More disabled parking ignorance

Brassedoff

I wish I had her two working legs!

Liz Jones, ignore disabled bays!

dori2o

Brassedoff wrote: »

I wish I had her two working legs!

Liz Jones, ignore disabled bays!

I expected nothing less from the daily mail and its employees.

Elitist, far right wing, I'm alright Jack so sod everyone else.

It seems these are the only views that apply to the paper, it's employees and the idiots who read and actually believe the crap it prints.

nannytone_2

it seems to be an opinion that is getting more and more prevalent in the public at large too though.

people seem to believe the mis information that says anyone with a disability is receiving shed loads of benefit ... whereas many disabled people either receive no disability benefit, or very little.

if the agenda was to set people against the disabled and merely seem them as leeches that are nothing more than a drain on resources ...

then sadly it appears to be working

pauliboo

The comments are getting better though, if you look at the 'best rated' they all follow the view that this is a 'joke' or crass article.

It seems the readership have finally started to question the mail's reporting.

nannytone_2

you need to take a look on the benefit board then.

they seem mostly in agreement that £53 a week is a liveable amount and that there is no reason why DLA shouldnt be used for housing costs as ' that is what it is for'

Dunroamin

The article is obviously tongue in cheek - sometimes even the DM shows a sense of humour!

Heycock

Have you actually read the article? She herself is disabled and has a valid point about discrimination against certain disabilities. Nothing to do with "Daily Mail" sensibilities or prejudices. I don't share the Daily Mail's politics (or the Mirror's) but i do now read it regularly and it seems to me that most comments on here about it and it's readers are based on ignorance and knee-jerk hearsay. In the short time I've been reding it there have been frequent contributions from guest writers to the left and to the right.
Liz Jones may be bitter, she may be confrontational. But she writes from her heart. If you can't take it, don't read it.

dori2o

Heycock wrote: »

Have you actually read the article? She herself is disabled and has a valid point about discrimination against certain disabilities. Nothing to do with "Daily Mail" sensibilities or prejudices. I don't share the Daily Mail's politics (or the Mirror's) but i do now read it regularly and it seems to me that most comments on here about it and it's readers are based on ignorance and knee-jerk hearsay. In the short time I've been reding it there have been frequent contributions from guest writers to the left and to the right.
Liz Jones may be bitter, she may be confrontational. But she writes from her heart. If you can't take it, don't read it.

She does the disabled no favours by refusing to abide by the system and deliberately abuse the disabled parking schemes.

If she is sufficiently disabled that she requires the benefit that a blue badge to help with day to day living, then she has the same opportunity I and every other BB holder has. She can apply for one using the proper channels and park in the bays designated for blue badge users by displaying the badge.

Otherwise she is a leech. A scrounging scumbag who is no better than the able bodied who use the disabled bays and abuse the BB system.

Mojisola

Heycock wrote: »

Have you actually read the article? She herself is disabled

She is deaf - she doesn't say to what extent. That hardly affects her mobility.

She also thinks you need a PhD in order to fill in the forms to claim a BB!

Heycock

So we have a disability pecking order then.
That aside, if you read the article rather than react to what others who haven't read it either have said you would know that her frustration comes from the AMOUNT of space given over to disabled spaces. Are there REALLY REALLY that many people out there with genuine mobility problems requiring a dedicated parking space? In an otherwise full car park there will always be empty disability bays. If the people on mobility want a tax payer funded space, let them pay road tax.

Mojisola

Heycock wrote: »

That aside, if you read the article rather than react to what others who haven't read it either have said you would know that her frustration comes from the AMOUNT of space given over to disabled spaces. Are there REALLY REALLY that many people out there with genuine mobility problems requiring a dedicated parking space? In an otherwise full car park there will always be empty disability bays.

If the people on mobility want a tax payer funded space, let them pay road tax.

I have read the article.

If she was genuinely objecting to the number of disabled parking spaces, she would be writing to the people running the car parks or starting a campaign in the paper she writes for. Just how does her parking in a disabled space send any message to anyone unless she puts a big sign on the car saying that choosing to park there is a protest against the number of spaces?

Not all people with BB are exempt from paying road tax. You can only get the exemption if the car is solely for the disabled person's use.