6 ms·

- More car to kill people with in the event of an accident Always keep in mind that accidents may involve a person on the other side.

by zaarn 6y ago

eganist 6y ago
> - More car to kill people with in the event of an accident > Always keep in mind that accidents may involve a person on the other side. This is self-negated with moves by the broader population towards SUVs. The end result is that SUV on SUV crashes will simply include more mass (structured to crumple more effectively as well) protecting occupants in all cars involved. Your car buying decision should be strictly around your own safety. Your driving habits must factor in both your safety as well as the safety of others; if someone else drives inappropriately and causes a crash and their wellbeing is impaired or concluded as a result of both their driving habits as well as their use of a less safe car, the fault shouldn't be on you for having a car that's safer for you to drive. Perhaps that's what you meant to convey when you edited my quote.
- zaarn 6y ago
  The other person might not strictly be in a car, they might be a cyclist or a person simply walking around, so I don't think your counter argument applies. I would also argue that centering your car buying decisions around your own safety is selfish and or egotistical; other people are just as valid as you and you should consider their safety just as much as your own, especially the traffic participants that are less able to defend themselves against bigger vehicles like pedestrians or cyclists.
  - eganist 6y ago
    > The other person might not strictly be in a car, they might be a cyclist or a person simply walking around, so I don't think your counter argument applies. > I would also argue that centering your car buying decisions around your own safety is selfish and or egotistical; other people are just as valid as you and you should consider their safety just as much as your own, especially the traffic participants that are less able to defend themselves against bigger vehicles like pedestrians or cyclists. If you're willing to buy a car based on the safety of others over your own, that's your right. But if we're being honest, everything you just mentioned is exactly why your active participation in defensive driving techniques is essential. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_driving https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_driving Since crashes always have fault, defensive driving and proper maintenance of your car are paramount safety requirements both for myself and to pay respect to other people. However, beyond that, I'm buying my car based on an assumption that other people will not pay me that respect (e.g. by texting and driving), which is also precisely the point of defensive driving in the first place. It seems like you're here mostly to force a debate. I made my point; I hope you're at peace with it.
    - zaarn 6y ago
      I'm not here to force a debate, I'm merely pointing out the obvious. It is my right to buy a car in consideration with others, but honestly, it should be a duty.
- Symbiote 6y ago
  > Your car buying decision should be strictly around your own safety. That is a horrible, selfish attitude. A car driver is absolutely responsible for their choice of vehicle, their choice to drive any particular journey, their choice to exceed the speed limit, text, phone, chat, and everything else. I would ban the sale of any car/SUV not in the current top 75% by pedestrian safety. Set that as a baseline, and increase the minimum standard every 5 years.
  - eganist 6y ago
    > A car driver is absolutely responsible for their choice of vehicle, their choice to drive any particular journey, their choice to exceed the speed limit, text, phone, chat, and everything else. Just their choices not to drive defensively (the portion I italicized in your statement). The car you choose may be based on specific requirements for life. And the journey you take may be all the same. Would you fault someone for not being able to afford a newer car? I picked a car that exceeds the latest pedestrian safety regulations; would you still grief me just because it's an SUV? 100% of the fault comes from how a person chooses to drive and keep their car safe (lighting, brakes, capabilities that allow them to drive defensively). I wouldn't rob someone of their choice of car because I don't know what circumstance necessitated it; it would be selfish of me to tell someone they can't drive a pickup when all of their work revolves around it.
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    >I would ban the sale of any car/SUV not in the current top 75% by pedestrian safety. Set that as a baseline, and increase the minimum standard every 5 years. That's called stack ranking and everyone knows it's a crap system with perverse incentives.
- saiya-jin 6y ago
  That's a bit false feeling you are buying - 2.4 tonne SUV vs 2.1-tonne big wagon if we compare within the same brand and similar sizes (BMW X7 vs 5 series). That's insignificant difference in head-on crash. Crumple zones are +-same so again not a win. If your argument is tiny car vs the biggest then its not about SUV anymore. SUV has much higher rolling danger in case of crash so better stretch your necks before driving...
  - eganist 6y ago
    > That's a bit false feeling you are buying - 2.4 tonne SUV vs 2.1-tonne big wagon if we compare within the same brand and similar sizes (BMW X7 vs 5 series). That's insignificant difference in head-on crash. Crumple zones are +-same so again not a win. If your argument is tiny car vs the biggest then its not about SUV anymore. It's weird that I'm here defending SUVs when my favorite car to drive is a low-riding, low-mass dart of a sports car that's far more likely to kill me than the party on the other side, but here I am. You've constrained the conditions of a crash to: - One specific make and model of car - One specific make and model of SUV - One specific type of crash (head-on, which are exceptionally rare. https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/810625 https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...) This feels like a strawman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)
michaelcampbell 6y ago
At your own expense. How many people are going to make that trade?
- zaarn 6y ago
  What expense? This includes persons on bicycles or on foot.
inglor_cz 6y ago
A lot of accidents involve wildlife. Deer where I live, moose in the European North. Big roadkill is pretty common if you live in the countryside, much more common than killing another person. You are definitely safer hitting the fearless ton of meat that is moose with a SUV.
- zaarn 6y ago
  Where I live, not a ton of moose, though generally if the area is known for roadkill of large animals, you should try driving slower and maybe checking your headlights to make sure they are adjusted. Safer driving beats driving a huge car for the purpose of not having to safely drive.
  - inglor_cz 6y ago
    Even from the shotgun seat I saw several absolutely suicidal deer who were invisible till the very last moment. "Area" may mean 50x50 km of mostly wooded and sparsely inhibited territory. It is unrealistic to expect the locals to drive 40 kph all the time there.
    - zaarn 6y ago
      I'm a very safe driver. When I go through the woods at night, I drive 40 or even 30kph. I've been part of a wild boar crash (southern german wild boars can get hefty), so I want to avoid future incidents. It's not unrealistic to expect locals to drive safely. Either drive safely or hand in your drivers license, what's even the point of having one then?
- detaro 6y ago
  > You are definitely safer hitting the fearless ton of meat that is moose with a SUV. Any data on this? Bigger==safer doesn't always hold with these things. Lots of other car design features play a role there, e.g. a smaller car with a strong roof will likely beat a SUV with a weak roof structure. (and while lots has happened with safety technology, the classic counter point is that if you have a chance to avoid the crash you're way more likely to roll an SUV while attempting to do so)

