Anti-SUV

[ALEXDJ]

Switching from an average new car to a 13 mpg SUV for a year would waste more energy than leaving a refrigerator door open for six years, a bathroom light burning for 30 years, or a color TV turned on for 28 years.

SUVs spew out 43 percent more global-warming pollutants - 28 pounds of carbon dioxide per gallon of gas consumed - and 47 percent more air pollution than the average car, using 1 million barrels of oil a day.

from the EPA: In the United States, approximately 6.6 tons (almost 15,000 pounds carbon equivalent) of greenhouse gases are emitted per person every year. And emissions per person have increased about 3.4% between 1990 and 1997. Most of these emissions, about 82%, are from burning fossil fuels to generate electricity and power our cars. The remaining emissions are from methane, from wastes in our landfills, raising livestock, natural gas pipelines, and coal, as well as from industrial chemicals and other sources.

read more http://www.suvsuck.org/

[Pressure]

I agree, there is no reason anyone needs an SUV.

[Feath]

Does this belong in a politics forum?

[ALEXDJ]

see, econmony met the need for demending products and now they are just trying sell things we dont need, but they make us want it, cause it's sooo "cool" to have them, not only SUVs

[el Chi]

I think you should prove eligibility, ie: You should need a license to own an SUV. For instance, you live in the suburbs of London? You need no SUV/Jeep/mini-tank/whatever. You live on a farm on the outskirts of the middle of nowhere? You may own one. You own one property in the city and one in the country? You might get away with owning an SUV, but you can't keep it in the city.

[ALEXDJ]

suv, isn't even that useful, they get stuck too, and most of them a too luxrous to trasport stuff around, in US SUV is a sign of "coolness" and money, nothing but that, no body take it to the "great outdoors"

trucks on the other hand is different deal

[short recoil]

Well put the emmisions/fuel aside, i hate mothers driving round in big SUV's (might not be case in america but it certainly is here)
The mother comes and picks up her kids from playschool in a massive toyota or vauxhall 4x4, completely overpowered vehicle for the task (they never even see a mud track) and then the women drivers in it :( (sorry any girls on the forum)
Can't control the vehicle properly, ride the clutch.......drive into another car without even realising.

[ALEXDJ]

Well put the emmisions/fuel aside, i hate mothers driving round in big SUV's (might not be case in america but it certainly is here)
The mother comes and picks up her kids from playschool in a massive toyota or vauxhall 4x4, completely overpowered vehicle for the task (they never even see a mud track) and then the women drivers in it :( (sorry any girls on the forum)
Can't control the vehicle properly, ride the clutch.......drive into another car without even realising.

there are defently more female suv drivers than man (here in US), i think it helps their selfesteem, and make them feel more powerful or "higher"

[Bodacious]

What about stuff like this?

My Truck (http://www.archerec.com/albums/truck/truckwtires.jpg)


So, AlexDJ, what do you think about the prisoners at Guantanimo bay, cuba?

Why is that question relevant you ask?

Simple, if your answer is that we are mistreating the priosners then that illustrates your hipocrisy. On one hand you don't mind affording non citzens some civil liberties but on the other hand, if you had your way, you would take a tax paying citizen's rights away just because it fits your political agenda. Transparent? I think so.

[CptStern]

:upstare: holy shit where do you come up with such nonsense?


btw judging from your "car" ..you're part of the problem ..I could probably drive a month on what you spend in a week ...and i have 2 cars

[ALEXDJ]

What about stuff like this?

My Truck (http://www.archerec.com/albums/truck/truckwtires.jpg)


So, AlexDJ, what do you think about the prisoners at Guantanimo bay, cuba?

Why is that question relevant you ask?

Simple, if your answer is that we are mistreating the priosners then that illustrates your hipocrisy. On one hand you don't mind affording non citzens some civil liberties but on the other hand, if you had your way, you would take a tax paying citizen's rights away just because it fits your political agenda. Transparent? I think so.
what the hell are u talking about? i have no political agenda, i don't belong to any party, i'm just against the bullshit that the greedy-money-lovers feed us

[ALEXDJ]

:upstare: holy shit where do you come up with such nonsense?


btw judging from your "car" ..you're part of the problem ..I could probably drive a month on what you spend in a week ...and i have 2 cars
who are you talking to?

[short recoil]

What about stuff like this?

My Truck (http://www.archerec.com/albums/truck/truckwtires.jpg)


So, AlexDJ, what do you think about the prisoners at Guantanimo bay, cuba?

Why is that question relevant you ask?

Simple, if your answer is that we are mistreating the priosners then that illustrates your hipocrisy. On one hand you don't mind affording non citzens some civil liberties but on the other hand, if you had your way, you would take a tax paying citizen's rights away just because it fits your political agenda. Transparent? I think so.

Is it me or have you gone completely off on one?
What has that got to do with the thread, other than saying sometihng to alex (should go in a PM) .......anyway that is a nice vehicle, but it does drink the fuel tbh

[Bodacious]

What nonsense? People wanting to restrict other's rights is nonsense. Don't try and call me out either. You won't see me following party lines saying gays shouldn't marry or anything like that.

Assumption is the mother of al **** ups, stern.

That is not my daily driver. I drive a cadillac.

[Bodacious]

what the hell are u talking about? i have no political agenda, i don't belong to any party, i'm just against the bullshit that the greedy-money-lovers feed us


Answer the question then, if you dont' have an agenda. What do you think about the treatment of the prisoners at Guantanimo bay, cuba?

