Not necessarily, but the state then requires proof that the reduced hearing (1) does not impact balance, and (2) can be compensated sufficiently by the driver (e.g. actively looking out for blinking blue lights because they cannot hear the horn of police/ambulance/fire brigade vehicles).

[–] rtxn 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You don't?

We have to show that an imperfect hearing is not a hindrance, e.g. you won't hear a siren coming from the left when it's from the right.

[–] captainlezbian 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Nah I’m hard of hearing and allowed to drive without hearing aids. All our traffic signals are predominantly visual and sirens are treated as a secondary component to the flashing lights. Hell, cops often only use the auditory components when the visual has failed, the visual never fails for me because I understand that I absolutely must rely on my eyes when driving.

So actually this is an area of professional interest to me and yeah, it’s often horrifying how easily many systems could incorporate visual sirening but choose not to. Fire alarms have flashing lights in every workplace in my country, but tornado sirens basically never do.

In as car centric of a country as America it would be a fairly extreme injustice to prohibit the deaf from driving if we’re able to effectively use visual signals within a reasonable margin of error (I’d say so long as our best drivers are better than the average hearing driver)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

i mean, in fairness, how would you incorporate non auditory sirens into a tornado siren?

[–] captainlezbian 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Flashing blue lights with a pattern mirroring the rhythm of the siren. So a slow undulation of luminosity of blue lights. If you see something like that out of nowhere you’re gonna know something is wrong, it isn’t a fire, and if you don’t recognize the pattern to do as others are.

As a bonus, put them under the fire lights with a blue backing and the word tornado in white.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

ok and what do you do when you are not in range of a tornado siren to see it? Where i live we can hear them, but cannot see them. Only in particularly nearby circumstances would you see one.

In a building i suppose that would work though, usually there are plenty of other indications there. Like other people. Also i probably wouldn't explicitly label them as tornado, unless you're in the US. Extreme weather perhaps elsewhere.

[–] captainlezbian 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Well considering I’m treating this as an and not an instead… so probably whatever was happening then? Combining sensory outputs in alarms and sirens saves lives because different senses have different merits and not everyone has every sense. There is no perfect warning except forewarning and when you hit the “evacuate or seek shelter” stage of an emergency any leg up is valuable

I went with tornado siren in a building as my frame of mental reference as in my part of the United States workplaces and other similar gathering places often have mandatory audio-visual fire alarms and mandatory audio tornado sirens. These are our two drills. These are our emergencies, and one leaves me absolutely fucked if I’m not wearing my hearing aids at the time.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

nah i get it, i just don't think it would do much in many cases. Especially considering that everybody has a phone these days, with a third sensory addition. Those usually tend to also notify people about severe weather events as well.

[–] captainlezbian 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Because you should never trust personal handheld devices to do the job of final warnings. My phone is on do not disturb at work. Many people do that. Sometimes people leave their phones in meetings. No phones are allowed on basically any factory floor unless it’s a work phone that like 1% of employees get.

So I’m an industrial engineer in addition to being deaf and one of my major professional focuses is actually human factors and as it pertains to the disabled it becomes extra important. So yeah this is basically all industry wide known to be better. So why is the fire flashy and the tornado not? Because both follow the legal minimum. I think workplace legal minimum should be raised so that any mandatory audio signal should contain a visual signal that shares the beat of the audio signal.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

i mean, that's definitely fair, in the instance of something like factory, having some sort of global warning system would be advantageous. Does this stem from the recent tornado that hit a factory floor in indiana and killed like 100 people or something i think it was? If so that would make sense. There was definitely a significant issue in that scenario.

Outside of something like work or an institution though im not sure.

[–] captainlezbian 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No I’ve actually pitched this idea to safety departments for years. Also I’m a Midwesterner, there’s always dead factory workers thanks to a tornado.

And like I do actually think that flashing lights in certain areas can be a good idea outside of work and institutions but it’s important to keep in mind how big of a net work and institutions are. It’s a third of your time for most of your life.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

there are definitely instances outside where it would be productive, but then again, as midwesterners i swear going outside during a tornado warning or watch is like a genetic feature of our DNA or something.