- More car to kill people with in the event of an accident Always keep in mind that accidents may involve a person on the other side.

by zaarn 6y ago

- More car to kill people with in the event of an accident Always keep in mind that accidents may involve a person on the other side.

eganist 6y ago

> - More car to kill people with in the event of an accident > Always keep in mind that accidents may involve a person on the other side. This is self-negated with moves by the broader population towards SUVs. The end result is that SUV on SUV crashes will simply include more mass (structured to crumple more effectively as well) protecting occupants in all cars involved. Your car buying decision should be strictly around your own safety. Your driving habits must factor in both your safety as well as the safety of others; if someone else drives inappropriately and causes a crash and their wellbeing is impaired or concluded as a result of both their driving habits as well as their use of a less safe car, the fault shouldn't be on you for having a car that's safer for you to drive. Perhaps that's what you meant to convey when you edited my quote.

zaarn 6y ago
The other person might not strictly be in a car, they might be a cyclist or a person simply walking around, so I don't think your counter argument applies. I would also argue that centering your car buying decisions around your own safety is selfish and or egotistical; other people are just as valid as you and you should consider their safety just as much as your own, especially the traffic participants that are less able to defend themselves against bigger vehicles like pedestrians or cyclists.
- eganist 6y ago
  > The other person might not strictly be in a car, they might be a cyclist or a person simply walking around, so I don't think your counter argument applies. > I would also argue that centering your car buying decisions around your own safety is selfish and or egotistical; other people are just as valid as you and you should consider their safety just as much as your own, especially the traffic participants that are less able to defend themselves against bigger vehicles like pedestrians or cyclists. If you're willing to buy a car based on the safety of others over your own, that's your right. But if we're being honest, everything you just mentioned is exactly why your active participation in defensive driving techniques is essential. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_driving https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_driving Since crashes always have fault, defensive driving and proper maintenance of your car are paramount safety requirements both for myself and to pay respect to other people. However, beyond that, I'm buying my car based on an assumption that other people will not pay me that respect (e.g. by texting and driving), which is also precisely the point of defensive driving in the first place. It seems like you're here mostly to force a debate. I made my point; I hope you're at peace with it.
  - zaarn 6y ago
    I'm not here to force a debate, I'm merely pointing out the obvious. It is my right to buy a car in consideration with others, but honestly, it should be a duty.
Symbiote 6y ago
> Your car buying decision should be strictly around your own safety. That is a horrible, selfish attitude. A car driver is absolutely responsible for their choice of vehicle, their choice to drive any particular journey, their choice to exceed the speed limit, text, phone, chat, and everything else. I would ban the sale of any car/SUV not in the current top 75% by pedestrian safety. Set that as a baseline, and increase the minimum standard every 5 years.
- eganist 6y ago