You are all about removing people's rights, talking about how this place is so terrible, guns, abortions, SUVs, what next?

I might not agree with abortion, personally, but as of today it is a constitutionally protected right, along with guns, and the right to pursue happiness. I am happy with my truck and I ma sure eveyone who owns an SUV is happy with it. Owning that SUV, as of today is our constitutionally protected right.

I am not saying your opinion is any less valuable, but if you hate this place so much, why don't you leave?

Your agenda is clear, I just want to point that out.

[MuToiD_MaN]

Since when did SUV bashing turn into Guantanamo Bay? You're out of line.

Anyway, I live in the suburbs and have no reason to own anything other than a small, fuel-efficient coupe or sedan (no hauling, towing, off-road driving, etc). I'm sure Bodacious living out in the boondocks might find use for his compensate-o-matic, but not me. And I'm sure all those people driving Expeditions and H2's aren't going to use em either.

It is altruistic to think that people could be made to buy only what they need, particularly in the developed countries in the world, but I hope none of those behemoth drivers come crying to me when gas prices hit $4 and $5 a gallon.

[CptStern]

What nonsense? People wanting to restrict other's rights is nonsense. Don't try and call me out either. You won't see me following party lines saying gays shouldn't marry or anything like that.

Assumption is the mother of al **** ups, stern.

That is not my daily driver. I drive a cadillac.


what rights? the right to drive a boat on wheels? how is that a right? Hmmmmmm *quickly thumbs through "the big book of humanitarian issues" * ...nope, cant find the basic human right to own a "gaz guzzling behemoth" ....maybe my copy isnt as updated as yours :E

[el Chi]

Is it me or have you gone completely off on one?No, it's not just you; he went off on one.
I mean, I see what he was getting at, sort of, but his logic train seemed a bit skewed on arrival.

The thing with SUVs is that they aren't usually necessary, and restricting ownership would help the environment and thus the world.
Detaining prisoners indefinitely and without trial and subjecting them to torture because they may be terrorists is completely different.
This had nothing to do with the war on terror or US foreign policy whatsoever, but you couldn't keep away, could you.

The irony is, of course, that you always claim to be logically superior to almost everyone on these boards, yet you come up with some real bollocks sometimes, and act as if we ought to treat it was gospel.

[ALEXDJ]

What do you think about the treatment of the prisoners at Guantanimo bay, cuba?.
i think those people have rights too.

You are all about removing people's rights, talking about how this place is so terrible, guns, abortions, SUVs, what next? .
Are you assuming that if i think that guns are dangerus, abortions is a murder, and SUV are nothing but a big toy that ruins this planet for everybody, that means that i want to remove "people's rights"? Not all, but the once that i harmful to themselves. U wouldn't make it a right to sell dope, would you? That's my point.

I might not agree with abortion, personally, but as of today it is a constitutionally protected right, along with guns, and the right to pursue happiness. I am happy with my truck and I ma sure eveyone who owns an SUV is happy with it. .
I am glad that they are happy with their SUV, but their childrent and grandchildrend will not be so happy.

[MuToiD_MaN]

I guess we all fell for the guy trolling for flames.

[ALEXDJ]

SUVs killed my father and raped my mother

[firemachine69]

SUVs have their uses. Soccer moms sure as hell aren't one of them!

[ALEXDJ]

SUVs have their uses. Soccer moms sure as hell aren't one of them!
what's the use?

[Exedus]

SUVs have their uses. Soccer moms sure as hell aren't one of them!

Roger that! Nothing makes me angrier than seeing some fat slob driving his H2 down the road in middle of the city. I live in Calgary, Canada. Oil and gas country up here, and that means overpaid underworked oil execs who drive huge vehicles for no good reason.

[firemachine69]

tactical units (e.g. both SWAT and our canadian JTF2 as examples)
VIP security
certain peace officers
people with an actual need for an SUV (which 90% of people who have one don't belong in)



Keep in mind, a RAV4 uses less gas then a previously mentioned Lincoln. That was a little hypocritical, considering that car uses a gas guzzling V8, as opposed to an efficient 4 cylinder / V6. Bad example. ;)

[ALEXDJ]

tactical units (e.g. both SWAT and our canadian JTF2 as examples)
VIP security
certain peace officers
people with an actual need for an SUV (which 90% of people who have one don't belong in)



Keep in mind, a RAV4 uses less gas then a previously mentioned Lincoln. That was a little hypocritical, considering that car uses a gas guzzling V8, as opposed to an efficient 4 cylinder / V6. Bad example. ;)
yeah, just like only millitary needs to have guns

[Bodacious]

what rights? the right to drive a boat on wheels? how is that a right? Hmmmmmm *quickly thumbs through "the big book of humanitarian issues" * ...nope, cant find the basic human right to own a "gaz guzzling behemoth" ....maybe my copy isnt as updated as yours :E


The pursuit of happiness isn't a right?

[Bodacious]

No, it's not just you; he went off on one.
I mean, I see what he was getting at, sort of, but his logic train seemed a bit skewed on arrival.

The thing with SUVs is that they aren't usually necessary, and restricting ownership would help the environment and thus the world.
Detaining prisoners indefinitely and without trial and subjecting them to torture because they may be terrorists is completely different.
This had nothing to do with the war on terror or US foreign policy whatsoever, but you couldn't keep away, could you.

