Put the bike on its side so the child could not tip it over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Leaving a child's bike outside a children's activity class is an "attractive nuisance." Find a better arrangement. Since you dropped off your child, leave the bike in your car, or tell her she can't bike to class.

It's just a silly and irresponsible thing to do. A two year old cannot appreciate the risk or consequences of playing on a bike. And she doesn't have the impulse control to make those decisions rationally.

It would be great if her mom stopped her, but your decision making is poor here. Why would you do this?

This is the whole point of having parents.

Why does this need to be explained to people?!? Really?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would have said No you can't climb on this bike, if she kept climbing I would have physically removed her from the bike and said "where is your Mom?"

I would do the same.

Exactly.

Say no. Physically remove her. And ask where’s your parent?

It’s great that your kid bikes to their activity. I see no problem with parking the bike outside. It is the other parent’s job to keep their kid off bikes that aren’t theirs.

Anonymous wrote:Leaving a child's bike outside a children's activity class is an "attractive nuisance." Find a better arrangement. Since you dropped off your child, leave the bike in your car, or tell her she can't bike to class.

It's just a silly and irresponsible thing to do. A two year old cannot appreciate the risk or consequences of playing on a bike. And she doesn't have the impulse control to make those decisions rationally.

It would be great if her mom stopped her, but your decision making is poor here. Why would you do this?

An attractive nuisance? First of all, that applies to a landowner, but in any case, I totally disagree. A bike is a mode of transportation. It's not entirely like a car or truck. I don't think anyone on this board would fault a pickup truck owner for a two-year old crawling on the truck that was parked outside his child's activity.

I mean, now a kid can't ride a bike to an activity because some toddler's checked out mom is going to let the toddler run wild? No.

OP, I think you handled this correctly - I probably would have gone back after you saw the bike tip over on the kid, took the kid by the hand to the mom and told her, "Not only do I not want your child injured, I don't want my child's bike damaged. Keep your child off of the bike."

I honestly can't believe the entitlement of some people.

That person needs to supervise their own kid. My kids see bikes all the time on sidewalks ,in the grass at parks , and bike racks. They aren’t allowed to climb on any of them. She needs to teach her kid not to touch another person’s belongings and take her away if she is.

Anonymous wrote:Leaving a child's bike outside a children's activity class is an "attractive nuisance." Find a better arrangement. Since you dropped off your child, leave the bike in your car, or tell her she can't bike to class.

It's just a silly and irresponsible thing to do. A two year old cannot appreciate the risk or consequences of playing on a bike. And she doesn't have the impulse control to make those decisions rationally.

It would be great if her mom stopped her, but your decision making is poor here. Why would you do this?

The problem was not OP. The problem was the child's mother not watching her child. There are attractive nuisances" everywhere. Putting a name on it does not release parental responsibility.

Anonymous wrote:I am still confused that your chlld biked there but you were there to drop off. Who were you dropping off it your DD rode her bike?

We biked in together.

Anonymous wrote:Leaving a child's bike outside a children's activity class is an "attractive nuisance." Find a better arrangement. Since you dropped off your child, leave the bike in your car, or tell her she can't bike to class.

It's just a silly and irresponsible thing to do. A two year old cannot appreciate the risk or consequences of playing on a bike. And she doesn't have the impulse control to make those decisions rationally.

It would be great if her mom stopped her, but your decision making is poor here. Why would you do this?

This is the whole point of having parents.

Anonymous wrote:DCUM at its finest. Now we can't leave bikes outside because they are an "attractive nuisance"? There aren't enough eye rolls in the world for this.

This. Next time tell the mom please keep her kid off of the bike. I have a 5 year old and almost 2 year old and every day I remind them not to touch things that don’t belong to them. And then I physically remove them if they do. That kids mom sounds like a nut.

I am still confused that your chlld biked there but you were there to drop off. Who were you dropping off it your DD rode her bike?

DCUM at its finest. Now we can't leave bikes outside because they are an "attractive nuisance"? There aren't enough eye rolls in the world for this.

It is silly to leave a bike outside? Really? I am guessing those Danes are all crazed from the cold!

Anonymous wrote:I would have said No you can't climb on this bike, if she kept climbing I would have physically removed her from the bike and said " where is your Mom?"

I would do the same.

Anonymous wrote:Leaving a child's bike outside a children's activity class is an "attractive nuisance." Find a better arrangement. Since you dropped off your child, leave the bike in your car, or tell her she can't bike to class.

It's just a silly and irresponsible thing to do. A two year old cannot appreciate the risk or consequences of playing on a bike. And she doesn't have the impulse control to make those decisions rationally.

It would be great if her mom stopped her, but your decision making is poor here. Why would you do this?

Which is why 2yos need to be supervised *at all times,* moron. By her PARENTS or a babysitter.