Riot over lawn parking continues… [UPDATED]

Barcham 3 April 2013 67

theparkinquestion

This will require a little work for those not keeping up with today’s drama. First go to this thread. It’s Monday’s bad parking photos, pay special attention to this photo:

post

Rioter pptvb had this to say in the comments:

Oh, this is GOLD!
@ #11. I have a fair idea who placed the sticker on your car.
It is one of many pissed off neighbours.
Your “lawn” is actually the nature strip between the foot path & the road. You and other residents of your units constantly park there and it is dangerous.
Your vehicles block the view of cars turning out of Castley Cr. as the approaching traffic is coming over a slight rise & around a slight bend.
We have spoken to many residents about their parking, and the dangers, Parking inspectors have issued tickets, Yet laziness prevails over common sense.

Rant Over.

( I will send photos of your “lawn” to JB )

There was more said on the subject, but Pptvb was good to his word and sent us pictures. There’s one up top, and here’s another:
differentangle

What’s the verdict Rioters? Is this an ok place to park, and if it’s not is sticking stickers to other people’s cars going too far?

Our original anonymous posted has responded.

For the benefit of Pptvb, the car stickered and posted on the RA was not parked in any locations he (or she) has described and taken photos of. I’m not so sure it was on a “nature strip” either as there is no footpath between the house and kerb where I got stickered and it was not on Castley Cct either. Regardless someone still thought it was parked ‘illegally’ though.

Please Mr angry sticker phantom next time maybe just put a note under the wipers or in the letterbox instead. That was the first I knew of a unoccupied vehicles causing such offense in the area and to me the reaction seemed out-of-line and probably illegal also.

Thanks again RA and apologies for bringing some silly neighbourhood argument to the site.

Never apologise anonymous Rioter, the RiotACT is here to serve… and to argue about parking.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
67 Responses to Riot over lawn parking continues… [UPDATED]
Filter
Order
gungsuperstar gungsuperstar 9:41 pm 03 Apr 13

Jim Jones said :

gungsuperstar said :

pptvb said :

gungsuperstar said :

Jim Jones said :

You can’t tell the difference between putting a sticker on an illegally (and dangerously) parked car and punching someone in the mouth?

Grail said :

How does physical assault even remotely compare to leaving a note on the windscreen?

Ah, so now we’re distinguishing between acts of vigilantism?

Nup, doesn’t work that way I’m afraid. Two wrongs don’t make a right, and the people defacing other peoples cars with stickers that neighbours are proudly bragging are hard to get off is no no better law-breaking behaviour than the people parking there in the first place.

Point………. Missed.

Yeah mate, you did miss the point.

You’re trying to justify the vigilantism of ‘your neighbours’ because it’s causing you a minor inconvenience.

While my example was an extreme one, it’s no different – “your neighbours” and my hypothetical are both breaking the law. To ridicule one while attempting to justify the other is hypocritical.

We have law enforcement for a reason. And guess what? It’s not you.

I hope the scumbag vandalising people’s cars gets caught – without checking, I’m tipping that vandalism is a greater charge than parking illegally.

You do realise that your argument made absolutely no sense whatsoever and that you sound like an angry self-obsessed loon.

I’m gonna head down to this joint and whack some big stickers on the cars just to f$%k with you.

And obviously I’m dealing with a Rhodes Scholar when you just say “you’re wrong, I’m right” without saying why. Clearly the whole argument has gone over your head.

You might as well have signed off with “naa na na-na na”

Madam Cholet Madam Cholet 2:14 pm 03 Apr 13

chewy14 said :

Or do a poo on a windscreen, which is infinitely quicker and more effective.

Do you mean infinitely quicker as in the actual act of leaving your calling card, or as in getting the neighbours to move their cars after finding your calling card?

If you were to consider this course of action, you would want to make sure that you were ‘ready to go’ so to speak. Nothing like being caught crouching on the bonnet of a neighbours car with your daks down….I would imagine anyway.

I think the nail under the tyre is infinitely quicker.

chewy14 chewy14 1:34 pm 03 Apr 13

Jim Jones said :

Or do a poo on a windscreen, which is infinitely quicker and more effective.

