Taking up a whole parking space

[Soujyu]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

For instance,
http://www.amlegal.com/austin_nxt/ (snip)
Austin § 16-5-16 PARKING PROHIBITED IN CERTAIN SPECIFIED PLACES
No person shall stop, stand or park a vehicle, except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a police officer or traffic-control device ... on a sidewalk or any part of the sidewalk area...

(snip)

This is Austin you're quoting. When you've got Lance Armstrong (I don't like him, BTW) and his cult of bicyclists, obviously there's going to be a law that is biased towards bicyclists.

However, we get a free perk; in downtown Austin, motorcycles (and scooters/mopeds) can park free in any spot that is controlled by one of their new meters. It allowed me to not have to use the bus to participate in jury duty.

[Kitdog]

At my work there is limited staff parking (I work in a school) and the Priciple hates motorcycles and thinks teachers shouldn't drive them!!! So sidwalk is out of the question. I found another teacher with a small Honda car and we made an agreement that we would share a spot. If I get there first I park as far to the front as I can sideways in the parking spot then she pulls in. If she gets there first then I pull in behind her again sideways. Works well and we both know where to find the other incase of emergency to move our vehicles so the other can get out.

[Flashmonkey]

Originally Posted by CZroe

In the lots I visit every day, the bicycle parking actually isn't on the sidewalk and the facility maintenance crew refers to them as the "East and West Motorcycle parking areas." There is some additional bicycle parking on one of the sidewalks, but the majority is elsewhere and motorcycles are clearly welcome. Also, many places have dedicated motorcycle parking areas ON sidewalks

Oh that's sweet! Well I guess san diego has more bikers than Canada does seeing as how you can ride all year round. A motorcycle is probably considered a legitimate form of transport there, as well. We're still seen as a nusance up here haha.

[Blackwidow]

Originally Posted by Hadyn

Our legal system is kinda wonky.

Kinda? I think its a freaking joke! in the example you gave about the intruder breaking in and getting shot by the homeowner, i have heard sooo many stories like that, and its pathetic! A guy won a case because he was breaking into a home and the owners came in and caught him, so he dashes out of the house and trips on the sprinkler and sues the homeowners.

[Blackwidow]

for those of you who live in LA county, have you ever parked on the sidewalk? i've seen so many bikes on sidewalks, and thought it was legal. If its not, i'd like to know so i don't start parking on the sidewalks once i get my bike.

[Cali619]

Originally Posted by Blackwidow

for those of you who live in LA county, have you ever parked on the sidewalk? i've seen so many bikes on sidewalks, and thought it was legal. If its not, i'd like to know so i don't start parking on the sidewalks once i get my bike.

I think its depending on where , cause a lot of businesses are out of jurisdiction(private property) and up to the owner whether to complain. If I have doubts I just ask a CHP or Cop , they are usually pretty cool to MC's.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

Unfortunately, the flaw in this reasoning is that someone breaking the law can shed some responsibility to others for the consequences of breaking the law. This same reasoning would make it possible for me to run out on the freeway to get hit by a car, then claim the driver was partly responsible and should pay for some of my damage.

At some point, lawbreakers should be held fully accountable for the consequences of their illegal actions. It makes no sense, nor should it, to place any blame, not even one percent, on the innocent victims. In any case, there's not enough detail to know exactly what happened in this particular case, but based just on the evidence of the pictures I would say that for now I believe the rider is one hundred percent responsible for the damage to the bike and any damage to the ramp.

The fact is, this would not, could not, have happened if he'd obeyed the law.

There's a difference though. Someone is only responsible if they could have taken action to avoid a situation. So if someone runs out on the freeway and you hit them because you didn't have the time or space to stop or swerve, then you are not responsible. If you see someone on the freeway and decide to just maintain your speed and not swerve to miss them, then it would be your fault.

[Blackwidow]

Originally Posted by Cali619

I think its depending on where , cause a lot of businesses are out of jurisdiction(private property) and up to the owner whether to complain. If I have doubts I just ask a CHP or Cop , they are usually pretty cool to MC's.

Thats cool that you can find cops when you need them, i seem to never find a cop when i need one. they are always in my grill when i don't care to talk to them.