  > A car driver is absolutely responsible for their choice of vehicle, their choice to drive any particular journey, their choice to exceed the speed limit, text, phone, chat, and everything else. Just their choices not to drive defensively (the portion I italicized in your statement). The car you choose may be based on specific requirements for life. And the journey you take may be all the same. Would you fault someone for not being able to afford a newer car? I picked a car that exceeds the latest pedestrian safety regulations; would you still grief me just because it's an SUV? 100% of the fault comes from how a person chooses to drive and keep their car safe (lighting, brakes, capabilities that allow them to drive defensively). I wouldn't rob someone of their choice of car because I don't know what circumstance necessitated it; it would be selfish of me to tell someone they can't drive a pickup when all of their work revolves around it.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  >I would ban the sale of any car/SUV not in the current top 75% by pedestrian safety. Set that as a baseline, and increase the minimum standard every 5 years. That's called stack ranking and everyone knows it's a crap system with perverse incentives.
saiya-jin 6y ago
That's a bit false feeling you are buying - 2.4 tonne SUV vs 2.1-tonne big wagon if we compare within the same brand and similar sizes (BMW X7 vs 5 series). That's insignificant difference in head-on crash. Crumple zones are +-same so again not a win. If your argument is tiny car vs the biggest then its not about SUV anymore. SUV has much higher rolling danger in case of crash so better stretch your necks before driving...
- eganist 6y ago
  > That's a bit false feeling you are buying - 2.4 tonne SUV vs 2.1-tonne big wagon if we compare within the same brand and similar sizes (BMW X7 vs 5 series). That's insignificant difference in head-on crash. Crumple zones are +-same so again not a win. If your argument is tiny car vs the biggest then its not about SUV anymore. It's weird that I'm here defending SUVs when my favorite car to drive is a low-riding, low-mass dart of a sports car that's far more likely to kill me than the party on the other side, but here I am. You've constrained the conditions of a crash to: - One specific make and model of car - One specific make and model of SUV - One specific type of crash (head-on, which are exceptionally rare. https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/810625 https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...) This feels like a strawman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)

michaelcampbell 6y ago

At your own expense. How many people are going to make that trade?

zaarn 6y ago
What expense? This includes persons on bicycles or on foot.

inglor_cz 6y ago

A lot of accidents involve wildlife. Deer where I live, moose in the European North. Big roadkill is pretty common if you live in the countryside, much more common than killing another person. You are definitely safer hitting the fearless ton of meat that is moose with a SUV.

zaarn 6y ago
Where I live, not a ton of moose, though generally if the area is known for roadkill of large animals, you should try driving slower and maybe checking your headlights to make sure they are adjusted. Safer driving beats driving a huge car for the purpose of not having to safely drive.
- inglor_cz 6y ago
  Even from the shotgun seat I saw several absolutely suicidal deer who were invisible till the very last moment. "Area" may mean 50x50 km of mostly wooded and sparsely inhibited territory. It is unrealistic to expect the locals to drive 40 kph all the time there.
  - zaarn 6y ago
    I'm a very safe driver. When I go through the woods at night, I drive 40 or even 30kph. I've been part of a wild boar crash (southern german wild boars can get hefty), so I want to avoid future incidents. It's not unrealistic to expect locals to drive safely. Either drive safely or hand in your drivers license, what's even the point of having one then?
detaro 6y ago
> You are definitely safer hitting the fearless ton of meat that is moose with a SUV. Any data on this? Bigger==safer doesn't always hold with these things. Lots of other car design features play a role there, e.g. a smaller car with a strong roof will likely beat a SUV with a weak roof structure. (and while lots has happened with safety technology, the classic counter point is that if you have a chance to avoid the crash you're way more likely to roll an SUV while attempting to do so)