Bad Parking Pictures

Calkem said:
They are emergency response vehicles, technically there is legal sanction for them to park there?

I had to chuckle a bit that you don't realise that.

Did you know that they can also travel at 171km/h, and skip red light robots..... Ridiculous hey, how dare they do that when they do that to save a person's live.....LOL
Click to expand...
If they aren't responding to an emergency they have to follow the same rules as everyone else.

Even when responding to emergencies they have myriad rules that they must follow, including treating red traffic lights as yields, not forcing other road users to break the law (such as by encouraging them to go through a red light), etc.

They have conditional exceptions. Going for a shopping trip, or a lunch break isn't a conditional exception.
 
Lycanthrope said:
If they aren't responding to an emergency they have to follow the same rules as everyone else.

Even when responding to emergencies they have myriad rules that they must follow, including treating red traffic lights as yields, not forcing other road users to break the law (such as by encouraging them to go through a red light), etc.

They have conditional exceptions. Going for a shopping trip, or a lunch break isn't a conditional exception.
Click to expand...
I had to chuckle a bit that he didn't realise that.
 
Lycanthrope said:
If they aren't responding to an emergency they have to follow the same rules as everyone else.

Even when responding to emergencies they have myriad rules that they must follow, including treating red traffic lights as yields, not forcing other road users to break the law (such as by encouraging them to go through a red light), etc.

They have conditional exceptions. Going for a shopping trip, or a lunch break isn't a conditional exception.
Click to expand...

LOL ......... Goodness LOL there is a lot a infantile thinkers on this forum.......

This is what I stated in my initial post:

Technically/legally they are allowed to park like that if there is just cause.

It doesn't seem like there is just cause it in the picture. I almost blew a fuse months ago seeing a team of paramedics out on their own shopping trip park in a disabled parking bay.

When I asked them why, they said they "are allowed to park there as an emergency vehicle" and that it gave them as "special exception".

I clearly (as daylight) LOL stated that there has to be an emergency for them to park in in like that......... And you refute that by saying they has to be an emergency for them to park like like.......... Which is exactly what I said!.... @Maurice Kitching you look like a fool right now hey :ROFL:

You reminding me of a thread here on MyBB whereby legal the "act" and the "motivation" are esoterically nuanced conceptualizations in discernment that @Cosmik Debris and @SykomantiS did not understand all in legalist form.

I'll be honest, in a way I was trying to trap someone, based on your ignorance and you fell for it.

The act of emergency vehicles parking in disabled parking is not in of it's own illegal, it is legal, they are exempt under the current legal proviso, can they can do, however, however they must be just cause for them to do so, which I clearly stated in statement verbatim, as underlined above LOL.

THE ACT IN OF ITS OWN BY PARKING THERE, FOR THEM IS NOT ILLEGAL! :ROFL:

It is the motivation on why they parked there that might make it illegal. I referenced the clear point that them going to do their shopping is not sufficient motivation to park in a disabled parking lot, it's there in post 8414, it's wrong and angered me.

In your own words you state that " They can park there if they are attending to an emergency" - So you are saying it legal for them to park there in an emergency, however, in the same light say that its illegal for them to park there based on motivation. Your argument is two forked and mutually destructive on a hierarchal form. If they can park there as a legal act (motivations aside) how is it that they cant park there (as an act) motivations aside? LOL

The law is clear they can park there in operation of their duties to save peoples lives, but you saying they can, but it's illegal. I cant park in a disabled parking bay, but EMS vehicles can, or double park. So they can park there, what is your argument really besides being so ignorant?

This is way above your paygrade, but I just wanted to play the mickey out of it, you might mislead buffoons' like you, but not me, something also tells me you wont understand what im saying :ROFL:


"But rattling nonsense in full volleys breaks and never shocked and never turned aside" - Alexander Pope
 
Calkem said:
LOL ......... Goodness LOL there is a lot a infantile thinkers on this forum.......

This is what I stated in my initial post:

Technically/legally they are allowed to park like that if there is just cause.

It doesn't seem like there is just cause it in the picture. I almost blew a fuse months ago seeing a team of paramedics out on their own shopping trip park in a disabled parking bay.

When I asked them why, they said they "are allowed to park there as an emergency vehicle" and that it gave them as "special exception".

I clearly (as daylight) LOL stated that there has to be an emergency for them to park in in like that......... And you refute that by saying they has to be an emergency for them to park like like.......... Which is exactly what I said!.... @Maurice Kitching you look like a fool right now hey :ROFL:

You reminding me of a thread here on MyBB whereby legal the "act" and the "motivation" are esoterically nuanced conceptualizations in discernment that @Cosmik Debris and @SykomantiS did not understand all in legalist form.

I'll be honest, in a way I was trying to trap someone, based on your ignorance and you fell for it.

