Autos >
SUVs
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedIs it time for SUV restrictions?
Results so far:
| Yes | 50% | 184 votes | Total: 370 votes | |
| No | 50% | 186 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesAs Americans, we think it is our natural right to consume as much of everything as possible, even if that oil that we consume comes from one of the most environmentally destructive projects mankind has ever endeavored. I'm talking about the Alberta tar sands project, and you don't need to be a left wing environmentalist to agree. Our number two supplier of oil is Canada, and most of it comes from this project.
SUV's are the trademark of a society obsessed with material wealth, as evidenced by single passenger 150 lb female drivers talking on cell phones and not paying proper attention to the road whilst they tailgate people in corolla's. As a study of concrete proof, tommorow when you drive to work or wherever, note how many people you see driving hummers, suv's and other luxurious overpriced garbage, that consist of the only driver in the vehicle.This happens to be in complete contrary to the argument that people need them for their families.
The next question begs that we ask ourselves what kind of people spend twice as much money as they need to on a luxury SUV as opposed to a compact car, who don't have the money, pay extra interest on it, triple for keeping the gas tank full, increase pollution in the air, water (in the form of the Alberta tailing ponds) and lose half the value of the vehicle the minute they take it off the car lot? Perhaps, soon to be extinct people.
If it is our right, at all costs, to keep these things on the road, then what will the same argument be saying when there are no more resources left to run these disgusting inventions in a couple generations? Is this question ever answered?, and if it is, isn't it the same as implying that we don't care about that generation?, Meaning we don't care about our offspring. History has never before been full of humans that implied they don't care about generations of other humans that succeed them. The result of such a evil mutation of humanity leads one to wonder if the end of the world is at hand.
Is the argument to keep them ever backed up with tangible evidence?, Or is it always shying away from the only reason, after deductive reasoning, they would have to keep them. A wealth status symbol? A power trip?, being up higher than everyone else.
It is interesting to note here, that if I was to drive an m1 tank down the road, I would be immediately stopped by law enforcement, however If I was to drive a hummer down the same road, at the same speed, I would get a tax write-off of the whole vehicle. If I want to drive a semi, I need a special use license from the local DMV. Why would this same rule not apply to all vehicles weighing over 3500 lbs? They do add extra unnecessary load onto the highways, do they not? Why are semi drivers charged a fee per axle and hummer, yukon and tahoe drivers not?, Even though the curb weight is often the same.
Part of the problem of this debate is that you have the resistance argument for this coming from individuals not qualified in any form of knowledge on subjects relating to the matter. No politician, radio host, internet blogger has thus far shown any evidence that he or she knows anything on the subject of socialism. A very popular argument repeated over and over, even though nobody seems to know what the word means and that in reality a good number of socialist societies have existed throughout history with each and every one of them totally different.
It would be apparent to most thinking men here, that the time has come to leave the dark ages of SUV's behind or be dragged painfully into the next age of enlightenment, where humans exist that care about the future.
Learn more about this author, Bruce Allen.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Why should there be any restrictions on 4x4's or SUV's? Lets not pander to the knee jerk brigade that listen to the hype of the green issue anoraks! To be honest, although that may sound a little strong, there is a truism in the fact that most groups that protest against the private owners of 4x4's and SUV's are really a minority. However, they are able to make enough noise to gain quite a few hangers on.
In addition, such groups provide governments with issues to deal with that can appear high profile and gain quite a bit of press and other media coverage, but that are in reality just a useful smokescreen for issues they would rather we either didn't know about or make a fuss about.
Those that made such a fuss in the United Kingdom oddly have been bitten by the new taxation that they fought so hard for. There were lots of protests about the owning of large 4x4's (most have the same road footprint as the average family car), and the government gained huge amounts of support for their new taxation laws that were, it was said, designed to penalise owners of such vehicles. By taxing owners of vehicles with high emissions, the government claimed it would reduce the amount of 4x4's and SUV's owned.
However, once the new taxes were announced, it was found that not only the owners of 4x4's and SUV's suffered. In fact, apart from those that owned very small cars with very low emission levels, everyone was financially worse off. Interestingly, owners of older 4x4's and SUV's came out of the legislation far better than expected. This is because as with such new tax laws, a start date based upon vehicle age was set. This means individuals like myself, who own a 4x4/SUV older than a manufacture date of 2001 saw little increase in their vehicle tax. This means that those that protested against our type of vehicle ended up in lots of cases, paying more vehicle tax than I do. A case of be careful what you wish for!
In fact, owners of 4x4's and SUV's tend to keep their vehicles longer. They also keep older vehicles on the road longer, and maintain them well in general. This means that they are 'greener' than those that buy more so called eco friendly vehicles that are fairly new and change their vehicles regularly.
A lot of the technology that goes into the manufacture of the new age eco friendly car means that when that car finally goes for destruction, the cost of handling what has gone into that car in manufacture, such as rare metals etc. means the cost to the environment is actually higher.
And do not be confused by the offsetting brigade, more hydrocarbons are produced in the scrapping and disposal of a vehicle than is ever offset against such.
As a last comment, the older 4x4's and SUV's that use old technology diesel engines are able to use renewable fuels such as vegetable oil and biofuels. This actually makes them far 'greener' than the newer vehicles that have diesel engines that cannot use such fuels.
Learn more about this author, Mike Mccarthy.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
