed devices (e.g., prescription eyeglasses or hearing aids); or services of a personal nature including assistance in eating, toileting, or dressing.

A public accommodation may not discriminate against an individual or entity because of the known disability of a person with whom the individual or entity is known to associate.

Commercial facilities are only subject to the requirement that new construction and alterations conform to the ADA Accessibility Guidelines. The other requirements applicable to public accommodations listed above do not apply to commercial facilities.

Private entities offering certain examinations or courses (i.e., those related to applications, licensing, certification, or credentialing for secondary or postsecondary education, professional, or trade purposes) must offer them in an accessible place and manner or offer alternative accessible arrangements.

IV. Eligibility for Goods and Services

In providing goods and services, a public accommodation may not use eligibility requirements that exclude or segregate individuals with disabilities, unless the requirements are necessary for the operation of the public accommodation.

For example, excluding individuals with cerebral palsy from a movie theater or restricting individuals with Down's Syndrome to only certain areas of a restaurant would violate the regulation.

Requirements that tend to screen out individuals with disabilities, such as requiring a blind person to produce a driver's license as the sole means of identification for cashing a check, are also prohibited.

Safety requirements may be imposed only if they are necessary for the safe operation of a place of public accommodation. They must be based on actual risks and not on mere speculation, stereotypes, or generalizations about individuals with disabilities.

For example, an amusement park may impose height requirements for certain rides when required for safety.

Extra charges may not be imposed on individuals with disabilities to cover the costs of measures necessary to ensure nondiscriminatory treatment, such as removing barriers or providing qualified interpreters.

VI. Auxiliary Aids

A public accommodation must provide auxiliary aids and services when they are necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals with hearing, vision, or speech impairments.

"Auxiliary aids" include such services or devices as qualified interpreters, assistive listening headsets, television captioning and decoders, telecommunications devices for deaf persons (TDD's), videotext displays, readers, taped texts, brailled materials, and large print materials.

The auxiliary aid requirement is flexible. For example, a brailled menu is not required, if waiters are instructed to read the menu to blind customers.

Auxiliary aids that would result in an undue burden, (i.e., "significant difficulty or expense") or in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the goods or services are not required by the regulation. However, a public accommodation must still furnish another auxiliary aid, if available, that does not result in a fundamental alteration or an undue burden.

There is a lot more, that is some of the highlights, I was talking about, It is not of my opinion about Google being of public accommodation. And their requiring to follow the ADA. Just because it is a "electronic" DOES NOT exempt them from following the law. They are blocking gun stores alternative access.

The list of public accommodation is a minor example of the extent title 3 covers.

I had to learn this because of my exclusion, when using service animals in public accommodations. It was that or not get food, or doctor, shop, etc.

I am not twisting anything in the ADA just to fit the situation. The ADA was put in place to STOP the kind of exclusion Google is committing. its family friendly policy is in violation, especially when the service "ACCESS" was already there. All they had to do was allow it on the uncensored listing vs safe mode.

difference between ebay and google is google is an access to public information highway. ebay cators to its members clientele not public per say. This is why I had not gone after ebay like I am Google.

If you don't believe me that google is a public accomidation then I strongly encourage you to call the ADA hotline with the department of justice. 1-800-514-0301

OH read this this is from 2010 which directly talks about what I been saying from the department of justice itself
http://www.ada.gov/anprm2010/web%20anprm_2010.htm
Quote:"The Department of Justice (Department) is considering revising the regulations implementing title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA or Act) in order to establish requirements for making the goods, services, facilities, privileges, accommodations, or advantages offered by public accommodations via the Internet, specifically at sites on the World Wide Web (Web), accessible to individuals with disabilities. "

Now google is restricting access to said sites by making it harder to find them. by forcing people to use standard search over shopping feature.

Sorry I stand corrected the above link points out they want to add it because of the fact that so many of the basic services by both government and public accommodation are going online.

Only thing I am guilty of is being ahead of the bell curve. One thing I will not bend on it is clear discrimination on google part. Only fault with my view, is it is not backed by the "LETTER OF THE LAW" but is backed by the spirit of it.

See the law was written in a time that electronic WWW was just taking off and not such an intricate part of society yet. So at the time of writing they did not foresee that so much would be done via web and thus had not written "SPECIFICALLY" to include the web in "Public accommodation..

I live in a city of excess of 100,000 because of things like wallmart and E-commerce, the availability of brick and mortar services has diminished locally as result. Forcing us to either drive excessive distances or turn to the web for equal access to compensate for our resource restrictions.

The following link is a must read....from a law firm web site
ok found a case against net-flix http://www.bennettandbelfort.com/blog/?p=358 That establishes that just because it is electronic doesn't get excluded.
This means we had established that yes google is considered public accommodation based on this case.

Then you add the above move by the DOJ to add to the ADA to strengthen it.

Point is I am not making this **** up, there is case law to support what I am trying to convey here. I am not twisting anything around here. This was decided by a court.

The added benefit is normal people will also have the added access that is meant for us . The same as the ramp curbs for mothers with babies get added benefits
due to making it wheelchair accessible

Quote from previous link:
"More broadly speaking, the takeaway message is that, whether or not a particular website will be required to provide accommodations, individuals with disabilities can now invoke the ADA in their efforts to make the internet more accessible. Internet businesses would be wise to brace for changes that may permit greater access to their content and services. Given that the internet has become a major – if not the major – outlet for entertainment, commerce, and communication for all people, advocates for the disabled believe that the marginal cost of including the handicapped is fairly born by those profiting from the internet boom. They argue that including those with disabilities is a move toward greater accessibility and inclusion – core principles that underscored the signing into law of the ADA by President George H. W. Bush in 1990."

The only way google can save itself, is to remove the shopping feature, all together, for all products.

[Heffay]

/insert popcorn gif here.

[goett047]

...but not enough time just to use the search feature. I totally get it