Sauron and World Eater have now elevated common perceptions of SUV drivers to the level of racism and anti-Semitism.
Get back to me, guys, when we start lynching or gassing SUV drivers. Your comments are offensive and inane.
I have a better idea.
Instead of going even further off topic into some shit I could care less about, why don’t you just admit it wasn’t a good idea to blame the SUV driver for the accident that you didn’t see happen.
Good term World Eater. Ignorance loop
Anytime the anti-SUV folks see an SUV at the mall, or commuting to work, they assume the person does not need it. They won’t consider other reasons the person bought it.
These folks are so biased the only vehicles they notice are SUV’s. When sombody does something stupid in an SUV, it gets burned into their memory.
There are bad drivers in all types of vehicles. SUV’s DO NOT have a corner on this market.
The only real negative points about SUV’s are -
- They use more gas. (we know that)
- They can roll easier than a car. (basic physics)
- Big vehicles tend to come out ahead when involved in an accident with smaller vehicles. (again, basic physics)
- Oh, and the 'I can’t see around them argument. O.K. Same can be said for mini-vans. No one bitches about Mini-Vans, it’s a biased argument.
All the rest is based on lack of knowledge, experience and biased casual observations of strangers.
[/quote]
Good term World Eater. Ignorance loop
Anytime the anti-SUV folks see an SUV at the mall, or commuting to work, they assume the person does not need it. They won’t consider other reasons the person bought it.
These folks are so biased the only vehicles they notice are SUV’s. When sombody does something stupid in an SUV, it gets burned into their memory.
There are bad drivers in all types of vehicles. SUV’s DO NOT have a corner on this market.
The only real negative points about SUV’s are -
- They use more gas. (we know that)
- They can roll easier than a car. (basic physics)
- Big vehicles tend to come out ahead when involved in an accident with smaller vehicles. (again, basic physics)
- Oh, and the 'I can’t see around them argument. O.K. Same can be said for mini-vans. No one bitches about Mini-Vans, it’s a biased argument.
All the rest is based on lack of knowledge, experience and biased casual observations of strangers. **
[/QUOTE]
Yep that’s it in a nutshell. What do you say Pucky?
World Eater: When I lived in NYC, I never drove. Didn’t need to. Where I live now, there is virtually no public transportation, and certainly not at the hours I travel. My compromise is living close to work and driving the most efficient car I could get 10 years ago when I bought it. The next car will be a hybrid.
People really want to twist this patriotism issue around to exonerate themselves from accusations no one is making. If you don’t drive a gas guzzler with a foreign-made plastic flag on it, then my criticisms don’t apply to you. Why lash out then when no one is attacking you?
I have looked at those bloody awful flags in stores and invariably they are not domestic made. If you found one that wasn’t, bully for you. I personally don’t think the flag was made for bumper decorations. It’s disrespectful, but that’s JMO.
YMMV, and I think that was my original point.
Rye chere:
- They use more gas.
- They can roll easier than a car. (basic physics)
- Big vehicles tend to come out ahead when involved in an accident with smaller vehicles. (again, basic physics) and many SUV drivers buy them for the perceived intimidation factor.
- Oh, and the 'I can’t see around them argument. O.K. Same can be said for mini-vans. No one bitches about Mini-Vans, because minivan drivers haven’t given themselves the same reputation for being asshats.
I’m not going to let you dodge the issue, worldeater.
Will you claim that it is totally irrlelevant to observe the class of drivers who drive “ricers”? (Hate that name, btw.) Will you claim that the selection of a “ricer” has absolutely no reflection on their personality?
I can live with this. Two things.
It’s good that your next vehicle will be a hybrid, you are obviously aware of the impact you have on the environment. Many people may be doing the same, perhaps by driving similar cars, or by other not so obvious means. Make sure you give them the benefit of the doubt.
As far as the flags go, I feel a person that has a flag on their car (no matter where it was made) is trying to show their support for our country, and should deserve my respect.
As you said YMMV
Bullshit.
Face it Pucky, your attitude is biased and not based on fact. It was clear as glass when you started this thread and it still is.
WhaHuh?
And it has been said elsewhere on this board that if you drive an SUV your not patriotic because it’s a gas-guzzler therfore funding terrorism. Skewed logic in my book, that doesn’t stand to scrutiny.
I don’t know, I think you can easily spot some poseurs.
Lexus, Lincoln or Caddy SUVs with no hitch, clearly poseurs.
The rest may be trickier, but I’ll bet that there are a hell of a lot more poseurs out there driving SUVs than legitimate Grizzly Adams types. If not, then the explosion in SUV sales would be mirrored by an explosion in people doing shit outside, which hasn’t happened. I think we’re fatter now than ever. The housewife/ commuter in the Expedition rarely needs it. She chose it because of fashion.
I also have to agree that driving like a dick is moronic, but more moronic if you’re piloting a massive battering ram that will definitely do the most damage to me possible.
No, they aren’t, you ignorant ass. You mentioned stereotypes, and implied they’re grounded in reality. I’m pointing out two stereotypes that have been dealt with by Cecil or someone at the Straight Dope, showing them to be false. My point is that stereotyping is a bad thing. It exemplifies ignorance.
Who was it that was complaining about reading comprehension in this thread?
Nope. Not gonna fly. I want a cite for the second half of that statement, the one you added. I also want a definition of the word “many” in this context. What are you talking about? Three? Ten? Five thousand?