[Blackwidow]

Originally Posted by revstriker

There's a difference though. Someone is only responsible if they could have taken action to avoid a situation. So if someone runs out on the freeway and you hit them because you didn't have the time or space to stop or swerve, then you are not responsible. If you see someone on the freeway and decide to just maintain your speed and not swerve to miss them, then it would be your fault.

Lets all agree to disagree. lol and lets all learn a lesson from this, DO NOT PARK IN PLACES YOU SHOULDN'T OR ELSE YOU CAN GET SCREWED BIG TIME.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by CZroe

What excuse? These things don't just pop out. They aren't silent either. There is no way a kid with functioning senses could have been unaware of it being deployed. In fact, they'd likely be very interested! Any deaf/blind kids would be under supervision and not running around in a parking lot under deploying handicap ramps.

It is not her responsibility to ensure that it remains clear any more than it is a train's responsibility to make sure that cars don't cut through the railroad crossing as it passes. Trust.

Once again, these things deploy very slowly for that very reason. They include a remote specifically so that you can have it deployed and ready when you arrive, meaning that you aren't expected to always be there to witness it. The kid analogy fails because they can and WOULD get out of the way. An inanimate object can't and that's why its owner is at fault 100%.

Someone standing in an empty parking space is not breaking the law (without specific signals and signage, pedestrians always have the right of way), so that doesn't apply either.

First, it would be completely reasonable to expect someone with degraded senses and abilities to be in a handicapped parking area. It doesn't have to be a kid. Second, it doesn't make any difference when it comes to responsibility, whether the ramp drops fast or slow. Yes they design them to move slow to minimize (not completely eliminate) the risk of injury. But this doesn't resolve the operator of the ramp from the responsibility of ensuring that the area is clear before they lower the ramp.

By the way, someone walking through the no parking zone of a handicapped area is not breaking the law either.

As for your train example, there are indeed rules and laws which govern the operation of a train through a crossing. Most crossing are designed to physically block people from entering the danger zone when a train is coming. Trains also must slow down in many cases, and sound their whistle as a warning that the train is about to cross.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by Blackwidow

Lets all agree to disagree. lol and lets all learn a lesson from this, DO NOT PARK IN PLACES YOU SHOULDN'T OR ELSE YOU CAN GET SCREWED BIG TIME.

I agree. As I said earlier, I have no problems with the guys bike getting knocked over. It was karma for him parking in the space. But when it comes to legal responsibility, this doesn't always jive with my opinion.

[Blackwidow]

totally agree with you Scott

[revstriker]

I think you will fine that most cities/towns etc. have some kind of law or ordinance which prohibits motor vehicles (which includes motorcycles) from parking on sidewalks. Now whether or not this is enforced is a different issue.

I do park on the sidewalk at a couple of places. When I do, I make sure that I am out of the way so people can get by. Since this is more often than not, near a wheel chair ramp, I also make sure that someone in a wheel chair can still get up, down, and by. I've never had a problem.

At the shopping mall, I have parked (with other motorcycles) in the bicycle parking area at the front of the parking garage. It is not up on a sidewalk though. It is beyond the cement pylons (or whatever those pole barriers are called) so it is not at risk of getting hit. Since I always see motorcycles in this area, I can only assume that the Mall Management does not have an issue with it. The funny thing is, I've never actually seen a bicycle there.

[ally99]

Originally Posted by kyl18b

What about the striped areas at the ends of parking rows? They're usually oddly shaped triangles. I'm protected from both angles usually by the two cars parked on the end. Any thoughts on those spots?

There was a cop in my MSF class who said that blue and red "gores" (so they are called..not sure if spelled correctly) are illegal but all other colors are ok to park our bikes. Most handicap areas are painted blue and the fire areas are red. So I always park in the yellow or white striped spaces to keep my lil' ninj as safe as possible. Just my 2 cents.
:-) Happy weekend all! Yeah! Ally

[Cedilla]

I always park diagonally at the edge of the parking space, and some bozo still managed to hit my bike last week. I don't know who or where, but I was out running errands all day, and the next morning I was looking over my bike while it was warming up, and I noticed a nice deep scratch all the way down to the bare plastic, all the way down my left tail fairing, and my turn signal lens was popped off.

