Writing Ideas Organiser Software
Technology10 mins ago
4x4s. What's the point?
Excellent!!! http://www.stopurban4x4s.org.uk/reasons.htm And if these reasons aren't enough, a child is almost 30 times more likely to suffer skull damage when hit by a 4x4 than a saloon car. So, are there ANY compelling reasons to drive one of these ludicrous machines if you are a town or city dweller and never go off road?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by flip-flop. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
No, it's just a stupid selfish status thing, engaged in by people of stunted intellect and no awareness of how other people think they appear. There is talk in London of Livingstone hitting these monstrosities with a �25 per day road charge. I hope he has the guts to go through with this plan. They are dangerous, unsuitable and environmentally damaging, and should be banned from all urban areas. So should the people who drive them. Rant over!
No compelling reasons that I can see, flip flop.
In fact I think they are absolutely ridiculous machines to drive around town in. Anybody that does so seriously needs to have their head examined, in my view. The excuses they put forward about them being �better protection for their children� etc etc is just bull�s excrement. They own and drive them because they want to and because they like them.
But that�s just my opinion. It does not mean I am right and, most importantly, it does not mean that people should not be allowed to own them. I have said before in these pages that I drive one of the smallest, most emission-friendly cars available. I do not drive it to be eco-friendly. In fact nothing was further from my mind when I bought it as I do not subscribe to the hysteria over carbon emissions. (This is because only about 4% of such emissions are from man-made sources. The rest are from natural sources over which man has no control at all. Therefore if mankind reduced its carbon emissions to zero it would have only a 4% effect on the total � hardly worth worrying about). I bought it because I wanted it and it suited my purposes.
But I also own a vintage bus which does about six miles to the gallon of diesel, belches out God knows what from its exhaust and would do far more damage to a child if it struck one than any 4x4 ever would. However, just because it might do some damage or cause some injury does not mean I should not be allowed to own it and operate it.
There are many, many things which people own and which people do which have the potential to harm others. But we have to strike a balance. Statistically, pedal cycles are a major cause of injury to small children in road accidents. (You will not see the figures in many analyses because they are, in the main, not captured). Ban them as well, shall we?
In fact I think they are absolutely ridiculous machines to drive around town in. Anybody that does so seriously needs to have their head examined, in my view. The excuses they put forward about them being �better protection for their children� etc etc is just bull�s excrement. They own and drive them because they want to and because they like them.
But that�s just my opinion. It does not mean I am right and, most importantly, it does not mean that people should not be allowed to own them. I have said before in these pages that I drive one of the smallest, most emission-friendly cars available. I do not drive it to be eco-friendly. In fact nothing was further from my mind when I bought it as I do not subscribe to the hysteria over carbon emissions. (This is because only about 4% of such emissions are from man-made sources. The rest are from natural sources over which man has no control at all. Therefore if mankind reduced its carbon emissions to zero it would have only a 4% effect on the total � hardly worth worrying about). I bought it because I wanted it and it suited my purposes.
But I also own a vintage bus which does about six miles to the gallon of diesel, belches out God knows what from its exhaust and would do far more damage to a child if it struck one than any 4x4 ever would. However, just because it might do some damage or cause some injury does not mean I should not be allowed to own it and operate it.
There are many, many things which people own and which people do which have the potential to harm others. But we have to strike a balance. Statistically, pedal cycles are a major cause of injury to small children in road accidents. (You will not see the figures in many analyses because they are, in the main, not captured). Ban them as well, shall we?
didnt they also ask people why they buy them and the owners said because they are safer than other cars. For who? Even if they hit another car they are the height of the windows and are more likely to cause injury or death than a standard height car.
In safety tests i think they drove one head on into something like an espace and the espace came off better.
I dont think they should be banned but i think people need to be made more aware of how they really do in safety tests etc. It may make the 'school gate' brigade think twice.
In safety tests i think they drove one head on into something like an espace and the espace came off better.
I dont think they should be banned but i think people need to be made more aware of how they really do in safety tests etc. It may make the 'school gate' brigade think twice.
i think mums in 4x4s on the school run give these cars a really bad image - other than that lets get real - this all about politics of envy the anti 4x4 tree hugging nazis want to get rid of cars like mercs , bmws , jaguars and rollers but know they'll be laughed out for their politics of envy so they disengenuously target luxury cars in a different way -hence 4x4.As for being monstrosities most are merely a few inches longer or the same as the an average saloon - the 40k lexus rx400 is an inch wider than a mini.
As for injuries they cause well,how much damage will a van or bus or articulated lorry cause to a childs skull ?- a lot more lets ban them shall we?
why do people buy them ? well , yes its a statement of wealth from drivers living in the worlds 4th largest economy , and a democracy where people have a free choice in what goods they buy.
