7 ms·
> But in a proposed world of no SUVs or trucks (read comment chain) I think you've misinterpreted something. No one is suggesting banning trucks or lorries; o
by Svip 5y ago
> But in a proposed world of no SUVs or trucks (read comment chain)
I think you've misinterpreted something. No one is suggesting banning trucks or lorries; only SUVs. They are not the same. Trucks, lorries, vans, buses, coaches, all provide meaningful utility. SUVs do not.
- giantg2 5y agoI thought that paper about morality did?
- Svip 5y agoI will confess that I did not read the article on morality, since it is hidden behind a nag screen. I assume most other people did not and would not, and the commenter merely provided it for those more curious. Generally speaking, I believe it is reasonable to only be arguing against the commenter, not the articles or papers they reference. The commenter in question only mentions SUVs, and not trucks. So even if the article about morality did lump trucks and SUVs in the same category, that's not what the commenter is bringing to the table.
- giantg2 5y agoIn that case their argument is even weaker. Just banning SUVs based on morality will cause those people to seek similar vehicles like vans and trucks, providing no benefit.
- TomSwirly 5y agoThe article talks about "personal vehicles" repeatedly, starting in the first sentence, and makes it clear that it's talking about vehicles used for personal transportation.
- giantg2 5y agoWhat is the point you are trying to make? Many people only have one vehicle. So they might be pulling a heavy trailer some of the time but using it for personal transportation the rest of the time.
- jupp0r 5y ago> SUVs do not They do to many people, but not to most. Where do you draw the line?
- fho 5y agoHonestly I would argue that most SUV owners just want to own the biggest car ... if it would be anything else (safety, load capacity, comfort) you could get the same or better with a not-SUV.
- giantg2 5y agoBut other large vehicles (trucks, vans) with those capacities have similar or higher pedestrian fatalities, so what would the benefit be?
- fho 5y agoTrucks serve a purpose if you need to carry (really) big loads on a regular basis (eg farming equipment). Same goes for actual off-road vehicles. None of these are applicable to vehicles that are only driven in cities. I personally like the "Hochdachkombi" format (e.g. Citreon Berlingo) ... smaller than a SUV with twice the trunk volume (1000l compared to e.g. the 550l of a X3). I can (and I have) transported four fridge size PA speakers in that car and still have some space on top for monitor speakers. All while still fitting on tight parking places in the city and using 8l / 100km (30mpg?).
- giantg2 5y ago"None of these are applicable to vehicles that are only driven in cities." Unless you're a contractor/handyman that needs to haul things like drywall, lumber, water heaters, etc. So there are some professions in the city that may require larger vehicles. Also, sometimes those farmer still have to drive into the city for things anyways, like for medical care.