Should these ppl be penalised for having a tank on the road for no good reason,lets face it hardly any of them go off road because most drvers who use them wouldent know how to.
2006-09-11 02:40:44 · 13 answers · asked by Francis7 4 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Other - Cars & Transportation
lets face it, it boils down to a choice. I choose to buy & run my car. Nobody should be able to force me or for that matter anybody else into doing what they see is right. We live in a democracy and still have freedom of choice the last time I checked. I do not condone poor road manners of inconciderate road use, so if you see somebody doing something wrong why do you feel the need to make a judgement on them because of the vehicle they drive?
A bad incociderate driver is a bad inconciderate driver no matter what they drive.
Yes I drive a 4x4. Yes I go off road. Yes I transport my children in it. My car is Diesel & returns 35 mpg. I do less than 5000 miles a year in it, I live in the countryside and I pay my taxes like everbody else. If I go into London I go by Train. My choice.
Why should a 4x4 be penalised for its size & economy when People carriers & the like take up the same space and do less mpg?
To all you bleeding heart liberals out there remember your freedom of expresion is not a god given right, but one that has been hard won by the generations that have gone before us. So please give us your opinion on what we should all drive around in. Perhaps you can then start to tell us what religion / food / tv programs / news papers / Political parties we should be supporting.
2006-09-12 01:31:32 · answer #1 · answered by martdfrogman 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Range Rovers are actually optimised for the school run, easy to see out of compared to modern smal hatchbacks,, so very safe leaving side roads, air sprung so ride kerbs, speed bumps etc effortlesslyl, also easy for kids to get out of and robust so the school bags etc dont wreck them. drawbacks are lousy stopping distances, but you can see much better than little cars, and fuel consumption if you have the V8 but even at 4 mpg thats only £10 per day.
Actually a diesel Freelander is as economical in the real world in town as anything else with 5 doors and as eco conscious.
Where the Chelsea Tractor is useless is in the Country, the brick like aerodynamics mean half the mpg of a saloon, the ride is unacceptably wobbly and they are too big and wide for country lanes, nope I drive a Sports hatchback because I live in the Country but would buy a Freelander Diesel or similar for the school run if I lived in town.
I am a hypocrit because I believe responsible parents transport their children to and from school and lazy uncaring parents make them walk yet my son always walks to school, well it is only 50 yards.
2006-09-11 03:06:27 · answer #2 · answered by "Call me Dave" 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I drive a 4x4 and I am horrified at the way I'm being classed generally. I need my car as it is - a 4x4. You try driving your smart car or fiat panda over peat bogs to get to a site in the middle of nowhere! Bet you'd be glad to see a 4x4 if you did try LOL.
They are some of the safest vehicles around and with the modern day diesel rail engines there's no reason why they can't run 50/50 on bio-diesel/regular diesel. This will cut emissions drastically.
I can understand the arguement against the school runs though - but I think the answer is better public transport. Lets face it, its crap.
I don't agree with the solution of upping the road tax to £1,800pa as whats being suggested in parliament. That would cripple a lot of businesses and individuals that need 4x4 vehicles.
2006-09-11 02:50:08 · answer #3 · answered by bigbadbert 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Angel D:
I'm sorry, but what reason do you have for driving your gas guzzler of a "car"?
Space? Most 4WDs are hardly any bigger than an MPV but they weigh hell of a lot more and are less fuel efficient. Which begs the question of why on earth would anyone buy a "baby" 4WD. These have just about as much interior space as a normal saloon.
Do you go off road? No? Then why the need for huge wheels with a heavy chasis and a huge engine to haul it all?
No we're not jealous. 4WDs are absolutely unneccesary. They take up way too much space, and for the most part use up too much fuel.
******
As for the reason of safety, note that the 2003 Freelander only had a 3 star NCAP rating. Not exactly the safest is it?
2006-09-11 02:48:46 · answer #4 · answered by k² 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
They should be made to pay at least £400 a year in road tax, why such a big vehicle, they block the roads outside the schools, disregarding children's safety parking on the zig zags, emit more pollution than a smaller vehicle, rip up more road surface and WHY?
2006-09-11 04:42:04 · answer #5 · answered by mick 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Most people who drive a 4X4 pay extra TAX ANYWAY as the majority use more fuel!! If your concern is for the environment then it doesn't matter who drives what! the money never goes to it anyway! we could all be driving on water as a fuel, or rape seed oil (which the diesel engine was invented for)
I drive a 4X4 as I need to. I care so I run on LPG!
Air travel is the biggest polluter-should we tax that?? and pay more for travel??
2006-09-11 03:45:18 · answer #6 · answered by WiLLow 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That may be true for alot of people, but my Dad for example does use his Range Rover off road as well as everywhere else. It's a 3.0 diesel so by far not the most polluting thing at all! My 3.0 petrol BMW Z4 is a hell of alot worse! What's your view on that?
2006-09-11 02:47:12 · answer #7 · answered by claire 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No. If we initiate to outlaw something non-mandatory, we will might want to outlaw dishwashers, maximum homestead pcs, all video games consoles and DVD gamers, CD gamers, perfumes, maximum cosmetics, rings, some products of clothing. this isn't 1970's Albania, its a democratic united states.
2016-11-26 00:58:27 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since the question asks for it ...then afraid I shall judge..YES they should be penalised. And yes I know the arguments from rural folk about "needing" a 4x4 but..what did they do before 4x4s and SUVs became mobile homes on wheels....somehow they got by and coming from the country lets be honest even people in most country areas don't need these things as yep they have roads in the country. Would be feasible for businesses such as farmers to apply for exemptions but for those keen on splashing cash on polutting monsters then yes they need to be penalised.
The facts are simple 4x as much carbon emission
More likely than any other vehicle to kill pedestians on impact
Falsehood that they provide better protection for the occupants...so nope not a case of ever being jealous - that is a wonderful piece of PR bull spun by the motore industry and the 4x4 sales that somehow any objeciton is always down to you're just jealous 'cos you can't afford one. Right in soem respects..none of us can afford these ridiculous trucks to be polluting the planet...the reason for the populatrity came into being to circumvent US laws being imposed on carbon emissions so they became reclassified as trucks...really to all those with capacity to pull tree trunks, drive up mountains, carry 10 people and a dead cow on the roof - do you really really really ever need any of this cr*p other than to sit and pose in traffic in smug "I have more money" posturing. They are ridiculous vehicles - time to stop them by whatever means necessary.
2006-09-11 02:50:21 · answer #9 · answered by Gilly S 3 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Predominantly driven by angry stressed-out mothers, making a symbolic status statement outside little Henry's school. Pathetic, charge them all double road tax for taking up to much space, charge them extra for there fuel, actually skip that one, those 4 x 4 are thirsty beasts. Blindfold the lot of 'em pin 'em up against a wall......come the revolution... Power to the people!!
2006-09-11 02:48:38 · answer #10 · answered by Bont11 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