I can understand - disagree with, but understand - the "no positive discrimination" angle on it.
That it is "insulting to the handicapped" is farcical, however, because those who are capable and choose not to use it are free to do so, and nobody is going to gainsay them.
As well, most of the time, handicap spaces are a voluntary compassionate service provided by the proprietor of the store or other location. The "legal enforcement" is there to help him with his choice. He picks where and how many handicap spaces to grant, after all.
I can agree that braile on drive-thru signs is just plain dumb, and an example of lack of common sense in government regulation. I'm largely in favor of less government regulation overall.
Treating people as if they have identical needs is one of the great sins of modern "equality" mindsets. Worse, it often conflates with the foolish notion that everybody has a right to "equal" outcomes.
Every person is different. Every person is a "special snowflake." The handicapped spaces are not on an honor system, generally speaking, but it can only possibly be insulting to a handicapped person who feels compelled to use it by social pressure. I do not think such a thing exists. If you don't think you need it, don't use it. If you're able-bodied and saying it insults handicapped people, you're just looking for a way to excuse being a jerk. There is a fully demonstrable need for some people to have larger space to maneuver in while getting out, and to travel less distance across a parking lot.
The only way it could be insulting is if you told people who believed otherwise that they can't do it on their own. Since it's self-selecting, that statement is never being made by the presence of the handicapped spaces and laws protecting them.
