8 ms·
This is why I drive a Toyota Tacoma. Being high up is also safer, your vitals will be less impacted. I'm always surprised people don't know this. Driving a smal
by ldjkfkdsjnv 4y ago
This is why I drive a Toyota Tacoma. Being high up is also safer, your vitals will be less impacted. I'm always surprised people don't know this. Driving a small car is almost irresponsible, especially with children
- OrangeMonkey 4y agoI legitimately cannot tell if you are serious or joking.
- ldjkfkdsjnv 4y agoDead serious. Why would I take on more risk
- OrangeMonkey 4y agoI wasn't judging, I just couldn't tell if it was satire or reality. Thanks!
- ldjkfkdsjnv 4y agoI'm more confused why people are outraged at me wanting to protect my own life, or that I would need to feel judged for driving a bigger car. I'm a responsible driver and a regular citizen.
- anigbrowl 4y agoAs has been explained to you before, you're just dumping the risk onto others. There's nothing especially praiseworthy about this.
- MereInterest 4y agoBecause part of being a responsible driver is minimizing harm dealt to those around you. In the same way that that requires driving at the speed limit, stopping at cross walks, and signaling before turning, it also requires having a bumper that would minimize fatalities when hitting a pedestrian. (Internal bleeding from a chest-height bumper is much harder to survive than a broken leg from a leg-height bumper.) The difference is that the former are required by both law and morality, while the latter is only required by morality.
- frumper 4y agoYou make assumptions that he’ll actually cause harm. I’ve never hit a pedestrian in my car. I’ve never hit someone on a bike. No one close to me that I know of has either. I know quite a few people that have had their cars hit by drunk drivers or reckless drivers.
- MereInterest 4y agoI don't think that assumption is required here. Whenever predicting the future, it must be dealt in probabilities, not certainties. So if you're playing poker, you must evaluate the strength of your hand based on the cards dealt so far. Retroactively saying that a decision was made correctly because the cards drawn favored it isn't a useful analysis. In the same way, it isn't necessary to assume that he will cause harm, only that it increases the likelihood of causing harm. With a larger car, a driver is less able to see pedestrians, and children/shorter adults may be blocked from view entirely. Pedestrian injuries and deaths are on the rise in the US, opposite the general trend elsewhere. The primary difference is the prevalence of unnecessarily large cars in the US.
- frumper 4y agoThe probability of dying from a car as a pedestrian in 2020 is 0.2% and that includes people committing suicide by car. Dying in a traffic accident with another car is 1.1%. If you're playing the odds in poker, you worry about the latter more than the former.
- bch 4y agoDo you consider that decision as contributing to an arms race?
- TakeBlaster16 4y agoWhat's the alternative? Should he choose to risk dying in a crash for the nebulous greater good of lowering the average size of vehicles on the road? This problem will not be solved by individual drivers acting against their own self-interest. It needs to be solved at a societal level, probably with regulations on maximum vehicle size (which already exist, but are being worked around by mfrs) Signed, A Miata driver. If I ever get in a wreck, I'm guaranteed to lose, but at least I'll go out in style.
- celtain 4y agoYes, people should absolutely feel a social obligation to make at least some concessions to the greater good. While this isn't a complete substitute for regulations that systematically fix issues causes by negative externalities, I'd rather live in a society where a lot of problems are avoided because my fellow citizens generally care about my well being, rather than one in which the government needs to intervene left and right.
- seer-zig 4y agoWhat do they do when the society around them doesn't care and is reckless? For example, because drinking is so ingrained in many societies today, you have to do what you can to protect yourself from drunk drives.
- jen20 4y agoSure, it is. I have an SUV, because everyone else here has pickup trucks, and almost nobody can drive to save their own goddamn lives let alone mine. If raised trucks were not allowed, I would drive a sedan.
- letsgo39 4y agobecause you would have some consideration for other people. But hey, there's no law that says you have to care so you can keep thinking the way you're thinking.
- plandis 4y agoHonestly it seems like a weird take to say people should care more about strangers than their own family. As long as SUVs exist on the road I feel like it’s a safety benefit for my family to have a similarly sized vehicle to protect my wife and child. I can’t control what others do but I can control what I do to keep my family safe.
- blehn 4y agoYou _are_ taking on more risk — to the other drivers on the road. That's the crux of the post.
- MereInterest 4y agoAnd this is the exact reason why additional regulation is necessary. Because each individual would pick the option that minimizes their own risk, while maximizing the total risk, the choice cannot be left to individual choices.
- Schroedingersat 4y agoWell, there are individuals with at least a tiny shred of ethics, but you don't tend tofind them in a tacoma with a pristine bed
- kingkongjaffa 4y agoSadly we’re in a phase of rampant individualism, regardless of any detriment to others. Larger cars also make roads more dangerous for all users, because the lost visibility means attentive drivers cannot see and plan further down the road with a huge suv in front of them. Reading the road is a key skill for safe driving, large cars hamper everyone’s ability to do this.
- anonu 4y ago> we’re in a phase of rampant individualism This is the history of the US from its foundation.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- nemo44x 4y agoIndividualism is a core feature of capitalism and the enlightenment. Group identities are cancer and although not a requirement of, parliamentary (democracy) emerged precisely with capitalism and the individualism it requires.
- winkeltripel 4y agoAncient Athens, the Romans, and the Phoenicians would seem to disagree.
