Do you use parent and child spaces without children?
Discussion
PurpleMoonlight said:
blueg33 said:
There is one thing that bugs me about threads on this topic
Why can people not accept that the land belongs to the supermarket, they are therefore free to tell people where they can and can't park, they are free to make spaces for whoever they want in what ever location they want ITS THEIR PROPERTY. If you don't like it go eleswhere.
If the parking pays were marked for white people only would you support that too because 'it's their property'?Why can people not accept that the land belongs to the supermarket, they are therefore free to tell people where they can and can't park, they are free to make spaces for whoever they want in what ever location they want ITS THEIR PROPERTY. If you don't like it go eleswhere.
I view p&c spaces similar to the gay b&b legal case. When the property is used for business purposes the property owner or operator should not discriminate against specific sections of society in it's use. Of course those that benefit from the discrimination think it's a wonderful idea, but that does not make the property owners desires fair and reasonable.
What if the supermarket decided to sell certain items to parents with children only, or had a P&C only checkout would the supporters of P&C spaces support that too?
Why would anyone condone the supermarket acting illegally? It is not illegal for them to offer preferential spaces to customers that they believe will gain a benefit from them.
Read the Equality Act, that will tell you what they can't do
xRIEx said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
yonex said:
You can't teach a pig to dance 
When all else fails, resort to personal insults I see ....Parent and child parking space supporters on here are remarkably vicious for a section of society that doesn't even have the backing of the law, just some yellow paint on tarmac. Some behave quite like children, actually. Perhaps some kind of segregation is best for them PurpleMoonlight. Maybe their own queues as well... .
blueg33 said:
If bays were marked for whitre people ony then that would be illegal. If they were marked fro red cars only, then fine, that's the choice of the land owner.
True, of course. But my purpose of the illustration was that if the stance is that only what is lawful discrimination matters, then only the law of parking on private land can matter too.
PurpleMoonlight said:
blueg33 said:
If bays were marked for whitre people ony then that would be illegal. If they were marked fro red cars only, then fine, that's the choice of the land owner.
True, of course. But my purpose of the illustration was that if the stance is that only what is lawful discrimination matters, then only the law of parking on private land can matter too.
The supermarket has the choice, they could equally have no P&C spaces or a car park full of them, as long as they meet the law
popeyewhite said:
xRIEx said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
yonex said:
You can't teach a pig to dance
When all else fails, resort to personal insults I see ....I never stated it was an analogy, because it isn't; I stated 'aphorism'. Maybe you should revise your Greek etymologies before accusing my English of being poor. I would direct you to some sources that might help you learn but as we all know, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. <---- OH s
t, LOOK! ANOTHER IDIOM! Luckily I don't have a horse, so I can't literally mean I'm leading it to water, it's just a metaphorical aphorism meaning, in this case, that you can present all the information to an idiot but they still won't be able to understand it. Well, well, well. (Three watery holes in the ground, no horses. Or dancing pigs. No wait, there must be dancing pigs because it wasn't a metaphor! Silly me. I'll get on Youtube and look for some pig dancing lessons.)popeyewhite said:
Parent and child parking space supporters on here are remarkably vicious for a section of society that doesn't even have the backing of the law, just some yellow paint on tarmac. Some behave quite like children, actually. Perhaps some kind of segregation is best for them PurpleMoonlight. Maybe their own queues as well... .
So what? Why does it need the backing of law?I asked these earlier, maybe you would like to reply:
- Do you drive into the 'Deliveries Only'/'Service Vehicles Only' area of a supermarket (or other establishment)?
- Do you go through doors marked 'Staff Only'?
- Do you ever go to the stockroom if an item you want isn't on the shelves?
None of these activities have the "backing of law", so if you don't do them, why not?
xRIEx said:
So what? Why does it need the backing of law?
I asked these earlier, maybe you would like to reply:
- Do you drive into the 'Deliveries Only'/'Service Vehicles Only' area of a supermarket (or other establishment)?
- Do you go through doors marked 'Staff Only'?
- Do you ever go to the stockroom if an item you want isn't on the shelves?
None of these activities have the "backing of law", so if you don't do them, why not?
None of those areas are open to the public, so arguably it's trespass.I asked these earlier, maybe you would like to reply:
- Do you drive into the 'Deliveries Only'/'Service Vehicles Only' area of a supermarket (or other establishment)?
- Do you go through doors marked 'Staff Only'?