I wish we had more motorcycle parking spots in my neck of the woods. We got 4 spaces in Huntsville, and they are all at cycle gear.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by ally99

There was a cop in my MSF class who said that blue and red "gores" (so they are called..not sure if spelled correctly) are illegal but all other colors are ok to park our bikes. Most handicap areas are painted blue and the fire areas are red. So I always park in the yellow or white striped spaces to keep my lil' ninj as safe as possible. Just my 2 cents.
:-) Happy weekend all! Yeah! Ally

There may be parking laws or ordinates around handicapped parking and fire zone parking. But just because there are none around other striped off areas (like maybe at the end of a row), I wouldn't assume that it is OK to park your bike there. If it is a privately owned parking lot, then I would imagine the owner could have your bike towed for parking in a designated no parking zone.

[headshrink]

Originally Posted by revstriker

. If it is a privately owned parking lot, then I would imagine the owner could have your bike towed for parking in a designated no parking zone.

In CA they would be liable for the towing costs IF there was not a proper sign posted (and some other details). BUT, that is not to say that it always happens the way it is supposed to either.... I would just say play it safe and park in a spot, if you are not familiar with that particular lot (your work, church, etc.).

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by headshrink

In CA they would be liable for the towing costs IF there was not a proper sign posted (and some other details). BUT, that is not to say that it always happens the way it is supposed to either.... I would just say play it safe and park in a spot, if you are not familiar with that particular lot (your work, church, etc.).

Agreed.

Laws are very different in different jurisdictions. Things can even vary from one town to the next.

[Sailariel]

Originally Posted by Blackwidow

Lets all agree to disagree. lol and lets all learn a lesson from this, DO NOT PARK IN PLACES YOU SHOULDN'T OR ELSE YOU CAN GET SCREWED BIG TIME.

I still think that it is much easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission. Works for me.

[00NissanNinja]

you know, I figure I'm taking all these risks and the roads suck and are filled with all sorts of obstacles intentionally, why can't I park at a bicycle rack or something, they are rarely occupied by a bicycle anyways. Nearly everyone should understand how easy a bike can be taken and the closer to the building we park the better chance that the bike will be safe and it will give us the option to lock the bike up.

[KJohnson21]

Originally Posted by Sailariel

I still think that it is much easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission. Works for me.

That might be what the Harley guy parked in the handicapped access area thought too.

[Sailariel]

Originally Posted by 00NissanNinja

you know, I figure I'm taking all these risks and the roads suck and are filled with all sorts of obstacles intentionally, why can't I park at a bicycle rack or something, they are rarely occupied by a bicycle anyways. Nearly everyone should understand how easy a bike can be taken and the closer to the building we park the better chance that the bike will be safe and it will give us the option to lock the bike up.

Have you gotten a citation for parking next to a bicycle rack? I have been parking at bicycle racks for two years with my bicycles and my motorcycle. No one has ever given me any grief. Park next to a rack and use your cable lock. Chances are that no one will care.

[Sailariel]

Originally Posted by KJohnson21

That might be what the Harley guy parked in the handicapped access area thought too.

I know two Harley guys who are handicapped---both have prosthetic legs from wounds suffered in Afghanistan. I have a handicap sticker because of a gunshot to my hip--Vietnam. I don't use the handicap space because I can still walk a ways. I can ride my bicycle for 100mi with no problem, but walking 100meters is a bit of a chore. There is a whole different muscle group in play. I think that if you meet some of the Patriot Guard Riders, you will find that many of us have some fairly serious disabilities.

[00NissanNinja]

Originally Posted by Sailariel

Have you gotten a citation for parking next to a bicycle rack?

No not yet, so I am going to keep doing that when I can. I think it should be legal everywhere to do so; that's what I'm getting at.

[Sailariel]

Originally Posted by 00NissanNinja

No not yet, so I am going to keep doing that when I can. I think it should be legal everywhere to do so; that's what I'm getting at.

Harris, I think you'll be fine. Best wishes, and enjoy your Ninja---a truly fantastic bike.

[00NissanNinja]

Originally Posted by Sailariel

Harris, I think you'll be fine. Best wishes, and enjoy your Ninja---a truly fantastic bike.

Thanks and I shall

[CZroe]

Dr. Gregory House, M.D. has a handicap sticker and a CBR 1K. He stashes his cane on the bike and GOES! No one argues that he doesn't deserve a handicap space.

Of course, he's fictional.

Embedding disabled, but at least there's a link and a thumbnail:

Link to original page on YouTube.