This actually happened to a friend of mine who parked his car in the city and had too many drinks to drive home so left it there for the night. Returned the next day to find a lovely human turd on his bonnet.
Funniest thing ever, and it seems Jim Jones is now the prime suspect.

tim_c tim_c 1:29 pm 03 Apr 13

loosebrown said :

Sir I have examined the Australian Road Rules and cannot find your advice that it is illegal to parallel park on a road with double lines. Happy to be corrected though as this sounds like a sensible rule.

The real issue here though is the ACT Government not requiring developers to provide adequate parking within their developments. People would not park illegally if there was parking provided for their use….

It is illegal to park where there are double unbroken lines if any part of your vehicle is less than 3m from the unbroken lines. Rule 208, part 6 (http://www.ntc.gov.au/filemedia/Reports/ARRFeb12.pdf)

I’d have to disagree with your comments that people would park legally if there were sufficient legal spaces provided – many of the pics posted to the Monday Parking threads occur where there is no shortage of legal parking spaces.

You’re right in saying It is not unreasonable for people to expect to be able to park where they live… but you need to consider how many cars is it reasonable to park at each residence? actpla has minimum requirements for parking to be provided for different sized dwellings, but these are grossly insufficient if all the apartments end up as group houses where each bedroom is let to a different person, each with their own car. What is a reasonable number of cars to be able to be parked at a residence? What if I want to operate a taxi or chauffeur business from my home?! 😉

basketofcat basketofcat 1:28 pm 03 Apr 13

p1 said :

Madam Cholet said :

Jim Jones said :

Or do a poo on a windscreen, which is infinitely quicker and more effective.

Ha ha, seconded! Maybe a nail under the tyre?

Spud in the exhaust? Prawns in the hubcaps? Vegemite under the door handles? Or, you know, something with chain.

Why not just park them in? What are they going to do, call the police?

youami youami 1:16 pm 03 Apr 13

loosebrown said :

Madman said :

loosebrown said :

It would be perfectly legal for them to park on the side of the road.

Actually, no it wouldn’t be legal. You can see the unbroken white lines either side of the two intersections.

Sir I have examined the Australian Road Rules and cannot find your advice that it is illegal to parallel park on a road with double lines. Happy to be corrected though as this sounds like a sensible rule.

The real issue here though is the ACT Government not requiring developers to provide adequate parking within their developments. People would not park illegally if there was parking provided for their use. It is not unreasonable for people to expect to be able to park where they live.

Of course the Govt has no reason to force developers to provide adequate parking. They recieve revenue by ticketing infringing vehicles. They encourage development by reducing developer costs and in the long run, they force people on to public transport.

It’s not the fact that the road has double lines but whether there is sufficient space (3 metres) between a parked car and the line so that traffic can pass without crossing over the line. I don’t know the road enough to be certain that two cars could fit between the double lines. But if they could, that is where they should park.

NoImRight NoImRight 1:14 pm 03 Apr 13

Someone does something you dont like and as “the authorities” dont seem to have the same level of interest you think they should that then justifies your messing with their property. Yes I dont see how this plan could possibly have a downside.

Jim Jones Jim Jones 1:09 pm 03 Apr 13

devils_advocate said :

Jim Jones said :

You can’t tell the difference between putting a sticker on an illegally (and dangerously) parked car and punching someone in the mouth?

*sigh*

That’s why it’s an analogy. It compares two things that are similar but not identical.

Otherwise it would be “illegally putting stickers on a car is vigilantism, it’s like illegally putting stickers on a car”, a statement which, while true, is not very illuminating.

Technically, it’s a “really crappy” analogy.

astrojax astrojax 12:54 pm 03 Apr 13

won’t someone think of the children…

riotact parking threads are usually good value, but this issue has been done to death. as has been posted on several threads, it is illegal to park on the nature strip and it is facile to argue ‘but it doesn’t hurt anyone, why pick on me?’ agaisnt it. it is illegal. look that up. don’t do it.

can we get back to pictures of parking fails now..?

or ducks?

loosebrown loosebrown 12:54 pm 03 Apr 13

Madman said :

loosebrown said :

It would be perfectly legal for them to park on the side of the road.

