Ebanda's Handyman Services Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Continuing the motoring theme.....My nag for today is people that have those "Baby on Board" signs in the back of the car. What is the point?? Do they feel they should be congratulated for managing to bring another child into an already over-populated planet? Or do they think people are less likely to ram into the back of them because they have a baby in the back?? Someone please explain it to me as I'm totally baffled. Im more cautious when I see a 'Baby on Board' sign, give them a wee bit more room too. Dont know if you have any kids Supermac but if my wee boy is in the back and someone is driving right up my arse it makes me mad. What if I had to break suddenly then the arse at the back of me would hit our car and possibly injure the wee man. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reina Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Get on with it.I'm sure you didn't get that £5K payrise for hee haw. I don't see a penny of it until August, mind.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Sionnach Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 (edited) I think it may be time for a haircut and beard trim. One of my colleagues last night said I had a 'Braveheart' thing going on and then, waiting for my bus home, a five year old walked past, looked at me and said to his Dad 'Is that Santa?' Cheeky wee shite! Edited March 23, 2007 by Kilt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philpy Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Continuing the motoring theme.....My nag for today is people that have those "Baby on Board" signs in the back of the car. What is the point?? Do they feel they should be congratulated for managing to bring another child into an already over-populated planet? Or do they think people are less likely to ram into the back of them because they have a baby in the back?? Someone please explain it to me as I'm totally baffled. Correct me if im wrong, but im sure i read somewhere a while back (on here maybe, but i aint too sure) that the reason people have those signs in their cars it can act as helpful information for the emergency services if they attend a crash and see a baby on board sign the first thing they would do would to be to check if the child was ok. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie_1888 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Don't have a problem with the wife driving it's the car sickness i get from it thats the worry On the subject of baby on board signs, I drive far more carefully when i see one of them as 27/11 said if i had the kids in the car and someone hit me i'd be getting done for assault if it was their fault 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie_1888 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 I think it may be time for a haircut and beard trim. One of my colleagues last night said I had a 'Braveheart' thing going on and then, waiting for my bus home, a five year old walked past, looked at me and said to his Dad 'Is that Santa?' Cheeky wee shite! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintSam Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Why is it more important to make an effort to take care behind a car carrying a child, than it is to make an effort to take care behind a car that isn't? If you smahed into my car because you were driving recklessly and killed me, you'd feel less bad because I wasn't a child? You should be driving carefully at all times. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musketeer Gripweed Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Continuing the motoring theme.....My nag for today is people that have those "Baby on Board" signs in the back of the car. What is the point?? Do they feel they should be congratulated for managing to bring another child into an already over-populated planet? Or do they think people are less likely to ram into the back of them because they have a baby in the back?? Someone please explain it to me as I'm totally baffled. It's so they can steal all the Parent & Child spaces at Tesco. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footiechick Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 It's so they can steal all the Parent & Child spaces at Tesco. (when the weans are at home!) I can't stand those stickers. I drive the same whoever I am behind. I am actually in agreement with Sam here. Shock horror!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ebanda's Handyman Services Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Why is it more important to make an effort to take care behind a car carrying a child, than it is to make an effort to take care behind a car that isn't? If you smahed into my car because you were driving recklessly and killed me, you'd feel less bad because I wasn't a child?You should be driving carefully at all times. I would feel less bad because at least you've had some life to live where if you killed a child the poor wee thing wont have had a chance at a life. 100% agree with your thought's though, if everyone drove safe all the time, 'Baby on board' signs probably wouldnt exist. Never gonna happen though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintSam Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 I would feel less bad because at least you've had some life to live where if you killed a child the poor wee thing wont have had a chance at a life. I'm sorry, but that has got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read on here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayos Noun Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Why is it more important to make an effort to take care behind a car carrying a child, than it is to make an effort to take care behind a car that isn't? If you smahed into my car because you were driving recklessly and killed me, you'd feel less bad because I wasn't a child?You should be driving carefully at all times. Because only a selected few people act this way yet if they came on here would probably agree with you, then go out for a drive and turn into an on-road lunatic. Boys racers, really old people and lorries are usually a nightmare for myself, who doesn't drive but is regularly out in a car 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ebanda's Handyman Services Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 I'm sorry, but that has got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read on here. Of course it is, I'm not agreeing with you after all. I would, of course feel terrible if I killed anybody due to my own negligent driving. I would feel worse killing a child who had just came into the world, it's as simple as that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintSam Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Of course it is, I'm not agreeing with you after all.I would, of course feel terrible if I killed anybody due to my own negligent driving. I would feel worse killing a child who had just came into the world, it's as simple as that. Yawn. Let me just point out that you did actually agree with me. That, however, doesn't detract from the stupidity of your statement. I'd feel bad if my negligent driving harmed anybody, no matter what age they were. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie_1888 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Yawn. Let me just point out that you did actually agree with me. That, however, doesn't detract from the stupidity of your statement. I'd feel bad if my negligent driving harmed anybody, no matter what age they were. You'd feel worse if it was a baby though 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintSam Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 You'd feel worse if it was a baby though No, I wouldn't. I'd feel bad no matter who it was. Do we now start to differentiate between a 5 year old and a newborn because the five year old has had five years worth of life? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie_1888 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 No, I wouldn't.I'd feel bad no matter who it was. Do we now start to differentiate between a 5 year old and a newborn because the five year old has had five years worth of life? No, because a 5 year old would still be considered a child. I'd feel bad no matter who i injured but if i injured someone under say 12 then i'd feel a whole lot worse about it, i think thats just natural which is the point i was making 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Thats true in my relationship too.Think I must be the only person to 'crash' my car at 2 miles per hour and cause £360 worth of damage. My annoyance just now, talking about cars, is that I have to drive Carol's bright purple Micra in to work next Thursday while mine is in for it's M.O.T. The car looks like Barney the dinosaur's head and does 0-60 in 3 months. It's not true in my relationship, that's for sure. ayrgirl is looking for a new car at the moment. I'm picking the bloody thing for her this time so we don't end up with a heap of crap like the Brava again! I've broached the subject of an automatic transmission a few times, only to be met with a stony glare and a curt reply, somewhat to the negative. Silly really, because the Brava has a rattle at the back end. It's a mystery to the wife how it appeared, but I reckon driving around at 20mph in 5th gear constantly is a bit of a clue..... Why doesn't she change gear? EVER?? It's not difficult is it? You learn it pretty soon from an instructor - it's like about the 5th thing they teach you!! GET AN AUTOMATIC YOU DAFT BINT 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Sionnach Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 GET AN AUTOMATIC YOU DAFT BINT I think it's time to go to Relate... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintSam Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 No, because a 5 year old would still be considered a child.I'd feel bad no matter who i injured but if i injured someone under say 12 then i'd feel a whole lot worse about it, i think thats just natural which is the point i was making And the point I am making is that it's all tragic, and there's no need whatsoever to prioritise it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.