The irony is, of course, that you always claim to be logically superior to almost everyone on these boards, yet you come up with some real bollocks sometimes, and act as if we ought to treat it was gospel.


1. Why should foreigners be given the same rights as a tax paying citizen? They shouldn't. Military tribunals are just fine for suspected terrorists. My point: Why advocate giving non citizen's constitutional rights and then turn around and wish to take away a legal citizen's constitutional rights? It is hypocrisy.


2. Where have I once claimed to be logically superior? I defy you to find a post of mine saying that.

Remember what I said to stern, assumption is the mother of all **** ups.

[CptStern]

The pursuit of happiness isn't a right?


that's a stretch


hmmmm SUV = happiness? wow, and to think all those starving poor in the world, all they need is an SUV to be happy.

"Hey Mabuto I havent eaten in 3 weeks but I'm happy cuz I just bought a Ford Behemoth"

[Bodacious]

i think those people have rights too.


Are you assuming that if i think that guns are dangerus, abortions is a murder, and SUV are nothing but a big toy that ruins this planet for everybody, that means that i want to remove "people's rights"? Not all, but the once that i harmful to themselves. U wouldn't make it a right to sell dope, would you? That's my point.


I am glad that they are happy with their SUV, but their childrent and grandchildrend will not be so happy.


Who are you, as an individual, to decide what is best for the people as a whole? The last person who tried to do that was Hitler. That idea, in it's simplest form, is called Fascism.

So I guess labeling you a Fascist wouldn't be far off, would it?

[Bodacious]

that's a stretch


hmmmm SUV = happiness? wow, and to think all those starving poor in the world, all they need is an SUV to be happy.

"Hey Mabuto I havent eaten in 3 weeks but I'm happy cuz I just bought a Ford Behemoth"


Answer my question, the pursuit of happiness is a right, is it not?

[CptStern]

Remember what I said to stern, assumption is the mother of all **** ups.

wow! what would you consider this:


"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George Bush February 8, 2003"


"assumption is the great great great grandmother of all **** ups"?

[CptStern]

Answer my question, the pursuit of happiness is a right, is it not?


:upstare: so you support same sex marriage, the right to smoke pot, the right in kill indiscrimately? everyone of those things could be construed as "happiness"


oh and you're infringing on my right to enjoy the road without having some behemoth obstruct my view


btw stop trampling on my right to the "pursuit of happiness" by quoting me (I get all pouty and sad when someone quotes me). Hey! you just looked in my general direction! YOU'RE INFRINGING ON MY RIGHT TO "a pursuit of Happiness"

[Razor]

wow! what would you consider this:


"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George Bush February 8, 2003"


"assumption is the great great great grandmother of all **** ups"?


Mr Stern, you are just as bad as Bodacious when it comes to off topic. Edit your thread to say ""We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use SUVs -- the very SUVS the dictator tells us he does not have." or take it in one of the huge number of Iraq war threads.

As for my opinion on SUVs, i think they are good if you are going to use them to go off road or use them to transport your large family, but for a mother to drive 1 mile for the school to pick up/drop off their single child is...odd.

[Exedus]

:upstare: so you support same sex marriage, the right to smoke pot, the right in kill indiscrimately? everyone of those things could be construed as "happiness"


oh and you're infringing on my right to enjoy the road without having some behemoth obstruct my view


btw stop trampling on my right to the "pursuit of happiness" by quoting me (I get all pouty and sad when someone quotes me). Hey! you just looked in my general direction! YOU'RE INFRINGING ON MY RIGHT TO "a pursuit of Happiness"

ROFL!!!

[CptStern]

Mr Stern, you are just as bad as Bodacious....


Mr?!? Only jehovah's witnesses, police officers and little kids call me MISTER!!! You're infringing on my right to feel youthful!!! It's a clear and deliberate attack on my right to "pursuit of happiness"!!! cease and desist! or face being run down by my SUV!!

[Bodacious]

Whatever, I am not going to bother anymore.

[jondy]

Bodacious, this isn't about anything but common sense versus stupidity. Just because people can drive fat, fuel guzzling, roadhogging monstrosities of cars in suburban communities doesn't make it right.

No one is taking away peoples' right to do ****ing stupid stuff. But people do have a right to make other people see that what they're doing is indeed ****ing stupid.

Understand? Now enough of the topic derailing, it's a pisstake.

[gh0st]

Haha stern you are on a roll.

Hopefully my car isnt contributing to the global pollution epidemic.

http://www.teresco.org/pics/banff-20000117-24/mike-scans/29-bbl-canyonero-mike.jpg

Gonna drive my kids to soccer now! VROOOMMM!!

[ALEXDJ]

1. Why should foreigners be given the same rights as a tax paying citizen? They shouldn't. .

what? you don't think that all humans have rights or (should have)?

i don't know what to call you than

[Bodacious]

Bodacious, this isn't about anything but common sense versus stupidity. Just because people can drive fat, fuel guzzling, roadhogging monstrosities of cars in suburban communities doesn't make it right.

No one is taking away peoples' right to do ****ing stupid stuff. But people do have a right to make other people see that what they're doing is indeed ****ing stupid.

Understand? Now enough of the topic derailing, it's a pisstake.


Driving an SUV is stupidity? Telling someone they can't dirve an SUV because you don't think they should isn't stupidity?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/Godshatter/rollbarf.gif

[Bodacious]

what? you don't think that all humans have rights or (should have)?

i don't know what to call you than


Of course they should have rights, but not the same rights granted byt the constitution. That is the difference.

