- cross-posted to:
- fuck_cars@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- fuck_cars@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
What, you wanted them to park on that innocent parent and child?
deleted by creator
For a BMW that’s pretty good
That’s an important BMW and it needs 2 spots to be safe
Typical BMW driver
Always a BMW driver
What’s the difference between a BMW and a porcupine?
With a porcupine, the pricks are on the outside.
BMW… shocker.
Before I even opened the comments I knew the first post was going to point out it was a BMW lol.
Yes, but context is important. Why did they park like that? Were there other badly parked vehicles that meant they had to choose between parking like they did and not parking at all?
However, in this case we can see it’s a Big Metal Wanker so it’s likely they just parked like that because they couldn’t give a shit.
No context needed it’s a BMW.
I usually like to give people the benefit of the doubt and say maybe there was an idiot parked next to them that left, and now they look like the idiot. But that’s egregiously bad.
I’ve seen one case where this was necessary although it looked equally awful (in a handicap spot, which this is not) because some asshole had originally parked half in a handicap spot, so a van with a motorized ramp didn’t have the space to extend it fully to get people out. So it had to take up both spots to extend the ramp.
None of which appears to apply in this picture, the owner of that car is just a jerk.
Honestly the first thing that came to my mind was that they wanted to park between the two posts because they were going to bring something out heavy and they needed to load it into the back of the car.
A person that knows how to operate a car would just pull in forwards like you’re supposed to.
And stick out on the front end to where cars drive by? No they wouldn’t. That’s unsafe.
deleted by creator
They still didn’t have to take up two parking spots
Yes they did, because the poles are in the way, if they park within the single space.
A quick glance at the picture would show you what I’m speaking about.
deleted by creator
There’s enough room for them to park within the parent parking + “no parking” area. They don’t have to take up the second spot.
One of the poles would still have been in the way, especially if it’s something large like a TV or lumber being loaded into the vehicle (have to account for the cart that the thing to be loaded is being carried on as well).
Just looked at the picture again. The back-end of the car is centered between the two poles, giving the maximum amount of space on each side of the vehicle for the poles.
Parking in the left spot with the vehicle 3/4 in the no parking area would allow full access to the back for any item. The right spot would be completely open and driving nose in would allow the person to get in and out in the other no parking area on the opposite side.
There was no reason but sheer laziness for parking like this or mental incompetence.
Wouldn’t allow room for the loading cart if you have to come at the back end of the car from an angle to get the large item loaded inside the vehicle.
It’s not unreasonable just to take a couple of minutes and park where they did just so they can load a big ticket item into their vehicle.
I think Humanity will understand and allow them the use of both spaces for the few minutes that it takes to do the loading.
deleted by creator
