originally for the emergency services
so that they would know that they should check in the back of a wreaked car. It would follow that the sign should be removed when the kid is not being transported.
Bloody irritating things and only exist in order to demonstrate the fertility of the driver - bunch of twats
(conanow, Wed 21 Oct 2009, 13:18, 5 replies)

Point written at the same time
(lkjshaglkasjdhglkhjz lkcvl; g;aodh;owih, Wed 21 Oct 2009, 13:19, closed)

well you learn something new....

I can't help but feel though (and this is why they annoy me so) that most people put them in their car as a notice to other drivers, rather than on the off-chance that they will be involved in some sort of road accident whilst little Jimmy is in the back.

cnuts.
(mcgriffto, Wed 21 Oct 2009, 13:28, closed)

But....
Does that mean if they had an accident and DIDN'T have the baby with them the emergency services would waste time looking for one?
(misspiggy In danger of having to get a job, Wed 21 Oct 2009, 13:44, closed)

Bollocks
This is absolute bullshit. As if a fire crew or paramedics would turn up to a crash and go "Oh look, there's no baby on board sign, no point searching the wreckage" or "There is a baby on board sign; Barry, check the glove compartment"
(thefuckestuppest cheapened this, on, Wed 21 Oct 2009, 13:51, closed)

You're missing the point
Of course the emergency services continue to look for other injured people - they prioritise using triage - small children are more vulnerable than adults in accident & less able to withstand impact etc so the signs help find the child.
(lkjshaglkasjdhglkhjz lkcvl; g;aodh;owih, Wed 21 Oct 2009, 14:53, closed)

As if the pushchair, bottles, bottle steriliser, jars of food, tubs of formula, 8 cubic metres of nappies, towels, powder, wipes, oil, dummies, teethers and toys that every baby apparently needs taking everywhere with them
wouldn't be a fucking clue
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Wed 21 Oct 2009, 14:08, closed)