Slate’s Justin Peters argues that handicapped parking fraud is one of the jerkiest crimes imaginable.
I agree.
My evil stepfather didn’t teach me much and demonstrated little by way of moral judgment, but when he saw a car parked illegally in a handicapped spot, he would scratch the paint with his car key.
Not the best example to set for your child, but at least he was talking a stand against something.
The most baffling aspect of of handicapped parking fraud is the risk-reward involved:
Park a little closer. Save a few steps. Risk a hefty fine and being labeled as a social pariah.
It’s just not worth it.
Almost as infuriating is the senseless desire to find a parking spot close to the entrance to a person’s destination. The amount of time that the average person is willing to invest in order to avoid walking 50 feet is astounding.
I have known people who will spend 15 minutes looking for a good parking spot at the mall in order to save 100 steps, knowing full well that their intention is to spend the next four hours walking thousands of steps inside the mall.
It’s insane.
I would love for an economist to do a study on the time and energy wasted searching for a good parking spot versus adopting the policy of driving to the end of the row and parking as far away as possible, even when a closer spot is clearly available.
I strongly suspect that consistently parking at the end of the row, without any attempt to park closer, would prove to be a time saver in the long run, and perhaps get you a little more exercise in the process.
I would adopt this policy myself, but I am married to a woman who really likes a good parking spot.
The sacrifices we make for our spouses.
