Parent and Child Spaces

QuinDixie

kunst nugget wrote: »

I have 2. They've both somehow managed to survive the trauma of going into the shop with me to do the weekly shopping without lasting psychological damage from the 'child abuse'.

But why do you bring them with you, is it because u have no partner to help you mind them.
I just dont understand the logic.

meeeeh

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I would never dream of parking in a disabled space but have parked and will continue to park in parent and child spaces without a second thought.

Well I guess some people do need wider areas to be actually able to park without crashing.

Drumpot

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Have plenty of manners and respect for people but would those car park spots are different

Ah, so you decide who you respect and what rules you respect ? Doesn't matter if there are guidelines clearly in place, if you don't like them you ignore them? Rebel without a cause . . A lone wolf giving the fingers to people with children.

You do realise you can disagree with something in principle, but still respect the rule ?

I am dead serious when I ask this . . Do you not think that there's anything even remotely dickheadish about the stance you are taking on this ? You think this is a reasonable way to act ? You seriously don't see anything at all wrong with what you are saying ?

meeeeh

QuinDixie wrote: »

But why do you bring them with you, is it because u have no partner to help you mind them.
I just dont understand the logic.

I bring them when my partner is not around or when we also go to the butchers, bakery and local park or library.

Tiger Mcilroy

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Because someone has kids doesn't entitle them to park up the front of the store.

Guarentee if they were at back of the car park they would be barely be used



Have plenty of manners and respect for people but would those car park spots are different

You still spectacularly miss the point of these spaces which are considerably wider to allow parents get children in and out of the car without damaging vehicles beside them and make it easier. I would hazard a guess parents would still use them if further away from the door if there were walkways purely as not everybody is as lazy as yourself.

Not everybody has an issue understanding the reasons for them and showing the tiniest bit of consideration for other people.

walkingshadow

This is like that rule regarding disabled toilets. Who cares if I use a disabled toilet for a piss? Are disabled people somehow immune from having to wait 30 seconds to use a toilet?

Tiger Mcilroy

walkingshadow wrote: »

This is like that rule regarding disabled toilets. Who cares if I use a disabled toilet for a piss? Are disabled people somehow immune from having to wait 30 seconds to use a toilet?

Yeah its exactly the same :rolleyes:

QuinDixie

meeeeh wrote: »

I bring them when my partner is not around or when we also go to the butchers, bakery and local park or library.

I do not see the attraction, never bring my children shopping, its bad enough If I have to go.

walkingshadow

Was the woman in the OP's story shopping with her children, or shopping for children?

Flippyfloppy

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Because someone has kids doesn't entitle them to park up the front of the store.

Perhaps if you ever open your own supermarket you can make it all about childless people.

Until then, parents are entitled to park in these spaces, most people let them at it. I've never had a problem getting a space on a weekday and pre-kids I never found the need to park in one. Then again I don't need to be right at the entrance, whereas you evidently do feel that need.

meeeeh

QuinDixie wrote: »

I do not see the attraction, never bring my children shopping, its bad enough If I have to go.

As I said before, not everyone has a partner with cushy nine to five job and too much free time to know what to do with it.. I do multiple shops at one time and sometimes and sometimes kids go with me to do the big shop. I don't overly like to take them with me me but sometimes it is the most sensible option.

Just because you can't see the attraction, it doesn't mean everyone else's circumstances are exactly the same as yours and should live exactly as you because your way is optimal.

Ctrl Alt Delete

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Perhaps if you ever open your own supermarket you can make it all about childless people.

Until then, parents are entitled to park in these spaces, most people let them at it. I've never had a problem getting a space on a weekday and pre-kids I never found the need to park in one. Then again I don't need to be right at the entrance, whereas you evidently do feel that need.

You may need to look up the definition of entitlement because your certainly aren't entitled to those spots

animaal

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I would never dream of parking in a disabled space but have parked and will continue to park in parent and child spaces without a second thought.

Out of interest, how do you react at an airport, when there's an announcement for parents with young children to board first? Do you rush to the top of the line anyway, because the request has no basis in law? Or do you quietly do as requested?

Flippyfloppy

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

You may need to look up the definition of entitlement because your certainly aren't entitled to those spots

They're marked parent and child pal. As I said, most normal people leave them for parents. Skipping in cues isn't illegal either but normal people who follow social cues don't do it.

Menas

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

You may need to look up the definition of entitlement because your certainly aren't entitled to those spots

These Parent and Child spots are on private property where the proprietor has put signs up indicating their stated use. But you feel you are entitled to use them anyway? Yet the people to whom the signs are intended are the entitled ones?

Are you also entitled to ignore the signs for the toilets just pee where you wish?

RaRaRasputin

Finn Vast Snot wrote: »

I think disabled spaces should exist. I don't think other spaces at the door should be reserved for one group with specific needs over another. Wide spaces in the main body of the car park would address parents' need for lifting toddlers out. With a pathway to the shop provided, only the most inadequate parents would be incapable of getting their children safely into the store.
That way there would be at least some possibility of elderly people sometimes being able to get a place by the door.

Ideally extra wide spaces should just be that, without a specific group specified as being allowed to use them. I would rarely need one so wouldn't take up a space there, but some people need to open the door wide to ease out of a car or get something cumbersome in and out of the car.