Link to original page on YouTube.

[tabogon]

Originally Posted by CZroe

What excuse? These things don't just pop out. They aren't silent either. There is no way a kid with functioning senses could have been unaware of it being deployed. In fact, they'd likely be very interested! Any deaf/blind kids would be under supervision and not running around in a parking lot under deploying handicap ramps.

It is not her responsibility to ensure that it remains clear any more than it is a train's responsibility to make sure that cars don't cut through the railroad crossing as it passes. Trust.

Once again, these things deploy very slowly for that very reason. They include a remote specifically so that you can have it deployed and ready when you arrive, meaning that you aren't expected to always be there to witness it. The kid analogy fails because they can and WOULD get out of the way. An inanimate object can't and that's why its owner is at fault 100%.

Someone standing in an empty parking space is not breaking the law (without specific signals and signage, pedestrians always have the right of way), so that doesn't apply either.

It seems very odd that you would justify blindly operating something mechanical that has the capability to seriously hurt someone. I am not saying that it was totally the HC person's fault, but there are responsibilities that you have to take into consideration. If it had been a person in a minivan opening the back hatch with a remote and hit something, it would be that person's fault. Whether the door opens slowly and has an audible tone or not that person should have looked before operating something that could seriously hurt someone.

How about if someone was hurt and an ambulance parked where the bike was, the EMTs are inside stabalizing the injured person and this HC person just blindly opens the ramp and damages the ambulance. Who fault would it be then?

If you want to break it down in a legal standpoint:
Bike parked illegally? Biker's fault.
Bike damaged due to being parked illegally? Biker's fault.
Bike damaged due to blindly operating the ramp? HC fault.
Possibility of it being done on purpose to "teach him a lesson"? Of course.
Vehicle not marked as a ramp equipped vehicle? Doesn't look like it.
(I will double check the laws, but EVERY ramp equipped vehicle that I have seen is marked as such.)

Like I mentioned, if it had been an emergency vehicle and it was damaged it would be ALL of the HC driver's fault, due to neglect of responsibility. However, since it was an illegally parked motorcycle, it's justified?

And previous logic from Scott and Blackwidow is not flawed in any way, if there happened to be someone injured due to blindly operating a mechanical device it would be the driver's fault. Period. Just because a person is handicapped doesn't mean they are no longer responsible for their actions, and trying to justify stupidity is just ignorant.

Again, I am not saying that it was TOTALLY the HC drivers fault, but that both parties are to blame is some way.


EDIT: I stand corrected on the van markings, it would seem that it is not required to actually mark a vehicle as having a ramp, and from looking at the picture the HC sign is a "van accessible" sign meaning the lane he parked in is the adjacent access aisle for the van parking.

Nevertheless, remotely operating the ramp without making sure it is clear is just plain stupid, and as we all know, stupidity is very much a punishable offense.

[Blackwidow]

Very well put Josh!

To add to the discussion, if you were the biker, would you call the police or allow the HC person to call the police?

Here is my take on it....how much would it cost to fix the bike? $600? $1000? A ticket for parking in the HC spot here in Cali is anywhere from $1500 to $2000 bucks, if I were the biker, i'd weigh those two out before making a decision to get he law involved. The biker might be better off shutting his mouth and learning from his experiance. Thoughts?

[headshrink]

There is a lot of back-and-forth about who is more right, wrong, or to blame in this case. Are we talking about our personal opinions of right and wrong, or armchair legal analysis? These are very often VERY different things. My guess is there is a sprinkling of both. Without an absolute here, there will be no consensus outside of personal opinions.

If we need an absolute to settle this, we can use my oppinion.... OK, j/k on that last part.

[CZroe]

Originally Posted by tabogon

It seems very odd that you would justify blindly operating something mechanical that has the capability to seriously hurt someone. I am not saying that it was totally the HC person's fault, but there are responsibilities that you have to take into consideration. If it had been a person in a minivan opening the back hatch with a remote and hit something, it would be that person's fault. Whether the door opens slowly and has an audible tone or not that person should have looked before operating something that could seriously hurt someone.

That's just it. If you blindly opened the rear hatch of your vehicle and it slowly opened like a ramp deploying, it would TOUCH somone unaware standing there. Let's not go overboard imagining scenarios where it is still possible (remember, there is no marked off loading zone there) because it is possible to seriously injure someone or yourself with pretty much anything.