Actually, no it wouldn’t be legal. You can see the unbroken white lines either side of the two intersections.

Sir I have examined the Australian Road Rules and cannot find your advice that it is illegal to parallel park on a road with double lines. Happy to be corrected though as this sounds like a sensible rule.

The real issue here though is the ACT Government not requiring developers to provide adequate parking within their developments. People would not park illegally if there was parking provided for their use. It is not unreasonable for people to expect to be able to park where they live.

Of course the Govt has no reason to force developers to provide adequate parking. They recieve revenue by ticketing infringing vehicles. They encourage development by reducing developer costs and in the long run, they force people on to public transport.

p1 p1 12:42 pm 03 Apr 13

Madam Cholet said :

Jim Jones said :

Or do a poo on a windscreen, which is infinitely quicker and more effective.

Ha ha, seconded! Maybe a nail under the tyre?

Spud in the exhaust? Prawns in the hubcaps? Vegemite under the door handles? Or, you know, something with chain.

devils_advocate devils_advocate 12:37 pm 03 Apr 13

gungsuperstar said :

pptvb said :

gungsuperstar said :

Jim Jones said :

You can’t tell the difference between putting a sticker on an illegally (and dangerously) parked car and punching someone in the mouth?

Grail said :

How does physical assault even remotely compare to leaving a note on the windscreen?

Ah, so now we’re distinguishing between acts of vigilantism?

Nup, doesn’t work that way I’m afraid. Two wrongs don’t make a right, and the people defacing other peoples cars with stickers that neighbours are proudly bragging are hard to get off is no no better law-breaking behaviour than the people parking there in the first place.

Point………. Missed.

Yeah mate, you did miss the point.

You’re trying to justify the vigilantism of ‘your neighbours’ because it’s causing you a minor inconvenience.

While my example was an extreme one, it’s no different – “your neighbours” and my hypothetical are both breaking the law. To ridicule one while attempting to justify the other is hypocritical.

We have law enforcement for a reason. And guess what? It’s not you.

I hope the scumbag vandalising people’s cars gets caught – without checking, I’m tipping that vandalism is a greater charge than parking illegally.

Law on vandalism isn’t so cut and dried. It’s a species of trespass to property, but has limits. For example, there was a precedent that specifically protected the right of parking inspectors to chalk tires. I’d be hesitant to call the outcome in a court case.

devils_advocate devils_advocate 12:34 pm 03 Apr 13

Holden Caulfield said :

No, it’s not an okay place to park.

No, it’s not okay to deface someone else’s property.

Two wrongs may not make a right, but they sure as hell make for hilarious reading on RA.

devils_advocate devils_advocate 12:31 pm 03 Apr 13

Jim Jones said :

You can’t tell the difference between putting a sticker on an illegally (and dangerously) parked car and punching someone in the mouth?

*sigh*

That’s why it’s an analogy. It compares two things that are similar but not identical.

Otherwise it would be “illegally putting stickers on a car is vigilantism, it’s like illegally putting stickers on a car”, a statement which, while true, is not very illuminating.

Mysteryman Mysteryman 12:08 pm 03 Apr 13

buzz819 said :

Mysteryman said :

As mentioned by others, it’s illegal. Doesn’t matter if anyone thinks it’s ok or not. The law is pretty clear.

I’d like to know where the stickers came from. Would love to purchase some!

It’s also illegal to deface someone else’s property.

Hint. deface is changing it in a way that is not permanent.

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say.

Madam Cholet Madam Cholet 11:40 am 03 Apr 13

Jim Jones said :

Alderney said :

Regarding the placing of a sticker on the windscrean. The Litter ACT 2004 states in Section 13 –

Placing advertising leaflets on motor vehicles etc
– 13(1) Place unsolicited leaflet in or on a motor vehicle in a public place, infringement penalty $100;
– 13(3) Distribute, commission, authorise or arrange for distribution of unsolicited leaflet for placement in or on motor vehicle in a public place, infringement penalty $100.