- Do you ever go to the stockroom if an item you want isn't on the shelves?
None of these activities have the "backing of law", so if you don't do them, why not?
PurpleMoonlight said:
blueg33 said:
Exactly QED
The supermarket has the choice, they could equally have no P&C spaces or a car park full of them, as long as they meet the law
Agreed, they are not acting unlawfully, but then neither is the person parking in a P&C bay without a C.....The supermarket has the choice, they could equally have no P&C spaces or a car park full of them, as long as they meet the law
xRIEx said:
I asked these earlier, maybe you would like to reply:
- Do you drive into the 'Deliveries Only'/'Service Vehicles Only' area of a supermarket (or other establishment)?
- Do you go through doors marked 'Staff Only'?
- Do you ever go to the stockroom if an item you want isn't on the shelves?
None of these activities have the "backing of law", so if you don't do them, why not?
I'm less sure of your intelligence than your literacy now. Oh and calm down, go and park at the far end of the carpark and enjoy the walk. It might clear your thinking.- Do you drive into the 'Deliveries Only'/'Service Vehicles Only' area of a supermarket (or other establishment)?
- Do you go through doors marked 'Staff Only'?
- Do you ever go to the stockroom if an item you want isn't on the shelves?
None of these activities have the "backing of law", so if you don't do them, why not?
xRIEx said:
If there are conditions of use for the car park, potentially they are committing a tortious act (breach of contract). In the same way motorway services make you pay for parking beyond two hours.
Possibly, but I doubt that the limited signage for P&C bays would constitute and enforceable contract, and even if it did the supermarket has suffered no loss so no penalty can be imposed.popeyewhite said:
xRIEx said:
I asked these earlier, maybe you would like to reply:
- Do you drive into the 'Deliveries Only'/'Service Vehicles Only' area of a supermarket (or other establishment)?
- Do you go through doors marked 'Staff Only'?
- Do you ever go to the stockroom if an item you want isn't on the shelves?
None of these activities have the "backing of law", so if you don't do them, why not?
I'm less sure of your intelligence than your literacy now. Oh and calm down, go and park at the far end of the carpark and enjoy the walk. It might clear your thinking.- Do you drive into the 'Deliveries Only'/'Service Vehicles Only' area of a supermarket (or other establishment)?
- Do you go through doors marked 'Staff Only'?
- Do you ever go to the stockroom if an item you want isn't on the shelves?
None of these activities have the "backing of law", so if you don't do them, why not?
I usually do park at the far end, because I'm not obsessed with being the closest to the door, as though it somehow means I 'win' the car park, and I'm also not inconsiderate enough to deny someone the resource placed specifically for their benefit (of which I do not gain the same benefit).
On occasions I've walked 4 miles to the supermarket because, y'know, my legs work and I'm not a lazy
.I thought the thread was going in circles but it may have a new lease of life if the debate has moved on to the justification for having these spaces in the first place, rather than the 'abuse' of them.
In case anyone hasn't read my earlier posts on the subject, I really couldn't care less about something that has no impact on me at all and I would never use the spaces other than in the middle of the night. I'd never use a disabled bay at any time although I would sympathise with someone adopting the same middle-of-the-night approach to those as to mine with p& c spaces.
I am however interested in some of the arguments for p & c spaces. I get that it's definitely helpful to be able to open doors fully in some circumstances. I certainly get the marketing angle. The one I'm less convinced of is the safety angle. Has anyone ever heard of a toddler or child being flattened in a supermarket car park - because I haven't, they tend to be flattened running across roads or by friends or relatives reversing over them on their own driveways.
In case anyone hasn't read my earlier posts on the subject, I really couldn't care less about something that has no impact on me at all and I would never use the spaces other than in the middle of the night. I'd never use a disabled bay at any time although I would sympathise with someone adopting the same middle-of-the-night approach to those as to mine with p& c spaces.
I am however interested in some of the arguments for p & c spaces. I get that it's definitely helpful to be able to open doors fully in some circumstances. I certainly get the marketing angle. The one I'm less convinced of is the safety angle. Has anyone ever heard of a toddler or child being flattened in a supermarket car park - because I haven't, they tend to be flattened running across roads or by friends or relatives reversing over them on their own driveways.
PurpleMoonlight said:
xRIEx said:
If there are conditions of use for the car park, potentially they are committing a tortious act (breach of contract). In the same way motorway services make you pay for parking beyond two hours.