Anyway, must rush , off to see a bloke about a top of the v8 range rover he's selling - or should i go for a porsche cayenne?.....decisions decisions......
As for injuries they cause well,how much damage will a van or bus or articulated lorry cause to a childs skull ?- a lot more lets ban them shall we?
why do people buy them ? well , yes its a statement of wealth from drivers living in the worlds 4th largest economy , and a democracy where people have a free choice in what goods they buy.
Anyway, must rush , off to see a bloke about a top of the v8 range rover he's selling - or should i go for a porsche cayenne?.....decisions decisions......
You'll find a link on my website ... if you want ...
There's lots of other annoying stuff there too.
http://mysite.orange.co.uk/gbur/Bad.htm
There's lots of other annoying stuff there too.
http://mysite.orange.co.uk/gbur/Bad.htm
As JJ has said, why shouldn't they, if they want to? They pay a lot more in fuel charges and other taxes in order to do so.
As to danger, aren't 1/ buses and trucks just as lethal, perhaps more so, as they can't stop as fast, 2/ boy-racers in BMWs even more dangerous still (yes, I use this marque as a generalisation).
What would you like to ban next, just because you don't like it?
As to danger, aren't 1/ buses and trucks just as lethal, perhaps more so, as they can't stop as fast, 2/ boy-racers in BMWs even more dangerous still (yes, I use this marque as a generalisation).
What would you like to ban next, just because you don't like it?
What !!! Keep the kids out of the road then ! How many parents allow their children to use bicycles without them wearing safety helmets ? And how many times do you see children in the back of cars not belted up, and more often than not standing in between the front seats, hey, lets ban these parents from owning cars and fine the parents of any child under 10 who has been involved in a road accident and been knocked down by a 4x4, the 4x4 didn't cause the accident it was the unsupervised child who caused it. While we're being ridiculous lets ban the new triple deck passenger airliners cos if one of those crashes 600 plus people are going to die.
Statistics are great aren't they they can be manipulated to back up any argument, did you know that over a thousnd people die every year from injuries and complications received from falls down stairs ! Lets make anyone over 50 live in bungalows.
Sorry Flip your argument has flopped !!!
Statistics are great aren't they they can be manipulated to back up any argument, did you know that over a thousnd people die every year from injuries and complications received from falls down stairs ! Lets make anyone over 50 live in bungalows.
Sorry Flip your argument has flopped !!!
The biggest reason why I hate these ridiculous machines the most is because when they are in front of me I can't see over them or around them and that really really irritates the crap out of me - Odd I know, but I like to see where I'm going: granted you can't with buses and trucks as well, but buses and trucks serve a purpose: a 4x4 in urban traffic does not.
Is there any compelling reason to allow Ferrari's and Lamborgini's?
They guzzle gas just as much are similarly stupid status symbols.
A simple solution would be to refuse to license for sale any private road vehicle that can't manage say 25 MPG on an urban cycle.
Does that sound too much to ask from motor manufacturers?
They guzzle gas just as much are similarly stupid status symbols.
A simple solution would be to refuse to license for sale any private road vehicle that can't manage say 25 MPG on an urban cycle.
Does that sound too much to ask from motor manufacturers?
4x4 are fine when driven correctly but if the driver is a rubbish driver they will hit someone no matter what and if i was to die from impact of a car id prefer it to be quick. 4x4s are excellent cars they dont consume more petrol or diesel than anyother car. its just some idea some stoneage man came up with because they are heavier vehicles. Getting a diesel 4x4 is the best thing you can do.
Now thats just padantic, im just standing up for the 4x4s out there who get slagged off for having a drinking problem if you dont own one dont complain. If 4x4s really ruined the enviroment why are farmers mostly driving round in them, and yes cos they are practical. I'm not having a pop im just seeing this from the other side of things. ther are more dangerous cars out there than a 4x4 like the rover metro.
no, you're missing the point. Farmers need 4 wheel drive. They have fields to drive over, not the nicely (kind of) kept roads of town.
If you like the car, keep it. Just don't try arguing for it by saying it doesn't guzzle more gas than others, or it's not more likely to kill someone if you hit them.
The best argument is - I like it. Simple as that.
If you like the car, keep it. Just don't try arguing for it by saying it doesn't guzzle more gas than others, or it's not more likely to kill someone if you hit them.
The best argument is - I like it. Simple as that.
Latest Posts
Body & Soul17 mins ago
Star Wars Quix...f A O Mozz....
Film, Media & TV59 mins ago
ChatterBank89 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles98 mins ago
Music99 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.