Now, I know that this is not an advertising leaflet as such, but one could argue it is ‘advertising’ the fact the car/s is/are illegally parked. One to ponder.

Regarding them just parking on the road and therefore not improving the situation for the people turning out of Castley, I’d be writing to the minister, and all your local members (including opposition one’s), to petition for more regular patrols and also for the street to be approprately sign posted for parking i.e. no parking/no stopping where there is a safety case.

I’d also raise the matter at the TCC as they can be a thorn in the side of MsLA.

You need to keep on at them though. The most tenacious always wins the day.

Always good to have a delegation too, rather than just an individual who can be passed off as the ‘resident nutter’.

Or do a poo on a windscreen, which is infinitely quicker and more effective.

Ha ha, seconded! Maybe a nail under the tyre?

Jim Jones Jim Jones 11:34 am 03 Apr 13

Alderney said :

Regarding the placing of a sticker on the windscrean. The Litter ACT 2004 states in Section 13 –

Placing advertising leaflets on motor vehicles etc
– 13(1) Place unsolicited leaflet in or on a motor vehicle in a public place, infringement penalty $100;
– 13(3) Distribute, commission, authorise or arrange for distribution of unsolicited leaflet for placement in or on motor vehicle in a public place, infringement penalty $100.

Now, I know that this is not an advertising leaflet as such, but one could argue it is ‘advertising’ the fact the car/s is/are illegally parked. One to ponder.

Regarding them just parking on the road and therefore not improving the situation for the people turning out of Castley, I’d be writing to the minister, and all your local members (including opposition one’s), to petition for more regular patrols and also for the street to be approprately sign posted for parking i.e. no parking/no stopping where there is a safety case.

I’d also raise the matter at the TCC as they can be a thorn in the side of MsLA.

You need to keep on at them though. The most tenacious always wins the day.

Always good to have a delegation too, rather than just an individual who can be passed off as the ‘resident nutter’.

Or do a poo on a windscreen, which is infinitely quicker and more effective.

Alderney Alderney 11:23 am 03 Apr 13

Regarding the placing of a sticker on the windscrean. The Litter ACT 2004 states in Section 13 –

Placing advertising leaflets on motor vehicles etc
– 13(1) Place unsolicited leaflet in or on a motor vehicle in a public place, infringement penalty $100;
– 13(3) Distribute, commission, authorise or arrange for distribution of unsolicited leaflet for placement in or on motor vehicle in a public place, infringement penalty $100.

Now, I know that this is not an advertising leaflet as such, but one could argue it is ‘advertising’ the fact the car/s is/are illegally parked. One to ponder.

Regarding them just parking on the road and therefore not improving the situation for the people turning out of Castley, I’d be writing to the minister, and all your local members (including opposition one’s), to petition for more regular patrols and also for the street to be approprately sign posted for parking i.e. no parking/no stopping where there is a safety case.

I’d also raise the matter at the TCC as they can be a thorn in the side of MsLA.

You need to keep on at them though. The most tenacious always wins the day.

Always good to have a delegation too, rather than just an individual who can be passed off as the ‘resident nutter’.

zorro29 zorro29 10:46 am 03 Apr 13

you shouldn’t park on the nature strip (especially if you’re blocking the driving view of other motorists or the footpath spaces for pedestrians). i do not agree with vigilante action but it is frustrating when the proper avenues won’t help you (had times in the past when i have been tempted with people parking over driveways or making too much noise etc etc).

RB78 RB78 10:37 am 03 Apr 13

basketofcat said :

RB78 said :

Good old Vic and Ric! Lovely old couple – have fond memories of walking up there as a kid to buy some lollies with my pocket money before heading onto the park. They were always very friendly to the local kids. From memory they had to sell the shop when Vic started to lose her eyesight.

Remember their opening day? With the tents? The icecream bar never tasted so good. When it was still a Shoprite it was even better, very personal and friendly home delivery.
.

Certainly do! The entire carpark was packed. From memory the icecream bar was called “carnival treats” but it’s popularity didn’t really last. Beat part was the frozen coke machine, back when they first came out.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site