Barring any extremely unfortunate and unlikely scenarios, you'd have to be pulling a Tianamen Square style "stand off" to get hurt. Can't fault the driver for a suicidal person standing there waiting to be squished. Unlike Tianamen's tanks, there is also an emergency kill switch on any automated ramp.

I'm certainly not saying that anyone SHOULD blindly operate it, but I am saying that they are justified. The potential for injury really isn't much different than remote start on a vehicle startling someone and having them get hurt. Inanimate objects with no right to be there are irrelevant. Legally, there is a very big difference and, as I have shown, the risk to people is very slim.

Originally Posted by tabogon

How about if someone was hurt and an ambulance parked where the bike was, the EMTs are inside stabalizing the injured person and this HC person just blindly opens the ramp and damages the ambulance. Who fault would it be then?

Did you know that it's illegal for an ambulance to speed and violate other traffic laws nearly everywhere? That's to determine fault, not to restrict the ambulance. Fault would be determined here just the same. I'm sure that you don't think that the train is at fault if an ambulance ignores the rail road crossing lights and weaves through the lowered gate arms only to get hit by a train. Right of way still matters. It isn't just for the person to access their van, it's also for the person to deploy their ramp, while staring at it or not. The bike is not visible from all angles anyway and as long as there is not a person there, which would be seen, there person has every right to deploy. Also, risk to property is not legally the same as risk to life. They were not risking anyone. As we have established, even if a person were there, they'd have to be totally incapacitated with no witnesses for there to be any risk. It's specifically why they deploy so slowly and have kill switches/emergency cut off buttons.

Originally Posted by tabogon

If you want to break it down in a legal standpoint:
Bike parked illegally? Biker's fault.
Bike damaged due to being parked illegally? Biker's fault.
Bike damaged due to blindly operating the ramp? HC fault.
Possibility of it being done on purpose to "teach him a lesson"? Of course.
Vehicle not marked as a ramp equipped vehicle? Doesn't look like it.
(I will double check the laws, but EVERY ramp equipped vehicle that I have seen is marked as such.)

Like I mentioned, if it had been an emergency vehicle and it was damaged it would be ALL of the HC driver's fault, due to neglect of responsibility. However, since it was an illegally parked motorcycle, it's justified?

I believe you made a majorly wrong assumption about the abulance scenario and who's fault it would be.

Originally Posted by tabogon

And previous logic from Scott and Blackwidow is not flawed in any way, if there happened to be someone injured due to blindly operating a mechanical device it would be the driver's fault. Period. Just because a person is handicapped doesn't mean they are no longer responsible for their actions, and trying to justify stupidity is just ignorant.

Again, I am not saying that it was TOTALLY the HC drivers fault, but that both parties are to blame is some way.


EDIT: I stand corrected on the van markings, it would seem that it is not required to actually mark a vehicle as having a ramp, and from looking at the picture the HC sign is a "van accessible" sign meaning the lane he parked in is the adjacent access aisle for the van parking.

Nevertheless, remotely operating the ramp without making sure it is clear is just plain stupid, and as we all know, stupidity is very much a punishable offense.

I agree that it is not smart, but I disagree that it is a punishable offense. The remote trigger and the safety features were made for doing exactly what the HC person did. Even if you look before deploying, there is no way to make sure that it stays clear while it deploys, so liability is similarly limited. A bike may not be seen when looking through a storefront before deployment, but it doesn't matter because a bike != a person. Any person who walks under a deploying ramp and stands there is an idiot. Any person who walks under it and has a sudden, unwitnessed 2-minute silent seizure, is unfortunate... like being struck by lightning.

Originally Posted by Blackwidow

Very well put Josh!

To add to the discussion, if you were the biker, would you call the police or allow the HC person to call the police?

Here is my take on it....how much would it cost to fix the bike? $600? $1000? A ticket for parking in the HC spot here in Cali is anywhere from $1500 to $2000 bucks, if I were the biker, i'd weigh those two out before making a decision to get he law involved. The biker might be better off shutting his mouth and learning from his experiance. Thoughts?

The bike is not a person. The biker would have NO basis for calling the police. Even if it's illegal to do something that you know will cause bodily harm to someone else, it's not illegal to deploy a ramp without clearing illegally placed property. Legally, damage to property is very different and it comes down to "right of way."

[Guinss]

I think there will be a lot of posts here based on opinions, it's after all a bike-forum and most will feel with the person that got the bike wrecked.

The way i see it, there has happened 2 individual cases of someone breaking the law here. The driver of the car was obviously not showing any awareness of where he/she launched the ramp, which of course is expected and therefore is to blame for the wrecked bike. The bike is parked wrong, and it can be fined by a police officer.

[FrugalNinja250]

I take it all back. If the HC hadn't parked there in the first place this wouldn't have happened. Therefor, it's all her fault.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by CZroe

That's just it. If you blindly opened the rear hatch of your vehicle and it slowly opened like a ramp deploying, it would TOUCH somone unaware standing there. Let's not go overboard imagining scenarios where it is still possible (remember, there is no marked off loading zone there) because it is possible to seriously injure someone or yourself with pretty much anything.

Barring any extremely unfortunate and unlikely scenarios, you'd have to be pulling a Tianamen Square style "stand off" to get hurt. Can't fault the driver for a suicidal person standing there waiting to be squished. Unlike Tianamen's tanks, there is also an emergency kill switch on any automated ramp.

I'm certainly not saying that anyone SHOULD blindly operate it, but I am saying that they are justified. The potential for injury really isn't much different than remote start on a vehicle startling someone and having them get hurt. Inanimate objects with no right to be there are irrelevant. Legally, there is a very big difference and, as I have shown, the risk to people is very slim.

I think you are confusing your opinion of responsibility with a legal responsibility. While safety devices such as audible warnings, stripped off zones, signs, and a slow moving ramp are in place to try and limit the chances of injury, they do not legally excuse someone from injuring someone else or damaging their property. They still have a responsibility, even with the safety devices in place, to operate their equipment in a safe manner.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by headshrink

There is a lot of back-and-forth about who is more right, wrong, or to blame in this case. Are we talking about our personal opinions of right and wrong, or armchair legal analysis? These are very often VERY different things. My guess is there is a sprinkling of both. Without an absolute here, there will be no consensus outside of personal opinions.

If we need an absolute to settle this, we can use my oppinion.... OK, j/k on that last part.

LOL! Indeed there are both types of opinions here. My personal opinion says the biker is 100% to blame. However, I believe legally, the driver of the van (or the operator of the ramp if not the same person) has some responsibility for the damage.

And this certainly is an arm chair legal analysis.

[CZroe]

Originally Posted by revstriker

I think you are confusing your opinion of responsibility with a legal responsibility.

And I believe you are doing the same. My example of an ambulance vs. a train at rail-road crossing is my viewpoint. The safety measures are equivalent to lowered but easily circumvented gates, and signal lights/sounds with advance knowledge except that the ramp is much slower and more avoidable than a train and yet a train can trust that you will obey the law and blindly blow through.

Originally Posted by revstriker

While safety devices such as audible warnings, stripped off zones, signs, and a slow moving ramp are in place to try and limit the chances of injury, they do not legally excuse someone from injuring someone else or damaging their property. They still have a responsibility, even with the safety devices in place, to operate their equipment in a safe manner.

Which they did. Knocking over a bike is not unsafe for a person and the conditions that led to it are not comparable for the stated reasons (a person can and would move). Potential for damage to an unattended inanmate object is not a personal safety/health concern. This is what I meant by the law not looking at property damage vs. personal injury/death the same way in the same circumstances.

[tabogon]

You are saying the exact same thing over and over again, the guy parked illegally, EVERYONE agrees with that. Also, just because they are slow and loud doesn't make them safe. They are hydraulic lifts after all.

In the grand scheme, the ramp was activated by a person hitting a switch and if that person didn't hit that switch there would not have been any damage. If the guy didn't park illegally, there would not have been any damage. Placing fault on both parties. Very simple logic and I still haven't ruled out the idea that it was done on purpose.

BTW, I have 2 cousins that are cops, 3 that are EMTs, they do whatever they need to to keep people safe and/or save lives. That includes parking in front of buildings, speeding and any other form of illegal driving you can think of. Trust me, if that person dropped a ramp on top of a cop car/ambulance/fire rescue/etc that person would be held accountable whether YOU think so or not.