by Miguel Polanco-Plata

Created on: May 22, 2009   Last Updated: May 25, 2009

I thought we lived in a free country, the United States of America, were freedom of choice was our right. What kind of narrow minded individual would think that it is ok in any way, shape, or form to place restrictions on S.U.V.s. Unlike many other countries in this world we have come a long way when it comes to many things including our transportation. The vehicles of today are far more fuel efficient and eco friendly than a car or truck of ten years past. There are people that are going to say that the reason there should be a restriction on S.U.V.s is their inability to use fuel efficiently. Well people in case you didn't know there are many manufacturers that make Flex Fuel S.U.V.s and Hybrid S.U.V.s for those of you who don't know what Flex fuel or Hybrid means allow me to explain.

A Flex fuel vehicle runs on E85 gasoline which on average costs about 85-90% less that regular gasoline. Number one benefit is that during this economy the lower fuel price is a big plus. Second the flex fuel vehicle is cleaner burning and it is a resource we don't have to go to War over. When I say we "don't have to go to war over," it is because E85 is a completely renewable resource. So there is no need to send our troops overseas to fight for the gas in our vehicles. Many vehicles currently in production are Flex fuel (visit e85fuel.com for a complete list) they don't require any modifications.
A hybrid vehicle is one that uses both gasoline and a separate power source generally electric to power the vehicle. Many of the S.U.V.'s that are being driven on the streets today are hybrids. They don't place as many pollutants into the air and they receive far better mileage per gallon than other vehicles.
I'm sure that another excuse of the opposition is that the S.U.V. is too large for the road and that its sheer size would crush a person in a smaller car maybe fatally injuring them. I know that when it comes to my family our safety is number one. So if I was in an accident I would much rather be in an S.U.V. than a car. The size of the S.U.V is also protective of its passengers and driver; there is less of a chance of an injury in a full size vehicle than a small car. Even in an accident involving two small cars the damage is far greater than that of two large S.U.V.s. Larger vehicles are built tougher and far more rugged than a compact sedan.

Now let's say you have a family of more than 5, what then if restrictions were put on driving your S.U.V would you and your spouse have to drive two cars, if you are not driving at the right time of day? Heck let's say one of the possible restrictions called for you only to drive the S.U.V with 5 or more people. There are very few people that can afford to have a car for work and groceries and one for when they have a family event that everyone is going to. It just doesn't make any sense.

Another great point I have is not everyone lives in the city even some that do have to drive through snow and heavy rain. In an S.U.V you have the 4x4 capability and higher ride height that you don't find in a compact sedan. The four wheel drive is essential to many people because of the environment in which they live in. If you have to drive through two feet of snow even with an all wheel drive car because of the ride height you are lost to the snow. I just don't see any valid reason that there should be any restrictions on S.U.V.s for any reason. When we start letting people put restrictions on what we drive we allow them to restrict our freedom of choice!

Learn more about this author, Miguel Polanco-Plata.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.