Veterans only parking

[lance_strongarm]

I saw a “Veterans Only” parking sign at a local grocery store recently. It seems to be permanent and not just for Veterans Day.

Come on.

I can see giving special spaces to people who need them because they have extra trouble getting around, like the disabled or pregnant or parents with small kids, but veterans? It’s gone from mobility to “employee of the month” parking, giving them something just because they are special.

I have no problem with honoring vets, and no problem with disabled vets using handicapped parking, but does every person who happens to have served in the military need, or want, special parking at the grocery store? And who is next to be honored for being special? Teachers? They’re mighty important. Police and firefighters? Nurses? They deserve it too.

[Czarcasm]

How could it possibly be enforced?

[Sicks_Ate]

Yeah.

The Home Depot here had two “Combat Wounded” parking spaces. I accidentally parked in one last week. Oh well.

[BobLibDem]

It’s always good business sense to cater to the military. There are a certain group of people who will see those special parking spots, get the vapors and swoon, saying “Oooooh…the troops!”. Those people will be more likely to patronize the business. So a few parking spots get out of use, a small price to pay for the goodwill it generates among some.

[bizerta]

@lance_strongarm

I saw a “Veterans Only” parking sign at a local grocery store recently. It seems to be permanent and not just for Veterans Day.

Come on. …

While I agree with the silliness of the issue, I also believe in the Golden Rule: Whoever holds the gold, makes the rules. IOW, whoever owns the parking lot can set the rules as long as it doesn’t violate any laws. OTOH, you have the right to vote with your feet if you don’t like the policy. I’ve done that on many occasions.

My gripe is disabled permits used to excess. Like when one spouse is disabled and the other spouse uses the permit even when the disabled spouse is not in the car. Or the cars is parked in a disabled spot and then waits in the car when a non-disabled party goes into the store.

[running_coach]

@bizerta

My gripe is disabled permits used to excess. Like when one spouse is disabled and the other spouse uses the permit even when the disabled spouse is not in the car. Or the cars is parked in a disabled spot and then waits in the car when a non-disabled party goes into the store.

In California, the first is a a violation of use. The second might be but I would let it slide as leaving a disabled person out in the middle of a parking lot is not really desirable.

[lance_strongarm]

@BobLibDem

It’s always good business sense to cater to the military. There are a certain group of people who will see those special parking spots, get the vapors and swoon, saying “Oooooh…the troops!”. Those people will be more likely to patronize the business. So a few parking spots get out of use, a small price to pay for the goodwill it generates among some.

Sure, a business can do whatever it wants with its parking (up to a point), but it opens a new can of worms. What’s next?

[inscrutable]

My favorite supermarket chain here has Veterans parking spots. Wonderful idea, and I use one when I shop there.

[lance_strongarm]

@bizerta

While I agree with the silliness of the issue, I also believe in the Golden Rule: Whoever holds the gold, makes the rules. IOW, whoever owns the parking lot can set the rules as long as it doesn’t violate any laws. OTOH, you have the right to vote with your feet if you don’t like the policy. I’ve done that on many occasions.

That goes without saying.

I’m simply discussing it.

My gripe is disabled permits used to excess. Like when one spouse is disabled and the other spouse uses the permit even when the disabled spouse is not in the car. Or the cars is parked in a disabled spot and then waits in the car when a non-disabled party goes into the store.

The former is illegal - the disabled person is supposed to be using the car (though they may be picking up a disabled person, don’t forget).

The latter is legitimate in my mind. A disabled person is using the space.

[lance_strongarm]

@Czarcasm

How could it possibly be enforced?

Same way use of handicapped parking is enforced - presumptions based on no facts other than looking at the driver, followed by rude comments or notes posted on windshields.

[lance_strongarm]

@inscrutable

My favorite supermarket chain here has Veterans parking spots. Wonderful idea, and I use one when I shop there.

Why?

[Oakminster]

I’m a veteran and I would not use a veteran only parking spot. I got out of the Air Force 23 years ago with all my parts intact. Got a couple of medals while I was in, got some GI Bill after I got out. When I die, they’ll put a flag on my coffin, then fold it up and present it to my wife after the service. Fair deal. I don’t need or want a parking spot. Give that to someone that needs it.

[Czarcasm]

@lance_strongarm

Same way use of handicapped parking is enforced - presumptions based on no facts other than looking at the driver, followed by rude comments or notes posted on windshields.

Handicapped parking(in Oregon, at least) is enforced by an official license plate or placard placed in the windshield, both issued by the state.

[Kearsen]

With obesity on the rise and potentially the single most damaging “disease” in the US, I propose that the fatter you are, the further away from the door you need to park.

In other words, your rage is unjustified and doesn’t really dignify a response.

[lance_strongarm]

@Czarcasm

Handicapped parking(in Oregon, at least) is enforced by an official license plate or placard placed in the windshield, both issued by the state.

That’s not enforcement though. Enforcement would be, for instance, cops giving tickets to those who park without a placard, or who use it without the disabled person in the car.

[lance_strongarm]

@Kearsen

With obesity on the rise and potentially the single most damaging “disease” in the US, I propose that the fatter you are, the further away from the door you need to park.

In other words, your rage is unjustified and doesn’t really dignify a response.

That wasn’t directed at me, was it? I hope not, because if so, it’s wrong on so many levels, which I’ll explain if it was.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Well, are you fat?

[Dinsdale]

@lance_strongarm

What’s next?

Well, WalMart wants to sell a bunch of green lightbulbs… :rolleyes: And the federal gov’t is providing increasing preference in hiring - whether or not the vet is the best qualified for the vacancy.

I wonder what exactly is behind our nation’s current apparent hero worship of everyone who ever volunteered to serve in the armed services. Is it guilt over the indefensible nature of these most recent military actions? Or guilt on behalf of the majority for having a minority do their dirty work?

If our troops are so delicate that the fact that they “saw dead bodies” is sufficient to trigger a VA disability claim, we might need to do a better job in the recruiting process.

[lance_strongarm]

@Dinsdale

I wonder what exactly is behind our nation’s current apparent hero worship of everyone who ever volunteered to serve in the armed services. Is it guilt over the indefensible nature of these most recent military actions? Or guilt on behalf of the majority for having a minority do their dirty work?

I was with you on that. I was going to say perhaps it is guilt over the failure to take care of wounded vets when they return. But then you ruined it with this:

If our troops are so delicate that the fact that they “saw dead bodies” is sufficient to trigger a VA disability claim, we might need to do a better job in the recruiting process.

[robert_columbia]

@bizerta

While I agree with the silliness of the issue, I also believe in the Golden Rule: Whoever holds the gold, makes the rules. IOW, whoever owns the parking lot can set the rules as long as it doesn’t violate any laws…

How is this different from a business having “Whites only” parking? I thought both race and veteran status were protected categories.