[gh0st]

Driving an SUV is stupidity? Telling someone they can't dirve an SUV because you don't think they should isn't stupidity?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/Godshatter/rollbarf.gif
Bodacious, even I cant back you up on this one. SUVs, and the fat, mongeral race that comprises its drivers, are totally unnecessary unless you are living in the pristine forest and need to get around. For city driving, unless you are hauling some serious payload, they are outmoded and absurd.

[Bodacious]

Bodacious, even I cant back you up on this one. SUVs, and the fat, mongeral race that comprises its drivers, are totally unnecessary unless you are living in the pristine forest and need to get around. For city driving, unless you are hauling some serious payload, they are outmoded and absurd.

Fair enough, but I should be able to do whatever I feel like doing as long as whatever it is is within the limitations of the law.

[jondy]

Driving an SUV is stupidity?

Yup. Justify the existance of an SUV in a suburban neighbourhood. You can't.

Telling someone they can't dirve an SUV because you don't think they should isn't stupidity?

If you read my post, I didn't say they couldn't. As you so high-horsedly say, that would be a breach of your constitutional rights. However, informing them that what they're doing is stupid is indeed an act protected by the constitution, so, really, I don't know what you're bitching about.

Like I said before. I'm saying it's a dumb thing to do. I'm not saying you can't.

[ALEXDJ]

Of course they should have rights, but not the same rights granted byt the constitution. That is the difference.

what rights you think should appliy only to a US citizen?

[CptStern]

"the right to trample on other's rights" :laugh: ...I'm jk!!!

[Bodacious]

what rights you think should appliy only to a US citizen?


Constitutional rights.

[ALEXDJ]

Constitutional rights.
so, they shouldn't have a right of free speech?

[Bodacious]

Yup. Justify the existance of an SUV in a suburban neighbourhood. You can't.

What if it was a family's only means of transportation? What if they had 10 kids and all they could afford to fit that many people was a 72 - 88 Suburban? What if someone car pooled with their buddies to the consruction site and they needed lots of room for lage people and their tools? What if mom was the soccer coach and loaded up the whole team to go to the field? What if I had a boat, camper or trailer to pull and a truck that could fit a total of 3 people wouldn't cut it, and I needed and SUV to do it?

Need I go on? Justified.

[Bodacious]

so, they shouldn't have a right of free speech?


Who? Prisoners at Gitmo? It isn't a right afforded to them.

[ALEXDJ]

Who? Prisoners at Gitmo? It isn't a right afforded to them.
many of them there are without any reason (wasn't explainted to them) man sorry, if you think that your dollars buy you freedom, i feel bad for you, freedom can't be bought, or else it's not real freedom

[jondy]

Need I go on?

No, you needn't. You're pointing out specialized cases that don't apply to the vast majority of your population. 'What if a family had ten kids' - give me a break, Bodacious, you're arguing for the sake of arguing, and everyone else here can see it.

Some people have SUV's because they need them. The vast majority of SUV drivers, however, have them for road-penis points, which isn't justifiable by any means.

[Bodacious]

No, you needn't. You're pointing out specialized cases that don't apply to the vast majority of your population. 'What if a family had ten kids' - give me a break, Bodacious, you're arguing for the sake of arguing, and everyone else here can see it.[/quote[

Why else is anyone here but to argue?

[quote]
Some people have SUV's because they need them. The vast majority of SUV drivers, however, have them for road-penis points, which isn't justifiable by any means.

And I suppose this is "fact" huh? Wrong, that statement is a generalization. I see no scientific survey of SUV drivers saying they only have them to look cool. What a load of crap.

[Bodacious]

many of them there are without any reason (wasn't explainted to them) man sorry, if you think that your dollars buy you freedom, i feel bad for you, freedom can't be bought, or else it's not real freedom


That sentence, if it can be even called that, is incomprehensible.

I never said freedom could be bought.

[staticprimer]

I say no more pollution, no more car exhaust, or ocean dumpage! From now on we'll travel in tubes!!


Personally I wouldn't have a problem with SUV's if there were much stricter emission standards on them. Better yet, make all cars hybrids!

[ALEXDJ]

I say no more pollution, no more car exhaust, or ocean dumpage! From now on we'll travel in tubes!!


Personally I wouldn't have a problem with SUV's if there were much stricter emission standards on them. Better yet, make all cars hybrids!
they might have too

[jondy]

Why else is anyone here but to argue?

You're taking the statement literally. Oh well. ( cue response - how else am I supposed to take it? Read between the lines, and I'm not talking about this size 1 text )

And I suppose this is "fact" huh? Wrong, that statement is a generalization. I see no scientific survey of SUV drivers saying they only have them to look cool. What a load of crap.

Your inherently contradictory implication about generalizations lacking factual basis aside - http://newsmanager.commpartners.com/nadahead/issues/2004-12-03.html

That's a lot of SUV's. A bigger percentage than anywhere else in the world, in fact. And it's an old source; if you have a look at the pattern here, it's safe to assume that the number has gone up since 2002. As for the survey saying people buy SUV's to look cool; it's by definition impossible. So there's a little breathing space for you there.

However, denying that the number of SUV's on the road far outstrips the people that need them is pointless.

[ALEXDJ]

SUVs block my view of the sunset when i'm driving home from work

[Tr0n]

SUVs suck ass anyways.

GG.

[ALEXDJ]

and they roll over easily

[Gray Fox]

What if it was a family's only means of transportation? What if they had 10 kids and all they could afford to fit that many people was a 72 - 88 Suburban? What if someone car pooled with their buddies to the consruction site and they needed lots of room for lage people and their tools? What if mom was the soccer coach and loaded up the whole team to go to the field? What if I had a boat, camper or trailer to pull and a truck that could fit a total of 3 people wouldn't cut it, and I needed and SUV to do it?

Need I go on? Justified.

You do not need a suv for that, you can buy a mini van, or a station wagon.

[CptStern]

or one of these babies


http://www.disneypix.com/potw/Year3/100104.jpg

[The Mullinator]

If you need storage space for people or luggage then a mini-van is what you should get.

If you want a rugged vehicle with towing power then get a pick-up truck.

Those two vehicles easily beat an SUV in practicality so the only reason to even get an SUV is to make yourself feel big on the road at the expense of safety and and gas.

Heck in my opinion SUV's are usually very ugly as well. Give me a good pick-up truck over an SUV anyday when it comes to looks.

[Direwolf]

Um, what if you need to hold people and tow something?
I feel that the actual existence of the SUV is justified since its such an incredibly useful and versatile vehicle, even if everyone and their dog doesn't need one.

This is all pretty much a moot point anyway. Anyone else noticing that all the retooling of SUVs and introduction of new vehicles keep focusing on smaller and more driving friendly vehicles? All these crossovers (Ford Escape etc) are all starting to look rather a lot like the ol' station wagon. Which is what I figure that people really wanted all along. Something roomy without being a wussy and ugly van.

[el Chi]

1. Why should foreigners be given the same rights as a tax paying citizen? They shouldn't. Military tribunals are just fine for suspected terrorists. My point: Why advocate giving non citizen's constitutional rights and then turn around and wish to take away a legal citizen's constitutional rights? It is hypocrisy.


2. Where have I once claimed to be logically superior? I defy you to find a post of mine saying that.

Remember what I said to stern, assumption is the mother of all **** ups.1. It's a really odd thing to be comparing the two, disparate as they are. Thus I shall NOT compare them.
My simple point, entirely unrelated from the war on terror, was that SUVs harm the environment and their distribution should be curbed. Lots of things are restricted, it doesn't mean it's an enfringement on your civil liberties.

2. I forget the thread, sadly. You, in your infinite wisdom, were snidely deriding people for disagreeing with you. I asked you why you bothered even reading these forums if you knew from the off-set you were going to actively disagree with them. You replied something along the lines of:
"I just like to see what the weirdos think."
If you ask me, that's a superiority claim right there.

[RakuraiTenjin]

We can't have cars out here because they get torn up too fast, dirt roads :/. Sorry, I'll keep driving the Trailblazer so my back isn't completely jarred and I don't have to pay for repairs a lot.

SUVs block my view of the sunset when i'm driving home from work
I'd really hope you're looking at the road and not the sky when driving

[el Chi]

We can't have cars out here because they get torn up too fast, dirt roads :/. Sorry, I'll keep driving the Trailblazer so my back isn't completely jarred and I don't have to pay for repairs a lot.well that's sort of my point. Some people DO need larger vehicles like SUVs.
Those people do not live in cities or suburbs.

[RakuraiTenjin]

well that's sort of my point. Some people DO need larger vehicles like SUVs.
Those people do not live in cities or suburbs.
?

Suburbs are where they are needed. Not cities, but cars get messed up pretty fast out here.

[Kebean PFC]

My family and I own a 2000 Ford Expedition. It has the small V8 (4.7L) and we use it to hual our family of 4 around. We like to go on vacation, and to hual all our crap we need a vehicle with room. Also, my father and I are both over 6ft tall, we need some legroom. On our last trip with a 30-40mph headwind we got 19 miles per gallon. Is that "gas-guzzling?" I dont think so, when you calculate cargo mile per gallon you will be amazed that SUV MPG isn't really that bad.

But i don't think that Soccer moms need one. I really hate it when there is an Excursion on the road in front of us with one person in the vehicle.

If a Hybrid Expedition came out, my family would be one of the first to get one. But, apparently, they will only make small hybrids for now. I don't fit in a Prius, and i have a tough time in the Honda one (i forgot the name). Just for the record i dont fit in a Mini cooper, Miata, Porsche (911 it think) or a VW Bug. So your theory that everone should have a small car fails becuase i wouldn't be able to drive!

Think about others when you write some of these threads. Maybe you would be happy with your Prius, or Civic, but I wouldn't be able to fit in the Civic for long, and the Prius is already out.

[el Chi]

?

Suburbs are where they are needed. Not cities, but cars get messed up pretty fast out here.
I think we have different definitions of suburbs...

[Foxtrot]

My Dad lives in the suburbs and owns a jeep, should that be taken away because he lives in the suburbs? He also volunteers to do charity type work, where he often needs to haul supplies like shovels, wheel barrow etc, does this mean he should not own a jeep?

[satch919]

My Dad lives in the suburbs and owns a jeep, should that be taken away because he lives in the suburbs? He also volunteers to do charity type work, where he often needs to haul supplies like shovels, wheel barrow etc, does this mean he should not own a jeep?

I think Jeeps are fine. Like this one, or something close to it:

http://www.motorstar.gr/jeep.jpg

If he has a valid reason to have it, its cool. I still think that we need to develop a more efficient fuel or power source.

However, if these SUVs have huge tires that aren't stock, uses diesel for fuel and requires a ladder to get up into the cab, then its gotta go. Most people that I see with these huge trucks don't even use them for hauling heavy equipment. From what I've seen, they're all kids who are looking to impress someone or compensating for something.

Maybe as an incentive to get rid of over consuming vehicles, the manufacturer could offer people money for turning in their old ones. Or they could just put it towards the purchase of a new/fuel efficient car for the same price as they paid for their original one. I don't think we should really force people to get rid of their cars even though I think they need to be taken off the road. That seems like it would start violating peoples rights or freedom. But giving them an alternative could work.

[gh0st]

My Dad lives in the suburbs and owns a jeep, should that be taken away because he lives in the suburbs? He also volunteers to do charity type work, where he often needs to haul supplies like shovels, wheel barrow etc, does this mean he should not own a jeep?
The point is people who NEED SUV's should have them. Those who dont probably shouldnt.

[Foxtrot]

The point is people who NEED SUV's should have them. Those who dont probably shouldnt.
I know, but who would decide and how? It would be very hard to do this, ecspecialy with my example because that is not job related work.

[Direwolf]

I think this is really just more of a moral point than something that should be put into legislation. Theres nothing all that effective that you can really do about it.

/me lets the fad die

[Korgoth]

I think the fad is dying pretty quickly actually, you wouldn't believe how man SUVs i've seen for sale since gas went up lol I just think its justice served, same people who voted for the oil rich administration are more often than not the ones driving the SUVs with the support the president ribbons on them... I love irony.

[SenorDingDong]

Liquid Hydrogen will most likely be the next fuel source. It runs basically the same as gasoline now, accept emits no pollutant emissions, and there is an infinite amount of hydrogen. Only problem is getting liquid hydrogen is somewhat expensive process.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/bmw-h2r.htm

[jondy]

Only problem is getting liquid hydrogen is somewhat expensive process.

The only realistic way to get hydrogen is to split up water. The oxidation of hydrogen, which is the reaction that provides the cars energy, is the opposite of this. Thus hydrogen isn't an energy source, it's an energy carrier; the same number of bonds are made and broken over the course of the fuels existence, meaning the overall energy produced in an ideal world will still be zero; and that's before the inevitable inefficiencies are accounted for.

You need energy to produce hydrogen - more than the hydrogen itself produces. It's simply a good medium for transfering energy, as it doesn't produce pollutants.

[OCybrManO]

Who are you, as an individual, to decide what is best for the people as a whole?Actually, we have a bunch of individuals (about whom we know very little) that we pay to determine what is best for the people as a whole. They're called the legislative, judicial, and executive branches of the government. You see, their whole lives revolve around making, interpreting, and carrying out decisions that change the lives of everyone in the country (and, to an extent, the world). Luckily, they have to get their decisions approved by the rest of the people... but if you throw enough money at them that isn't hard. :E

Fair enough, but I should be able to do whatever I feel like doing as long as whatever it is is within the limitations of the law.You can't smoke in a restaurant. You can't buy or consume alcohol under the age of 21. You can't wear a strapless gown if you are a man or have sex with a porcupine in some parts of Florida. A recently passed anticrime law in Texas requires criminals to give their victims 24 hours notice, either orally or in writing, and to explain the nature of the crime to be committed...

... and most related to the subject, driving is not a right in the United States of America. It is a restricted priviledge. You can only drive certain vehicles that fall under the category of "street legal." Also, just having a regular passenger vehicle license does not give you the right to own and/or drive any wheeled vehicle. For example, here are the various licenses available in Florida:

Class A: Commercial motor vehicles - trucks or truck combinations weighing with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating of 26,001 lbs. or more, provided towed vehicle is more than 10,000 lbs.
Class B: Commercial motor vehicles - straight trucks weighing 26,001 lbs. Gross Vehicle Weight Rating or more.
Class C: Vehicles transporting placardable amounts of hazardous materials, or vehicles designed to transport more than 15 persons including the driver with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating of less than 26,001 lbs.
Class D: A truck or truck-tractor with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating of 8,000 lbs. or more, but less than 26,001 lbs., or more than 80 inches wide, not transporting placardable amounts of hazardous materials. Farmers and drivers of authorized emergency vehicles who are exempt from obtaining a commercial driver license must obtain a Class D license with proper endorsements.
Class E: Passenger cars, 15 passenger vans including the driver, light trucks with Gross Vehicle Weight Rating less than 8,000 lbs., or recreational vehicles.
Learner's Restricted: Any of the vehicles listed under Class E being driven by a person 15 years of age, or persons learning to drive.
Motorcycles: Any class license which includes a motorcycle endorsement. All first-time customers for a motorcycle endorsement who are under 21 years of age must complete a department-approved Motorcycle Safety Education Course.
Moped: Any class license - motorcycle endorsement is not required. NOTE: Riders and passengers under 16 years of age must wear approved protective headgear. A Moped tag is required. Personal Injury Protection insurance is not required.Personally, I think the weight limit of the Class E license and the ability to drive RVs without further training should be changed. Large vehicles like those handle a lot differently than the training involved in acquiring a Class E license... and when they aren't handled correctly they are very dangerous, especially to the drivers/passengers of other vehicles on the road.

