The fact that you might get a hundred tanks in the park if they are allowed and that that would be bad is not the reason that a tank in the park violates the rule.
The reason a tank in the park violates the rule is because a tank is a vehicle and the rule is "no vehicles in the park".
Re:No Vehicles in the Park
by happymellon on Tuesday November 03, 2026 @08:54AM
(#50352005)
I don't think I said that.
The tank violates the rule and it is why it isn't allowed.
However there is a scenario (such as the war memorial,or an ambulance) where you may want the vehicle to have access.
I was just relating it to people who claim to want to "cut red tape/remove regulations" because most of the time the red tape scenarios are these where we want to be able to carve out exceptions for particular scenarios. But we still don't want it to be the default position.
I think this is key. Having a tank, even if it is nonfunctional and being used as a war memorial is still a vehicle and should be banned unless an exception granted.
Otherwise you'll end up with a hundred "tanks" in the park because they are "allowed". This is one of the things that people who want to slash red tape don't seem to get. Just because it was difficult to get one going doesn't mean that we should cut the red tape. Perhaps we don't actually want/need 27 instances of it.