Possibly, but I doubt that the limited signage for P&C bays would constitute and enforceable contract, and even if it did the supermarket has suffered no loss so no penalty can be imposed.PurpleMoonlight said:
Why do you think that more space equals more safety?
Surely it matters where that space is. There is loads on the hard shoulder of the M1, is that a safe place though?
Generally P&C spaces aren't on the hard shoulder of the M1. They do, however, generally have enough space around them for example to be able to load a child into or out of a pram or trolley without being in the road.Surely it matters where that space is. There is loads on the hard shoulder of the M1, is that a safe place though?
Now, who are these many people who would see as much safety benefit as small children by having more space around their car?
9mm said:
I am however interested in some of the arguments for p & c spaces. I get that it's definitely helpful to be able to open doors fully in some circumstances. I certainly get the marketing angle. The one I'm less convinced of is the safety angle. Has anyone ever heard of a toddler or child being flattened in a supermarket car park - because I haven't, they tend to be flattened running across roads or by friends or relatives reversing over them on their own driveways.
In a much earlier thread on PH people were condoning someone wheelspinning around a car park in the middle of the day, and taking the view that it is a parent's responsibility to keep their children out of the way....xRIEx said:
They may have suffered a loss - if a parent with child drives in, is unable to find a space suitably spacious enough to remove their baby in carrier they may drive off - lost revenue to the supermarket; if a parent and child notices that shoppers without children regularly park in the spaces and the supermarket does nothing to enforce this, they may permanently take their business elsewhere - lost revenue to the supermarket.
In practice maybe, maybe not, but that is not a loss for which they can claim under the legislation even if they could quantify it.PurpleMoonlight said:
swerni said:
you must live in a very strange world Then do not give a s
te about my kids, they just want my money. So yes, to the bottom line of the supermarket me and my kids are more equal than you, as we spend more - and we are probably nicer people all in all going by the venom and malice you spout. (even though I am not sure you are not just trolling now)its just about the money.. that is it, but with a young baby, trying to lean in and get the baby carrier out the car in the pissing winter rain, the wider spaced did help.. Mine are way older now... So I just park else where now.
Edited by joe_90 on Friday 27th February 12:09
xRIEx said:
So what? Why does it need the backing of law?
I asked these earlier, maybe you would like to reply:
- Do you drive into the 'Deliveries Only'/'Service Vehicles Only' area of a supermarket (or other establishment)?
- Do you go through doors marked 'Staff Only'?
- Do you ever go to the stockroom if an item you want isn't on the shelves?
None of these activities have the "backing of law", so if you don't do them, why not?
Why not?I asked these earlier, maybe you would like to reply:
- Do you drive into the 'Deliveries Only'/'Service Vehicles Only' area of a supermarket (or other establishment)?
- Do you go through doors marked 'Staff Only'?
- Do you ever go to the stockroom if an item you want isn't on the shelves?
None of these activities have the "backing of law", so if you don't do them, why not?
because they don't have deep seated issues with delivery drivers, just women.
Let's face reality here, what this is really about is those weirdo blokes who have issues with women. If P&C spaces were market up for father's only they wouldn't have this issue. They also wouldn't have the balls to park there. Some men are just angry at women and seize opportunities where they think they can have a go at them and get away with it.
That's what this is really about.
joe_90 said:
The ones with kids will probably spend more money, so they want to get them into their store. Once one store did it the others had to follow suit.
Then do not give a ste about my kids, they just want my money. So yes, to the bottom line of the supermarket me and my kids are more equal than you, as we spend more - and we are probably nicer people all in all going by the venom and malice you spout. (even though I am not sure you are not just trolling now)
its just about the money.. that is it, but with a young baby, trying to lean in and get the baby carrier out the car in the pissing winter rain, the wider spaced did help.. Mine are way older now... So I just park else where now.
Then do not give a s
te about my kids, they just want my money. So yes, to the bottom line of the supermarket me and my kids are more equal than you, as we spend more - and we are probably nicer people all in all going by the venom and malice you spout. (even though I am not sure you are not just trolling now)its just about the money.. that is it, but with a young baby, trying to lean in and get the baby carrier out the car in the pissing winter rain, the wider spaced did help.. Mine are way older now... So I just park else where now.
Edited by joe_90 on Friday 27th February 12:09
I agree 100%, well except my spouting venom and malice.
I have never stated nice wide bays should not be provided, only that they should be available for all to use if they wish and not just a section of society that the supermarkets dictate for commercial reasons.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff