Okay then, I reassert my right to carry active armament so that when your big SUV comes barrelling down on my Saturn sedan I can vaporize it. I’m not even kidding. Don’t like it? Too bad.
Also, I reserve the right to go to your house and demolish your SUV. Hey, if you’re taking the gloves off, let’s not kid around at civility any more. I find your declaration of the rights of SUV owners to kill non-SUV drivers offensive and dangerous. The roads are a shared resource, and must of necessity be handled cooperatively. You can do what you want in your own home, but once you get on the road that we all pay for, I have a say about what you should be allowed to do. You want to make your own roads, then you’re free to do what you want. In the meantime, I’ll take your comments as free license for small car owners to slash tires on SUV’s (for their own protection, of course).
I don’t think legislation would be necessary. Most parking lots are privately owned and the owner has the right to disallow access to oversized vehicles. Of course, by doing this he will be reducing the patronage to the businesses served by said parking lot.
Instead of banning oversized vehicles, I would prefer to see citations (small ones, perhaps $10 per violation) issued for any vehicle that parks across two lanes, sticks out of the space too far, parks in a handicapped space, parks a Ford Flipper in a compact car space, etc. Call them “don’t be a jerk” tickets.
I would especially like to see this on public streets where parking is tight. The way it is now, some joker parks in two (parallel) spaces, leaving a half space in front and a half space behind. He doesn’t get a ticket- instead the poor schmoe who tries to squeeze in behind gets one for sticking out over the space a few feet. :mad:
There’s a bit of a difference between an accident and purposely running into someone to kill them.
If there was a situation that involved you vaporizing an suv heading towards you, and killing everyone inside to save yourself… Well, I can’t argue with that I’d probably do the same. If it was possable.
No you don’t have that right. I’m not wasting my time replying to this.
Yes, if you search hard enough you can find exceptions to anything.
The point is that driving a SUV doesn’t directly hurt or kill someone, that’s a fact.
Now if you happen to get into an accident, yes you do have a bigger chance of getting hurt if you get hit by an SUV and you’re in a small car. Ideally accidents don’t happen or shouldn’t, but this isn’t a perfect world.
I’m not going to argue the point that everything’s not equal. This is a basic principal that’s been around forever. Sometimes someone has something that’s bigger and better then what you have. Sometimes someone has a better chance of living then you, maybe because they have that better thing.
Maybe its unfair someone is a better driver then someone else?
If everything was equal. Well, sounds kind of communist.
Not when the person at fault has intentionally purchased a vehicle with the intent to increase their safety at the expense of the safety of anyone else around.
It’s entirely possible. It’s expensive, but a computer tracking system could very easily detect an imminent collision and fire an RPG with accuracy at an oncoming vehicle. It’s heartening to note that you see no moral difference between buying an SUV and purchasing a defense system which kills a colliding vehicle and all occupants. Now if you’d only realize that they’re both a bad idea…
You already replied. If you have the right to use roads as your own personal killing fields, then I have a right to proactively defend myself. Plain and simple.
Bull. The fact is that merely having SUV’s on the road increases the likelihood of deaths from SUV-car collisions. It also appears that SUV’s have a measurably higher rollover rate which results in more single-car deaths (in addition, SUV’s have a higher center of gravity, so when they roll over, your head is much more likely to be crushed against the roof than in a car). I did the research for this on a thread on another board, but I’ll hunt around again for the statistics.
What a lame rationalization. Because it’s not a perfect world, we have to make compromises in our uses of common space and resources.
What a laugh. You’ll please note that there is a wide range of non-SUV vehicles to choose from. You think that outlawing or restricting SUV’s will somehow remove all of that? The real issue is that SUV’s are exquisitely designed for killing people in cars, as well as the people in SUV’s. In addition to their weight, the bumpers on SUV’s are nowhere near the location of that on cars (whereas minivans tend to have bumpers in the right place). Vehicles are designed to take the stress in the bumper, and by having reasonably similar bumper heights, both vehicles do better.
Then build your own roads and drive exclusively on them, and I’ll be free to avoid driving on them. Until then, SUV drivers are using the same roads that the non-SUV taxpayers pay for as well. We have every right to restrict their ability to kill us.
I’m not sure where you’re going with this, but as soon as the DOJ considers obesity to be a disability, such people will be adequately protected by the ADA. I would expect that such a large person may already qualify for handicapped plates, in which case he or she already has a reserved parking space almost anywhere they go.
Anyway, I would think that the extra climbing involved in getting into those really huge SUVs would tend to keep 400-pound people away from SUV showrooms in the first place.
Perhaps you are suggesting that disabled people must not be disadvantaged just because they chose to drive a tank to the mall. Well I disagree that the person is being discriminated against, rather the tank (or choice of vehicle) is. I don’t see this as discrimination against the obese because such restrictions would also apply to me as a non-obese person. In short, if the rule applies to everybody then it’s not discrimination (discrimination = to make individual distinctions or show preference or prejudice against a person).
So if half the houses on your block buy security systems for their homes and the other half do not, is the half that don’t morally entitled to go to those homes and demolish the others’ security systems, so everyone has a roughly equal chance of being robbed?
I find it puzzling for someone to simultaneously assert that SUVs are more likely to kill their occupants in both single- and multiple-vehicle accidents, and imply that SUV drivers are out looking to deliberately hit other vehicles and kill other drivers. That’s just patently stupid.
One point- some parking lots do indeed have different spaces designed for different vehicles. Here in SoCal, we have several that have regular slots, compact spaces, and spaces specifically for high-profile trucks and SUV’s. It’s smart, easy amd avoids some conflicts.
And just for the record, I find the idea of comparing me to an intentional murderer based on my choice of vehicle to be ridiculous and histrionic. Please try another tack, it would sound more intelligent and reasonable.
I just want to comment on this. I personally put my own safety ahead of others on the road, even if it’s at the expense of someone else’s safety. If I get in an accident with someone in a VW Bug while I’m in my friend’s Caprice Classic, that person is much much more likely to die or get seriously injured than I will.
To me, my safety (and other’s with me in the vehicle) are my primary concern (Well, actually, pedestrians are tied right there as well). The safety of other people in other cars do not come into the equation when I look at cars, I only try to keep them safe by being a careful driver.
If someone decides to get a little Nissan because it’s good on gas, they shouldn’t be surprised if their car gets totalled in a relatively minor accident. If they get injured in such a case, well, it’s their own fault for choosing a car with such a drawback.
Same thing with SUV’s. People just have to realize they’re not in a little zippy car. Maybe this has to do with drivers education, perhaps something isn’t being done right to educate them about the current dangers of driving an SUV, and how to drive them properly. We know there are several SUV designs that need to be fixed.
However, SUV’s have multiple purposes. What other car class can do what a good SUV does? Vans/minivans? Can’t tow or haul a lot of weight. Trucks? Can’t fit as many people comfortably. So, what else is there?
And if you die while trying to zip through a red light and my SUV smashes you and your car to itty bitty pieces, that’s your own damn sucky driving that got you killed, not my SUV. (Note: I don’t own a car, I’m just commenting that bad driving gets more people killed than one person having a bigger car than another).
Likewise, if an SUV hits your car while running a red light and kills you, theres a damn good chance there would be the same result if they were driving a minivan, or full sized sedan.
