What if axe lady wasn’t a total psycho?

Parking in a prohibited spot may land you a ticket and a fine. But leaving your car in front of someone’s house can get you in even deeper trouble — as experienced by a woman whose car was smashed by an angry house owner when she did just that.

The violent episode, which took place at a housing estate in Bangkok’s Prawet district early this week, soon caught the attention of social media users.

In a video clip, the house owner showed signs of frustration at not being able to exit her place due to a pickup blocking her way. Without releasing the handbrake, the driver had left the vehicle and gone shopping at a nearby market.

Fuming with anger, the house owner returned accompanied by a family, armed with an axe and began to strike the pickup. The driver, clearly upset, argued she had failed to see a “no parking/no blocking” sign in front of the house. She accused the woman with, literally, an axe to grind, of overreacting.

Netizens were immediately divided over the issue.

The person who recorded the incident sympathised with the car owner and accused the homeowner of acting selfishly.

Others sided with the axe-wielder, lambasting the other driver for being inconsiderate and parking illegally.

As the case unfolded, it appeared the homeowner had been forced to tolerate “inconsiderate” drivers for years as, to her dismay, the estate served as a prime location for flea markets. At least four rotate among its grounds.

Some may feel sorry for the driver, but it’s no fun finding yourself stuck in your own home because a stranger was incapable of recognising or reading clearly marked sign.

Equally as clearly, the woman in the pickup was the straw that broke the camel’s back.

As netizens continue to argue for both sides, I’m afraid they are missing the point.

Both women are victims of lax enforcement by the authorities, which in this case would be the Prawet district office and police officers who have somehow managed to distance themselves from the conflict.

We should ask why flea market operators have apparently been given free rein to inconvenience other people.

In this case, no parking spaces have been provided for shoppers, which clearly set the scene for confrontations between residents and visitors to the market. Even more concerning, no one gave the vendors permission to operate — and yet they did.

The owner of the house said she has repeatedly petitioned the district office to complain about the illegal flea market in front of her house, but to no avail.

She appeared not to be too thrilled that some of the stalls were so close to her fence.

After approaching the authorities in this way, she said she received a number of threats, including one from police officers.

Speaking to the media yesterday, she said one elderly member of her family requires regular hospital treatment, meaning that in an emergency a blocked drive could have serious repercussions.

Clearly the officers involved here handled the case poorly.

The four flea markets continue to operate, without permission, in a zone designated as a residential area. Moreover, the estate was designed to serve as a residential area. It’s simply not a suitable location for a market.

Prawet district office was quick to defend itself. On Monday evening, officials said their duty was limited to “taking care of sanitation matters”. The district office head told the media the market operators were protected by a court injunction and could not be shut down.

But are parking regulations really beyond the jurisdiction of the district office? Other comments from officials about how parking on the roadside is prohibited during certain hours also gives the impression the pickup driver could have parked anywhere she chose outside of those hours.

Meanwhile, the district office’s claim that it lacks the authority to shut down the markets is simply farcical.

At the end of the day, the debate raging over which of the two women was in the wrong is not important — the root cause of their dispute is.

It would be better if the district office acknowledged it has a duty to regulate area zoning and control parking areas, noise levels, buffer zones and market operators who want to run such a thriving business in residential areas.

If not, expect to see more axes being ground.