I actually think this is a very good idea - in theory, because it would never work. Simply because people are too self entitled to consider others. Goes for all sorts of people, incl. parents. I heard someone shamelessly proclaim that they'd ram their trolley into someone else's car if they were parked in a P&C space without a child in the car. :rolleyes:

Ctrl Alt Delete

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

They're marked parent and child pal. As I said, most normal people leave them for parents. Skipping in cues isn't illegal either but normal people who follow social cues don't do it.

They can be marked spawn of Satan it still doesn't give anyone an entitlement to park there.

But of help for those the word entitlement seems to be lost on "give (someone) a legal right or a just claim to receive or do something."

Ctrl Alt Delete

Menas wrote: »

These Parent and Child spots are on private property where the proprietor has put signs up indicating their stated use. But you feel you are entitled to use them anyway? Yet the people to whom the signs are intended are the entitled ones?

Are you also entitled to ignore the signs for the toilets just pee where you wish?

No what I'm saying is I'm entitled to use the spaces just as much as anyone with a child. Private property of not it doesn't let them make up laws such as prohibiting prams for example

And naturally your not entitled to pre anywhere because that is against the law

kunst nugget

QuinDixie wrote: »

But why do you bring them with you, is it because u have no partner to help you mind them.
I just dont understand the logic.

When they were younger, my wife worked weekends while I worked during the week. Inevitably one of us would bring them with us while shopping. It wasn't a big deal. Sometimes we even brought them when - gasp - we wanted to give the other person some child free time! The horror…

meeeeh wrote: »

As I said before, not everyone has a partner with cushy nine to five job and too much free time to know what to do with it.. I do multiple shops at one time and sometimes and sometimes kids go with me to do the big shop. I don't overly like to take them with me me but sometimes it is the most sensible option.

Just because you can't see the attraction, it doesn't mean everyone else's circumstances are exactly the same as yours and should live exactly as you because your way is optimal.

It's the fact that they called it child abuse that I found absolutely bizarre.

Menas

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

They can be marked spawn of Satan it still doesn't give anyone an entitlement to park there.

But of help for those the word entitlement seems to be lost on "give (someone) a legal right or a just claim to receive or do something."

That is just one definition of the word. Another, from oxford dictionaries, is :The belief that one is inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment:

Ctrl Alt Delete

Menas wrote: »

That is just one definition of the word. Another, from oxford dictionaries, is :The belief that one is inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment:

Yep belief being the operative word there.

Tiger Mcilroy

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

They can be marked spawn of Satan it still doesn't give anyone an entitlement to park there.

But of help for those the word entitlement seems to be lost on "give (someone) a legal right or a just claim to receive or do something."

This really isnt going as well as you expected is it?

kunst nugget

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Yep belief being the operative word there.

You're not really seeing the pot-kettle-black scenario happening here…

Ctrl Alt Delete

Tiger Mcilroy wrote: »

This really isnt going as well as you expected is it?

I don't expect anything from this thread to be honest I fully expected plenty of people erroronously thinking they are entitled to a parking spot

Flippyfloppy

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

They can be marked spawn of Satan it still doesn't give anyone an entitlement to park there.

But of help for those the word entitlement seems to be lost on "give (someone) a legal right or a just claim to receive or do something."

Oh too right. Come to think of it those markings on the roads in car parks directing traffic/ stating who has right of way are pesky aren't they? I bet you ignore them too!

Ctrl Alt Delete

kunst nugget wrote: »

You're not really seeing the pot-kettle-black scenario happening here…

Oh I am seeing it. That's been my point I am equally entitled to park in a parent child space as is someone with kids

Ctrl Alt Delete

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Oh too right. Come to think of it those markings on the roads in car parks directing traffic/ stating who has right of way are pesky aren't they? I bet you ignore them too!

No I don't go looking for accidents but on a point have you ever had the legal right of way argument over an accident in a car park?

Menas

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Oh I am seeing it. That's been my point I am equally entitled to park in a parent child space as is someone with kids

No, you think you are but you are not.
No more than you are entitled to park your car blocking the front door of the shop.

It is private property and if you want to use it you should park your car where the proprietor designates you park it - and that is not in a parent and child spot unless you are a parent....or a child.

Ctrl Alt Delete

Menas wrote: »

No, you think you are but you are not.
No more than you are entitled to park your car blocking the front door of the shop.

It is private property and if you want to use it you should park your car where the proprietor designates you park it - and that is not in a parent and child spot unless you are a parent....or a child.

Private property does not allow you to make up law. If I ran a shop and designated spots "white only" what you think will happen

Kirby

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Oh I am seeing it. That's been my point I am equally entitled to park in a parent child space as is someone with kids

Menas wrote: »

No, you think you are but you are not.
No more than you are entitled to park your car blocking the front door of the shop.

It is private property and if you want to use it you should park your car where the proprietor designates you park it - and that is not in a parent and child spot unless you are a parent....or a child.

Thats not how the law works I'm afraid. The proprietor can also designate a "men only" parking spot. When a woman parks in it, as she is legally entitled to do, the proprietor can do nothing about it.

You can set any sort of crazy rule you want. It doesnt make it binding. Socially distressing for some? Yes. Illegal? No.

The fact of the matter is, anybody can park in the P&C spots. It does not hold the same stature as a disabled spot. It's illegal to park in a disabled spot if you are able bodied. But there is no law regarding P&C. It's a courtesy, a convenience. Thats all. Parents are not entitled to it.