- nemo44x 4y agoIt’s why I said it’s not a requirement of. But Feudal society was toppled by capitalism which was powered mainly by democracy.
- refurb 4y agoIf you think individualism isn't rampant elsewhere, you need to travel more.
- xani_ 4y agoSadly probably serious. Taxing bigger cars to the point it's noticeable to average driver is probably only realistic solution, even if that's unfair for people that just happen to have a bunch of kids
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- silisili 4y agoYou do realize if everyone drove giant vehicles, we'd be back to square 1 right? Then what, put children in semis?
- ldjkfkdsjnv 4y agoYeah I realize that, but its optimal for me right now, and thats how capitalism works
- paulryanrogers 4y agoThat's how capitalism fails us all.
- yibg 4y agoIt's also how selfishness works.
- briandear 4y agoIt’s selfish to want to protect yourself? I guess it literally is selfish. But I’m not increasing my actual risk for some hypothetical reduction of everyone else’s risk. Semis, buses, industrial vehicles all share the same road I’m on, so why would I shrink my vehicle? And isn’t it selfish for people to insist on riding their bicycles on the roads? Why is their willingness to increase their own risk my problem? I’m not asking them to ride bikes. They make that choice. By the way, there is about 12k drunk driving deaths each year about about 850 cycling-auto deaths each year. Let ban alcohol if we really cared about safety.
- pluc 4y agoDrinking and driving is banned.
- elenaferrantes 4y agoWow, as others said I can’t tell if you are serious or not. By this line of reasoning there is also the following. It’s optimal for me right now to : - answer that phone call in the subway. - Steal that item. - Play loud music at 2am. - fart in the elevator. And so on It’s called antisocial behaviour.
- woodruffw 4y agoIrresponsible for which children, exactly?
- throwaway0a5e 4y agoYou paid half ton truck money to wind up with a midsize truck (or you got the deal of the century). Vehicle size was clearly not a priority when you made the purchase. Or at least that's what your actions say.
- ldjkfkdsjnv 4y agoYeah its not the biggest one out there, but good enough, affordable, easy to sell etc. I would drive a sport civic if it was safe
- tomjakubowski 4y agoI wouldn't be surprised if the change in risk to you versus to others is grossly asymmetric. Taller front ends are far likelier to kill people (pedestrians) in a collision.
- paulryanrogers 4y agoCaring for children by driving a vehicle whose hood is taller than some adults. I suppose it makes sense if one believes they're far more likely to encounter children only in other tall vehicles. And that increased pollution and waste won't impact everyone's future negatively. Taken to the extreme would my family be safest in a motorized siege tower? What about all the moments near home when the kids are playing on the driveway or near the street? Or those pesky unrelated kids who can only afford a bicycle or small car?
- ldjkfkdsjnv 4y agoModern civilization, its wonders, and high life expectancy were built on market forces and individualism
- paulryanrogers 4y agoAre you sure there weren't other factors building the good things; like say publicly funded research, unions, anti-trust, etc.? Or maybe you prefer the good ol' 12x7x365 work days, child labor, company towns, and rampant illiteracy. Or perhaps you prefer the return of rugged individualized health systems where you can choose between death or family bankruptcy. (Not if just when, more money just means later.)
- ldjkfkdsjnv 4y agoThe bottom line is still the same, large advances in society and modern comforts are derived from human self interest. You might do well to educate yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene
- pluc 4y agoPeople know this they just have more common sense than a wet rock
- hamiltonians 4y agobuy a cherry picker. those are as high up as possible.
- tomjakubowski 4y agogreat visibility too. just don't get into a rollover
- beiller 4y agoHow do you feel about your children walking to places and other parents having your mentality? What I'm getting at is that it in your ideal world here, your children may actually wind up less safe.
- qwerpy 4y agoThis seems to be a widely disliked comment here, but I'll back you up. I drove a sedan most of my adult life, then had kids, and am now looking into buying a large truck or SUV to carry the kids around in. I can't control the cars that others are driving around me or their driving skills or sobriety level, but I can control the car I drive. It's an arms race, I admit. But I will optimize for the safety of my children above all else, so large vehicle it is.
- asdff 4y agoBy doing that, you are also signalling demand to the market for heavier cars, which makes it more dangerous for your children when they cross the street as this article points out.
- anonymousab 4y agoThat signaling will most assuredly occur from the rest of society regardless of the choice he makes. Since the trend will continue regardless of his personal choice, one option is clearly safer for him than the other.
- asdff 4y agoI mean the odds you hit your own kid with your car one day are slim but non zero as well
- reducesuffering 4y agoAnd so have the other commenters that agree with you. Prisoner's dilemna, all your kids are now more unsafe. I have been alive for three people I know to get killed by cars as pedestrians. Fools
- fzeroracer 4y agoWhat happens if your kids decide to start walking around to places? To school, with friends, or to do stuff? In that time you've signaled to the market that you want larger vehicles on the road, which makes it progressively less safe for your children to walk anywhere while slightly more safe in your vehicle. John Neighbor follows the market and has bought an even larger car. Now you are in the position of needing to buy a larger car as well in order to maintain your relative safety standards.
- Tokkemon 4y agoOk but a Tacoma is excessive in the extreme. Driving a truck that size means you're compensating for something.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]