The act of emergency vehicles parking in disabled parking is not in of it's own illegal, it is legal, they are exempt under the current legal proviso, can they can do, however, however they must be just cause for them to do so, which I clearly stated in statement verbatim, as underlined above LOL.

THE ACT IN OF ITS OWN BY PARKING THERE, FOR THEM IS NOT ILLEGAL! :ROFL:

It is the motivation on why they parked there that might make it illegal. I referenced the clear point that them going to do their shopping is not sufficient motivation to park in a disabled parking lot, it's there in post 8414, it's wrong and angered me.

In your own words you state that " They can park there if they are attending to an emergency" - So you are saying it legal for them to park there in an emergency, however, in the same light say that its illegal for them to park there based on motivation. Your argument is two forked and mutually destructive on a hierarchal form. If they can park there as a legal act (motivations aside) how is it that they cant park there (as an act) motivations aside? LOL

The law is clear they can park there in operation of their duties to save peoples lives, but you saying they can, but it's illegal. I cant park in a disabled parking bay, but EMS vehicles can, or double park. So they can park there, what is your argument really besides being so ignorant?

This is way above your paygrade, but I just wanted to play the mickey out of it, you might mislead buffoons' like you, but not me, something also tells me you wont understand what im saying :ROFL:


"But rattling nonsense in full volleys breaks and never shocked and never turned aside" - Alexander Pope
Click to expand...
I didn't state anything in my own words. I used yours. Here's a cookie for your trouble.


1743314755506.png
 
S_L_Y_G_U_Y said:
this muppet also leaves its windows open do they know they are living in SA
Click to expand...

The driver's seat is reclined to the snooze position (although some people imbeciles do drive with their seats like that), it's possible that there is a real muppet in the driver's seat.
 
Calkem said:
Did you know that they can also travel at 171km/h,
Click to expand...
are they ?
i recall one of many ambulance trips between bantry bay and cbd, to chris barnard hospital - me in passenger seat upfront alongside the driver, with 2nd paramedic in the back with my mother.
during the ride i commented something the the affect "it must be interesting to be tearing through the traffic at high speed".

driver responded they are not allowed to exceed speed limits - but may jump stop streets / red lights, drive in emergency lane etc .
not sure if that is road traffic act, or netcare policy.
but at the same time, i'm inclined to think if a patient is unstable and critical, speed limits will be ignored
 
Grant said:
are they ?
i recall one of many ambulance trips between bantry bay and cbd, to chris barnard hospital - me in passenger seat upfront alongside the driver, with 2nd paramedic in the back with my mother.
during the ride i commented something the the affect "it must be interesting to be tearing through the traffic at high speed".

driver responded they are not allowed to exceed speed limits - but may jump stop streets / red lights, drive in emergency lane etc .
not sure if that is road traffic act, or netcare policy.
but at the same time, i'm inclined to think if a patient is unstable and critical, speed limits will be ignored
Click to expand...

Im sorry about your own experiences to hospital. I cant imagine how traumatic is could be with your own mother

I think it goes back to the act and motivations post.

Are ambulances allowed to exceed the speed limit or skip red robots, that is an obvious answer and does not need my connation to it.

I doubt ( or yes it could be see below) it is Netcare policy because EMS vehicles are excluded under sec.60 of the Road Traffic Act when they are carrying out emergency work, but are however, not allowed to exceed the speed limits or transgress the road rules when not carrying out their duties in a emergency with the limitations set. It seems as if the Netcare perfectly gave an instruction to their EMS that they are not to exceed the speed limits when not attending to an emergency, which is prevalent now, and the driver thought that it applied to all scenarios, or maybe your cases was not an emergency. The paramedic most likely read/perhaps the memo in a wrong way. You must remember that the EMS driver is also a paramedic, so under their medical training what is not an emergency might not seem like an emergency to you, e.g a patient is stabilized

I do think that EMS will utilise their own discretion in whether the they deem the event as a emergency, if its a hospital transfer or akin to that they might not want to exceed the posted speed limits, unless there is an sufficient motivation for them to disregard certain proviso (the patient goes into shock) and stand on the shoulders/authority of sec.60 sub section A.
 
Good!

Illegal parkers be warned! Cape Town acquires new vertical lift towing truck

The City of Cape Town has added a new vertical lift truck to its towing fleet, with the aim of clearing illegally parked vehicles more efficiently, and in a manner that conventional tow trucks can’t.

The vertical lift truck removed six vehicles during the last week of March.

"This vertical lift truck makes it so much easier to remove vehicles, particularly ones that are parked in and can’t be moved using the conventional tow trucks," said Alderman JP Smith, Mayoral Committee Member for Safety and Security.

"Its forklift mechanism makes the work a breeze. It’s early days yet, and our staff are familiarising themselves with the new vehicle, so we expect the rate of pickups to increase rapidly in the near future."

Smith said this should be a wake-up call to those motorists who think they can get away with breaking the law by parking as they please, without due regard for others.


1743776999452.png

1743777021040.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter