Well, if you must leave it open!

[Thistledew]

DS has just turned 2. He is mad about all things diggers. There has been some major resurfacing work on the road near us recently and a digger (sorry DS, backhoe loader) has been left parked just down the road for about a week now. DS likes to go and have a good look at it close up. Today he asked to drive it, i.e. sit in the cab. I said "Sorry DS, it is locked", but stupidly to demonstrate the point I tried the door handle.

It's not locked.

It would make DS's week to sit in the cab and pretend to drive for a few minutes.

Would you let him?

I suppose I would analyse it accordingly to the harm principle. I would draw a distinction between the 'harm' of letting him enter property belonging to an individual and the 'harm' of entering property belonging to a faceless company. Yes, an individual would be pissed off if I let him play in their house or car, but who is going to be upset if he sat in a council's digger?

What's wrong with teaching your 2yo that building sites and building site equipment, such as diggers, should be avoided and not played on?

What about when he’s ten years old and out and about without you?

Having been taught that it’s ok to play with unattended machinery, what if he climbs into a tractor, a digger or a steamroller? And knocks it out of gear? Is it manageable then?

The habits you teach him now are building blocks for his future behaviour.

Wanting something doesn’t always mean you should have it.

Sure, that's why when he sat in our friend's digger I stopped him from fiddling with the controls and told him why. That's why when we are looking closely at the machinery and he goes to reach out to touch it, I tell him not to and why.

You can’t be serious! You’re teaching your DS that it’s okay to climb on dangerous machinery and use / touch things that aren’t his . Go to Diggerland FFS!

I’d be pissed off if I left my car unlocked and found your DS in the front seat pretending to drive.
This is no different!
It’s private property, you can’t just go and get in it. The wall is completely different, this has been shut.

So just ask your friend to let him sit in their digger again? Why do you feel you're so entitled to things that don't belong to you?

It’s still private property, even if it is the council’s digger it isn’t yours
You wouldn’t just let him into a fire engine, or the back of an ambulance!

He’s already been in a digger. You don’t have permission of the owner of the vehicle.
Just tell him that - it’s ok to look, but no touching without permission

Of COURSE you should just let him do whatever his little heart desires! After all, it's not YOUR fault someone forgot to lock it! So it's like they forced you to allow your son to trespass...

Or not. I'm really not a fan of the word entitled - but you really, really are.

would draw a distinction between the 'harm' of letting him enter property belonging to an individual and the 'harm' of entering property belonging to a faceless company
Hes 2
And what you describe is still trespass

It's not about risk adverse. It's about common sense and decency. It's not yours and you don't have permission so no he can't go in. Sometimes you have to say no to your kid..it won't kill him!

No really, the distinction is

‘Does this belong to me’

Or

‘Does this NOT belong to me’

Anything else is assuming that rules, laws and basic manners don’t apply to you if you don’t want them to.

I suppose I would analyse it accordingly to the harm principle. I would draw a distinction between the 'harm' of letting him enter property belonging to an individual and the 'harm' of entering property belonging to a faceless company. Yes, an individual would be pissed off if I let him play in their house or car, but who is going to be upset if he sat in a council's digger?

Or you could just teach your child the difference between right, wrong and fucking entitled

Absolutely not.

Do you all stop your children walking along brick walls or playing leapfrog over parking bollards as well then? They are the property of someone else too and you don't have their explicit permission to use them in that way.

the 'harm' of entering property belonging to a faceless company

So behaviour is only wrong if you don’t have to face the consequences or if you aren’t upsetting an individual?

That’s an... odd attitude.

So as a teenager you would teach him not to steal your neighbour’s campervan for joy riding but the corporation bus is ok?

What would be the consequences of a two year old sitting in a digger?

IT. IS. NOT. YOUR. RIGHT. TO. LET. HIM. SIT. IN. IT.

Actually yes, I never let my kids walk along other people’s walls.

Parking bollards, never came up but I don’t think it’s the same anyway. It’s not about them being used for something other than their design, and it wouldn’t be viewed the same by the owners.

So you judge if you should do something or not depending on consequences?

Where do you draw the line?

So there is more of a split in terms of wall walking, but no objectors to bollard jumping? What is it that differentiates those two from each other and from sitting in a digger?

We don't have a 'right' to do any of them.

What would be the consequences of a two year old sitting in a digger?

You are completely deliberately missing the point.

It's not the consequences of sitting in a digger you need to consider. It's the consequences of not teaching your son that you don't go sitting in random diggers!!

And for fucks sake get over the wall thing. It's not even remotely the same thing.

And those consequences are ...?

Assuming I also teach him that heavy machinery is dangerous and to be respected?

meadowmeow - why is is not remotely the same?