Your “ricer” question is equally inane. Let me show you why (and I’ll type slowly, to aid your reading comprehension):
You see a car that has all of the standard “ricer” characteristics. You automatically assume the driver of that car is a “ricer,” and mutter something derogatory under your breath. At the next stop light, you pull up next to the car and glance over. Surprise! It’s a 70-year-old woman driving. How can this be, you ask? Well, perhaps she borrowed her grandson’s car to run to the store. Perhaps she has no concept of “ricers,” but just likes the way her car looks. Perhaps she herself is a “ricer.” The point is, you don’t know. Anytime you impute characteristics, real or imagined, of a particular group to someone without knowing them, you’re stereotyping.
Which brings us back to the original post (and many of your subsequent posts). You have no idea what caused the accident whose aftermath you witnessed. Your assumption is that the SUV driver was driving in an unsafe manner. You have absolutely no evidence of this, other than your preconceived stereotypes of SUV drivers. You’re impugning that driver with no basis in fact.
I hate to break it to you, but fashion (or style or personal preference or whatever you want to call it) is the reason most people choose their cars.
And what is the deal with all this “need” crap? Are we now only allowed to purchase vehicles we “need”? When did that happen? And if that’s the case, why on earth are some people allowed to buy sports cars that can go 150 miles an hour? They don’t “need” to go that fast; in fact, it’s against the law to drive that fast in most places. So by your logic, they shouldn’t buy those cars.
You can live with what? Are you accepting the fact that one’s choice in cars does have a reflection on one’s personality?
Or are you denying that there is such a thing as car culture?
Where did the popular perception of SUV drivers come from? Did the low-mileage crowd just decide to start spreading false rumors about them? Or did SUV drivers earn it with their behavior?
You cite racial stereotypes. SUV drivers are not a race. SUV ownership is a choice that has a lot to do with personality, just as much as taste in clothes, music, etc.
I am going to say something in all seriousness. It is absurd and dangerous to compare trivial matters to something like the Holocaust. You trivialize real suffering.
I’m not saying people should only buy what they need. I agree they should be allowed to choose to drive anything. I just think that a lot of people don’t consider their choices. The fact that they choose to buy an Expedition to buy groceries and commute with (note : I DID NOT say to haul lumber, extrem kitebike, tow houseboats with) tells me something about the decisions that person makes.
Sure fashion plays a part in everything we buy. The hidden costs of choosing a fuel guzzling poor handling big battering ram for a freeway commute still exist though.
And lets drop the Lamborghini comparison shall we? The Murcielago is safer, handles better. Still sucks gas, but I don’t see too many of them on the roads. I guess the economy must really be affecting sales.
Ferrari sold 74 cars in the US last month (it’s a bigger seller than the Lambo)
http://www.autosite.com/editoria/asmr/svcoupe.asp
Meanwhile, Chevy sold 17,601 Suburbans last month (not counting all of the other GM trucks that use the same platform)
http://www.autosite.com/editoria/asmr/svsuv.asp
It’s not about denying people the choice to buy a freaking road beast, it’s about the mentality behind (admittedly not all) of the purchases.
It’s kind of embarrasing when you meet someone from outside the USA and see how ridiculous our roads and parking lots look to someone who’s not used to it.
Here you go:
I think typing slowly is for your benefit. It doesn’t affect the speed of reading.
Not all marbles are red.
Therefore, there are no red marbles.
Also, I’d like a cite for this incident, a definition of “next car,” a cite for the number of grandmothers driving ricers, and other lamer tactics.
Then she is not the one who opted to buy a car like this.
Reading comprehension.
The fact is the widely observed behavior of many SUV drivers.
Cite, please.
Also, I’d like a definition of “most” in this context.
I stated some facts.
You added your own biased conclusions.
Listen carefully to me, here (or read carefully, actually): THE ACT OF STEREOTYPING IS A BAD THING. It doesn’t matter if one is stereotyping an ethnicity, a nationality, or a group of people who wash their hair with their left hands and enjoy bird-watching. It’s all bad.
I did not compare stereotypes, you pusillanimous twit. I gave examples of faulty stereotypes in an effort to show you that stereotyping is a bad thing. It’s a thought-process (or lack thereof) used by small-minded people.
I agree that ownership of an SUV is a choice, and that choice is driven, in part, by personality. YOU are the one claiming that “many SUV drivers buy them for the perceived intimidation factor” and SUV drivers have “given themselves the same reputation for being asshats”. You have no cites for that, other than the weak rejoinder “everybody thinks so.” As this thread has proven, not everybody thinks so. Yet you still persist in your slurs.
And the beauty of it all, the crowning irony, is that the incident which provoked this thread is something you didn’t even see happen. You’re assuming the driver of the SUV that had spun out near your neighborhood was driving poorly, but you don’t know that. Others have even offered possible alternatives regarding the cause of the accident, and you disregarded them. You’re one of the most dangerous types of people in the world, in my opinion: You’d rather cling to your prejudice than accept that your view might be wrong. That’s not debate, or even a rant; that’s cant.
And on preview, I can see you’re either ignorant of the uses of hyperbole, or choose not to acknowledge it when it’s staring you in the face. You’re also a master of the reductio ad absurdum method of arguing a point, which is in itself a product of a weak mind.
That’s not a cite you braindead calico catfeltcher, that’s a joke.
You’ve got to be kidding me! Let me get this straight. If they own any of those brands, and there is no trailer hitch, they are automatically a poseur? You actually look at the vehicle, and say “look at that, no hitch, whoever owns that truck, is a tailgating lane switching fashion whore, who believes they are invincible when they drive.”
“Oh and they have a flag, fucking patriot wannabe”
**
What if she has a trailer hitch?
**
Then perhaps you should rant about 18 wheeler truck drivers who are on meth.
Great reading comprehension there, I was responding to Ruby’s post.
According to the loop of ignorance, we are doomed to debate these final points until the end of time. Sauron summed up my stance succinctly.