 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
Member
| Joined: | Wed Apr 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Norwalk, Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 134 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
Sorry tim,
Youhave that backwards.
Those things are done due to public law as they should be becaues they are public property and should be accessable to all... private property is a different animal all toghether..
Where does the government get off telling a private busisnessman what he must or must not do with his property?
Got it. Private businessman. If he doesn't want to provide handicap access, government doesn't have the right to require him to do so. The handicapped who want to shop or visit the establishment should just get over it.
How about, I dunno, sprinkler systems or fire exits? Does the state or local government have a right to mandate those, or as a private businessman can he set up shop in a plywood shanty and force people to work and shop in unsafe conditions?
How about if he doesn't want to serve black people, or women? Can the government force the issue or does the private businessman get to serve only who he wants?
Does a private business that caters to the public get to pick and choose which members of the public it serves? I would argue it doesn't.
In regards to the Gettysburg church, like it or not, there are numerous structural, electrical, and fire standards that new buildings have to meet. Were this an actual historic building, there wouldn't be an issue. As a modern reproduction, however, it has to meet local, state, and federal codes.
Last edited on Sat Jul 31st, 2010 10:54 pm by barrydancer