2006-11-16 02:46:40 · 7 answers · asked by footynutguy 4 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Television
Come on people, stop being so offensive. Blind people are human too.
There is an audio description track available so programmmes sound like plays on the radio.
Why shouldn't they be allowed to have tv's? Aren#t they allowed to be part of society? Aren't they allowed to join in the coversation of other people who talk about what they watched on tv the night before?
And blind people can live independently on their own. They don't have to live with their family, so the argument about the tv is for other people doesn't work at all.
2006-11-16 02:58:16 · update #1
Excuse my ignorance, but why would a blind person have TV?
2006-11-16 02:49:40 · answer #1 · answered by k² 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you are "colourblind" you CAN see colour but mix up certain shades.This is unless you are achromatic. This means you have no colour receptors at all, this severely affects your vision so you would be registered blind. If this were the case I'm sure you would have mentioned this, also being registered blind you would know you get a free TV licence. The answer to your question is no you do not HAVE TO pay for a colour licence, if you look on the TV licence website you'll see that you can have a black and white licence for £47 instead of £139.50, you would only be allowed a black and white TV though.
2016-03-28 22:27:57 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a cheek i think. There was a time when people had to buy a license for a radio if you had no TV.
I am colour blind, but still pay for a colour license. when the man calls and asks you for your license, just keep shouting PARDON? and he may just give-up lol.
2006-11-16 02:57:00 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It sounds stupid and I think it is.
(s)he should NOT have to pay for colour if he only has a monochrome receiver - that is the law. Whether he has freeview or not, is irrelevant
You have to pay for a colour licence ONLY if you have a receiver capable of displaying colour pictures. This is true even if you cannot receive any colour transmissions (Difficult, I know) but have a colour TV. You have to pay based on the TV receiver you own.
No - he should only pay for monochrome license.
2006-11-16 02:56:09 · answer #4 · answered by superman in disguise 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To pay for the rediculous salaries of some of the stoopid mentally challenged participants/producers of reality shows which more correctly should be confined to being used as torture instruments against those who so eloquently support their arguments for war and the destruction of the innocent.
2006-11-16 02:54:15 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
weird, huh - but think of this:
if you're blind, what do have a TV for in the first place?
Because you have sighted people in the family but the licence is in your name? it's stupid. I get a free licence because my dear old mum lives with me and she's over 75.
The government isn't crazy, it's actually taking the piss - they're filming us for a new series of Monty Python's Flying Circus.
2006-11-16 02:52:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Same reason people of different sizes pay the same for different sized clothing. You don't pay for the amount of fabric you need, you pay the same so the company can make it affordable to the masses.
You want to hear your favorite shows, they can charge you what they charge everyone if they want to, or they could be nice for a change and wave it, but yeah, like that's going to happen.
2006-11-16 02:54:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