I hate SUVs. I think I’m bound to piss a few people off here because surely there are quite a few dopers who drive them. Actually, I won’t go into the reasons I hate them because anyone who agrees with me already knows what they are, and those who don’t aren’t likely to be swayed by my argument.
So I imagine sparks will fly, but here’s my proposition:** You must have a legitimate reason to buy an SUV(or other ridiculously large pickup truck)**
Some reasons I can think of: 1)owning a landscaping/construction/etc. business where you need to haul things around for your job 2)you live in the middle of nowhere and you actually drive offroad 3)you live in a snowy godforsaken climate where it helps to have a HUGE car. 4) umm I can’t think of any more at the moment but you probably get the idea. I guess this will probably be a point of debate – who gets to decide what is a legitimate need? Well I can definitely agree that its a sticky point, but there are several other things that you can’t just buy without any need. I guess my system could be implemented at the Vehicle Registration level or possibly even the sales/purchase level.
I intend for this to be a reasoned debate, not a rant, but essentially I want to eliminate all the cases where some rich-ass parents buy their 16 year old daughter a Yukon or something. American Ideals? Freedom of Choice? bs
Unless we’re willing to allow a governing body to regulate such things, I say … horse puckey.
The best vehicle I ever owned was a pick-up truck.
I didn’t need a pick-up truck.
I just wanted a pick-up truck.
On the other hand, I do find it pretentious, and goofy and dorky and wasteful and all that for mom to drive junior to band camp in a Suburban, and I don’t see why anybody would even want to drive a Humvee. But … different strokes fer different folks. In fact, I’m sure many people saw me driving my truck to the 7-11 to pick up a six pack and felt the urge to yell “Poseur” at me as I zoomed past.
Fuck 'em. I don’t care. I’m sure Mrs. McGillicuddy and the twins in the Plymouth Planetoid don’t care either.
Then there’s the argument around conserving fossil fuels by regulated gas guzzlers like that … but I ain’t touching that one.
Oh, goody! We get to make rules for other people’s automobile choices. I love this.
I go first.
You must prove you need a passenger car. Specifically, you must prove that there is no public transit in your area and that you cannot bicycle to work for some reason.
You may not have a car that holds more people than your original family and a minimal amount of cargo (say, three day’s groceries). If it’s just you, get a motorcycle unless you live pretty far north. Larger cargos can be handled by delivery companies.
You may not drive somewhere you don’t have to go. From time to time, the police will pull you over and ask, just to make sure.
For safety’s sake, the new national speed limit is 30 MPH. If you like, you can convert it to KPH to make you feel like you’re going faster.
That’s it for now. After Jayrot agrees with each and every one of these, as I’m sure he will, I might have some more.
I don’t have any problem with them - what I do have a problem with is when people drive them like they would drive cars or worse. I would like to see traffic violation fines based on weight or momentum rather then just action (running a light) or speed. This would take into account that a 3 ton SUV running a red light is more dangerous then a 1 ton car.
Frankly, while I think that some people who splurge and get an SUV are being silly, as far as I’m concerned it’s no crime to be silly. And if we’re going to start regulating silliness, I can name a dozen other silly activities that I think should be banned as well, including watching TV for hours on end, buying fast food, and surfing the Internet.
Well, as much as I despise the SUV craze, I don’t think it is reasonable to require people to have a good reason to buy them.
However, I think it is perfectly reasonable to make sure that they are absorbing all the costs involved with them. This justifies regulation of emissions and fuel economy standards and also higher taxation of gasoline, etc. , etc.
Let’s not kid ourselves. Part of the reason people are buying so many SUVs is that they are being effectively subsidized for doing so.
Well i’m going to go ahead and assume that the OP thinks that people who drive SUV’S are bad drivers. (disregarding the retarded logistics of owning one without need, gas… tires… speed, “percieved safety”… etc)
assumption 1) people’s driving skills are normally distrubted.
fact 1) Suv are bigger then cars, less menueverable etc.
inference 1) Suv’s are harder to drive.
Inference 2) because SUV’s are harder to drive and driving skill is normally distrubuted there will be a greater PERCENTAGE of people driving SUV’s who can’t handle their vehicles.
therefore I propose they make licensing more rigorous. People who can’t drive should not be on the road. Period.
Doesn’t it say in the constitution that we all have a right to drive? No…It’s that we all have a right to drive with guns. No but seriously, I lived in Tokyo for a while which is probably the best public transit place in the world (another debate) and I didn’t have a car. For the most part it was fine. I wouldn’t have wanted to drive most of the time anyway. But I will tell you that it’s very difficult to go grocery shopping for a household and bring it back on the train or bus. People need to lug things. But what does a 16year old high school guy need to lug in this? If I say we should ban assault rifles, do you think we should ban rubber band guns?
??? Although I appreciate the sarcasm, I don’t think it really addresses my issue. Please tell me how. Keep in mind, my point is far from eliminating all superfluous actions of society…
You want people to drive slower? That much slower? Don’t think that would help traffic on our already crowded streets. My idea would be benfitial to traffic, no? among other things.
We get to make rules about a lot of other peoples choices. For Americans, the automobile is sacred.
Manhattan, I appreciate your point (why stop at SUVs) but it seems to me that a basic function of government should be to identify problems and then introduce legislation to correct them. I think needless SUVs are a problem that needs to be fixed. Maybe that’s the debate. (admittedly suited for a different thread)
Just curious, Jayrot on what you think a legitimate need or use would be for the SUV in the pic you linked to ? Or should this vehicle not exist, in your opinion ?
Since you asked, I think that it would be very useful for anyone who needs to tow something. Possibly a trailer, boat or whatever. Maybe someone hauling concrete?
What if they know they’re going to be doing that, oh, only twice a month? Are you going to require them to get two cars or haul concrete or a boat at all times?