TexasCHLforum.com

seamusTX wrote:Sorry. It's hard to keep the details straight in a 5-page thread.

But the location is irrelevant. Only a small percentage of the membership of this forum lives in the market of a particular Eyemasters.

If every single Eyemasters posted a valid 30.06 sign, they would be excluding all 6,000 forum members and all 390,000 CHLs (or whatever the number is now); but that seems not to be the case.

- Jim

It is with me. As I said in an earlier post, if one does it, I boycott them all.

seamusTX wrote:That's why some business used to be whites-only, and some resisted the Americans with Disabilities Act, and some still throw out blind people with seeing-eye dogs.

Come on, prove me wrong.

- Jim

Let me see if I can rephrase that so you understand better: Most businesses don't want to lose even one customer.

bdickens wrote:Most businesses don't want to lose even one customer.

I agree (at least business that want to stay in business).

However, when their legal counsel or some upper-management moron has made his mind up to do something, it's difficult to get them to change. After all, in their minds, they made the correct decision the first time.

A few e-mails won't do it. Even a public announcement by a prominent figure or organization rarely works.

This is what it takes:



- Jim

seamusTX wrote:This is what it takes:

DART route 428 running late on Sunday afternoon? Then our problems should all be solved weekly.

seamusTX wrote:That's why some business used to be whites-only, and some resisted the Americans with Disabilities Act, and some still throw out blind people with seeing-eye dogs.

Come on, prove me wrong.

- Jim

Well, there was that one guy swinging his seeing eye dog around over his head by the tail, claiming he was just looking around...

wgoforth wrote:

seamusTX wrote:That's why some business used to be whites-only, and some resisted the Americans with Disabilities Act, and some still throw out blind people with seeing-eye dogs.

Come on, prove me wrong.

- Jim

Well, there was that one guy swinging his seeing eye dog around over his head by the tail, claiming he was just looking around...

A customer was in our Home Depot with a cute little Maltese. He told me that he had taken the dog into Kroger and they had told him that he couldn't bring a dog into the store. He held the dog up and told them it was a seeing eye dog. They responded, "But it's a Maltese!" To which he replied, in shock as he groped around "A Maltese? They gave me a Maltese?" and wandered, still groping, out the door.

jimlongley wrote:

wgoforth wrote:

seamusTX wrote:That's why some business used to be whites-only, and some resisted the Americans with Disabilities Act, and some still throw out blind people with seeing-eye dogs.

Come on, prove me wrong.

- Jim

Well, there was that one guy swinging his seeing eye dog around over his head by the tail, claiming he was just looking around...

A customer was in our Home Depot with a cute little Maltese. He told me that he had taken the dog into Kroger and they had told him that he couldn't bring a dog into the store. He held the dog up and told them it was a seeing eye dog. They responded, "But it's a Maltese!" To which he replied, in shock as he groped around "A Maltese? They gave me a Maltese?" and wandered, still groping, out the door.

LOL, actually, I have heard that story told as a joke for years (but it was a chihuahua in the joke). What's really bad is that our mall here limits the number of children you can bring in the mall at a time to 6.....we have 10 children who are very well behaved, homeschooled. Prejudism and stupidity comes in all flavors.

Could you just say you couldnt SEE the Sign, I mean come on, you are going to Eye masters, its believable.

wgoforth wrote:

jimlongley wrote:

wgoforth wrote:

seamusTX wrote:That's why some business used to be whites-only, and some resisted the Americans with Disabilities Act, and some still throw out blind people with seeing-eye dogs.

Come on, prove me wrong.

- Jim

Well, there was that one guy swinging his seeing eye dog around over his head by the tail, claiming he was just looking around...

A customer was in our Home Depot with a cute little Maltese. He told me that he had taken the dog into Kroger and they had told him that he couldn't bring a dog into the store. He held the dog up and told them it was a seeing eye dog. They responded, "But it's a Maltese!" To which he replied, in shock as he groped around "A Maltese? They gave me a Maltese?" and wandered, still groping, out the door.

LOL, actually, I have heard that story told as a joke for years (but it was a chihuahua in the joke). What's really bad is that our mall here limits the number of children you can bring in the mall at a time to 6.....we have 10 children who are very well behaved, homeschooled. Prejudism and stupidity comes in all flavors.

I would think that would be a form of discrimination. When I was a landlord in Wisconsin I could limit the number of people allowed to live in the apartment but not put a limit on the number of kids.

austinrealtor wrote:well, I got a responce today - sorta. Lady from Eye Care Centers of America called and left a message and asked me to call her back. When I did so about an hour later, got her voice mail. So I guess now we're playing phone tag.

A phone call was more than I was expecting; thought I'd just get a form letter blow off. So I am a bit encouraged that I might actually be given the opportunity to further enlighten someone; but knowing full well they won't likely be changing their policy.

Anyway, it's a start (I hope). Will of course update here when I finally talk to her.

Finally spoke to the woman from Eye Care Centers of America by phone today. She was very nice, but didn't really have any information for me other than a verbal response from those above her that ECCA would keep the signs posted "for the safety of their employees and customers" and because of "liability". I played along and protested a bit to her on the phone, asking if they even understood what a CHL was and who they were excluding? Her role seemed to be merely to transcribe my comments and "pass them along".

Anyway, I've typed a follow up letter with talking points outlining the reasons I feel their "safety" and "liability" reasons hold no water. Not expecting much more, but trying to present our collective disagreement with 30.06 signs in a civil and respectful manner to these corporate higher ups. Gotta fight the good fight, even if there is little hope of any change.

Will of course let y'all know if anything else comes of this.