[Bodacious]

Actually, we have a bunch of individuals (about whom we know very little) that we pay to determine what is best for the people as a whole. They're called the legislative, judicial, and executive branches of the government. You see, their whole lives revolve around making, interpreting, and carrying out decisions that change the lives of everyone in the country (and, to an extent, the world). Luckily, they have to get their decisions approved by the rest of the people... but if you throw enough money at them that isn't hard. :E

Once they gather together they are a group, no longer individuals.


You can't smoke in a restaurant. You can't buy or consume alcohol under the age of 21. You can't wear a strapless gown if you are a man or have sex with a porcupine in some parts of Florida. A recently passed anticrime law in Texas requires criminals to give their victims 24 hours notice, either orally or in writing, and to explain the nature of the crime to be committed...

... and most related to the subject, driving is not a right in the United States of America. It is a restricted priviledge. You can only drive certain vehicles that fall under the category of "street legal." Also, just having a regular passenger vehicle license does not give you the right to own and/or drive any wheeled vehicle. For example, here are the various licenses available in Florida:

Personally, I think the weight limit of the Class E license and the ability to drive RVs without further training should be changed. Large vehicles like those handle a lot differently than the training involved in acquiring a Class E license... and when they aren't handled correctly they are very dangerous, especially to the drivers/passengers of other vehicles on the road.


As I said, within the limitations of the law.

[OCybrManO]

Once they gather together they are a group, no longer individuals.Wait... I'm no longer an individual because I live in a city? I'm no longer an individual because I am a citizen of the United States of America? The President isn't an individual? You never cease to be an individual until you have no freedom. You are part of a group, but you are still an individual. They all make their own decisions... but a majority (in most cases) have to agree on the decision for anything to be done about it. In the executive and judicial branches the decisions are left to even smaller numbers of people. In the Supreme Court it goes down to 9 people. On the executive side, the President can veto a bill that has passed the approval of both the House and the Senate, decide to invade/attack a country (as long as it's something like a "police action" and not a "war"), pardon people, etc. That's a significant amount of power for an individual.

As I said, within the limitations of the law.Before that you claimed that driving an SUV was a constitutional right (implying that they can't take away your "right" to drive an SUV merely by sending a bill through congress). It most certainly is not. I was showing that there is indeed a precedent that your "pursuit of happiness" does not override safety concerns (well, the strapless gown one was just funny)... including your own well-being. It's why recreational drugs are illegal (on the same grounds that suicide is illegal). It's why you're not allowed to punch someone that's pissing you off. It's why some states ban talking on cell phones (and similar activities) while driving.

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
-Oliver Wendell Holmes

[Bodacious]

Wait... I'm no longer an individual because I live in a city? I'm no longer an individual because I am a citizen of the United States of America? The President isn't an individual? You never cease to be an individual until you have no freedom. You are part of a group, but you are still an individual. They all make their own decisions... but a majority (in most cases) have to agree on the decision for anything to be done about it. In the executive and judicial branches the decisions are left to even smaller numbers of people. In the Supreme Court it goes down to 9 people. On the executive side, the President can veto a bill that has passed the approval of both the House and the Senate, decide to invade/attack a country (as long as it's something like a "police action" and not a "war"), pardon people, etc. That's a significant amount of power for an individual.


You are reading too far into what I meant.


Before that you claimed that driving an SUV was a constitutional right (implying that they can't take away your "right" to drive an SUV merely by sending a bill through congress). It most certainly is not. I was showing that there is indeed a precedent that your "pursuit of happiness" does not override safety concerns (well, the strapless gown one was just funny)... including your own well-being. It's why recreational drugs are illegal (on the same grounds that suicide is illegal). It's why you're not allowed to punch someone that's pissing you off. It's why some states ban talking on cell phones (and similar activities) while driving.

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
-Oliver Wendell Holmes

Same here. I am not going to wast my time with you making a mountain out of a mole hill and misocnsruing my intent.

[OCybrManO]

You are reading too far into what I meant.I'll grant you the fact that I read too far into the first one... but I did it for a reason. You drag up things other people say and use them out of context or take their opinion and stetch it to the extreme to try to make them seem like a nut job.

Same here. I am not going to wast my time with you making a mountain out of a mole hill and misocnsruing my intent.Don't try to get all indignant about someone calling you out on a mistake that you've been repeating throughout the whole thread. If it's not what you meant, why don't you rephrase your opinion? All I know is what you say, not what you mean... and I'm not going to assume you meant something other than you said. If you don't mean what you say... by all means, correct yourself. Just don't get pissed off about people misinterpreting what you meant to say when you've been trying to drag the thread off-topic and down to mere name-calling by saying shit like this:

So, AlexDJ, what do you think about the prisoners at Guantanimo bay, cuba?

Why is that question relevant you ask?

Simple, if your answer is that we are mistreating the priosners then that illustrates your hipocrisy. On one hand you don't mind affording non citzens some civil liberties but on the other hand, if you had your way, you would take a tax paying citizen's rights away just because it fits your political agenda. Transparent? I think so.... and this:

The last person who tried to do that was Hitler. That idea, in it's simplest form, is called Fascism.

So I guess labeling you a Fascist wouldn't be far off, would it?... followed by frustration and a lie:

Whatever, I am not going to bother anymore.It's like arguing with a child. They keep repeating themselves, get flustered, and storm off.

[Sainku]

Anyone driving an SUV now is either rich or has found an alternative fuel source. Gas prices are just to high now. That is why they are all on sale.

[firemachine69]

yeah, just like only millitary needs to have guns

If you haven't noticed, the military is comprised of humans, like me and you.

*shocker*

[AzzMan]

Never was a fan of truck/suv's, always felt like they were gonna flip over if i turned too sharply =/

[ALEXDJ]

If you haven't noticed, the military is comprised of humans, like me and you.

well, duh, but they are getting paid for protecting the civilians, just like the police

they have millitary training, and that's what seperats them form the rest of the country

please, don't make silly comments

[iyfyoufhl]

ok, so we all agree that SUVs are pointless waste of natural resources and we should outlaw them?
by the way,did you hear how GM resently lost couple billions because their SUV wouldn't sell
also, they rejected hybrid technology saying that it wouldn't be a smart bussiness stratagy and Toyota now has it patened to their name

[superjuanchango]

I agree, there is no reason anyone needs an SUV.

Since when did SUV bashing turn into Guantanamo Bay? You're out of line.

Anyway, I live in the suburbs and have no reason to own anything other than a small, fuel-efficient coupe or sedan (no hauling, towing, off-road driving, etc). I'm sure Bodacious living out in the boondocks might find use for his compensate-o-matic, but not me. And I'm sure all those people driving Expeditions and H2's aren't going to use em either.

It is altruistic to think that people could be made to buy only what they need, particularly in the developed countries in the world, but I hope none of those behemoth drivers come crying to me when gas prices hit $4 and $5 a gallon.

suv, isn't even that useful, they get stuck too, and most of them a too luxrous to trasport stuff around, in US SUV is a sign of "coolness" and money, nothing but that, no body take it to the "great outdoors"

trucks on the other hand is different deal


There are more, I feel no need to quote them. These posts are examples with one of my problems with many members of the left and the right. "I don't do X or have a need for X so no one does!" Just because you don't need to haul or tow doesn't mean no one else does. Just because it doesn't snow in whatever place you live doesn't mean it doesn’t anywhere else. If someone has the money to pay for their SUV and gasoline then by all means let them do what they want. Drive your hybrid two door speck and laugh at them when they drive by, guess what, they don't care.

[Direwolf]

ok, so we all agree that SUVs are pointless waste of natural resources and we should outlaw them?
by the way,did you hear how GM resently lost couple billions because their SUV wouldn't sell
also, they rejected hybrid technology saying that it wouldn't be a smart bussiness stratagy and Toyota now has it patened to their name
GM's got both sides of the coin though. While their SUV isn't selling as well, they make dozens of smaller cars that have picked up the slack. And Toyota has a patent on its own version of hybrid technology. No one car company owns it exclusively (several companie have hybrids on the market and in development right now).

[iyfyoufhl]

GM's got both sides of the coin though. While their SUV isn't selling as well, they make dozens of smaller cars that have picked up the slack. And Toyota has a patent on its own version of hybrid technology. No one car company owns it exclusively (several companie have hybrids on the market and in development right now).

i haven't heard anything about the smaller cars, but i am not deniying it, but i think GM still makes pretty shitty cars

[Direwolf]

GM makes: Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, Hummer, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Saab, and Saturn.

Now unless those all suck or all make SUVs, then I'd say GM isn't in any trouble. :D

[trizzm]

well I guessed I learned something here.
believe it or not, to this day I was CONVINCED a SUV did stand for Sub Urban Vehicle.
note i'm not english, heh. never had made the connection with our véhicules utilitaires sport.

[Milkman]

I drive a 4-Door Impala, and the Family owns a Suburban, amazingly enough we actually use it's rediculous amount of cargo space often enough to justify its purchase.

True SUVs are what piss me off, many have less cargo room than a car (BMW X3, Mercedes M class, Lexus RX300, etc) and serve no other purpose than the smash into me with because of their huge blindspots.

[Cuddlez.ini]

I drive a 4-Door Impala, and the Family owns a Suburban, amazingly enough we actually use it's rediculous amount of cargo space often enough to justify its purchase.

True SUVs are what piss me off, many have less cargo room than a car (BMW X3, Mercedes M class, Lexus RX300, etc) and serve no other purpose than the smash into me with because of their huge blindspots.

Those aren't "True SUVs"! Golly most of you people must live in the city and not get out much...

Go to these forums and tell them they shouldn't own an "SUV" :

http://www.ih8mud.com/ <-- dedicated to the Toyota Land Cruiser
http://www.pirate4x4.com <-- Covers all kinds of Trucks and SUVs

Ever think that maybe some of those people with some of these vehicles do use those vehicles capabilities... just not everyday or everytime you see them? Because maybe when you see them you are not in a place that would need these vehicles capabilities to get to...?


There are more, I feel no need to quote them. These posts are examples with one of my problems with many members of the left and the right. "I don't do X or have a need for X so no one does!" Just because you don't need to haul or tow doesn't mean no one else does. Just because it doesn't snow in whatever place you live doesn't mean it doesn’t anywhere else. If someone has the money to pay for their SUV and gasoline then by all means let them do what they want. Drive your hybrid two door speck and laugh at them when they drive by, guess what, they don't care.

I couldn't say it any better.

[iyfyoufhl]

the people who need space in their car buy trucks

SUV drivers are either little middle age wifes, who like to feel superior (although they are dumb and inferior)
or men with small dicks