Did you hear where PARIS (France) wants to outlaw/forbid SUVs?

[LittleApple81]

Call them something like a joke of a car (sorry, don't remember the exact quote) that use too much gas, cause congestion, and increase pollution. Bwahahhahahahahaha!!!!!

On AAR news.

[quinnox]

1. I actually agree with this

SUV's are gas hogs and are too heavy, so they are a road hazard to those in lighter vehicles. There are studies that back this up, people who are in SUV's are much less likely to be seriously injured or die than the vehicle that isn't a SUV that collides with it.

Either get new standards on car weight and make hybrid SUV's available or do something to cut down on the popularity of them, perhaps an added gas tax for SUV's only.

[MasonJar]

2. Tell George; he initiated a tlarge tax break for owners of big cars.

[Commendatori]

4. I don't understand this.

As for your "There are studies that back this up, people who are in SUV's are much less likely to be seriously injured or die than the vehicle that isn't a SUV that collides with it," are you claiming that SUVs make their drivers "unfairly safe" or that people who drive them should have their risk of death increased to make it even?

Before anyone calls me a Freeper on this one, I'm a Democrat on social issues, but not on SUVs - I have no problem with them, and I don't think everyine should drive around in deathtraps just because some people do.

[quinnox]

6. Here is the thing

Since most people know that an SUV is going to make them safer in the event of an accident, and there are now so many on the road, then naturally people are going to buy them.

So this makes a cycle where there are more and more of them, and makes the odds worse for those that don't happen to have an SUV. Plus, they are gas guzzlers and with the limited natural resources running out it doesn't make sense to have these kind of fuel inefficient vehicles running around.

So, I would make it so there is a gas tax penalty for those that choose to drive them, or maybe a luxury tax type idea that all SUV's have an added tax to buy them.

I am merely saying I would enact legislation to try and cut down on the popularity of them.

[Commendatori]

8. Fair enough.

I understand the sentiment, but I doubt it would really work. If someone is willing to pay an extra ten grand for their vehicle...

Nice thought, though, don't get me wrong.

[LittleApple81]

7. In the New Yorker magazine, several months ago, they had a wonderful

article about the SUV drivers' mentality. Instead of learning how to drive a smaller, more ecologically oriented car, they go for the one that provides them with a better chance of survival (the tank approach). They tested the SUVs against good cars in the same price range. In terms of survival, when you have an accident because of losing control of your car, road conditions, or driver ability THE SUVs WAS SO MUCH WORSE than any of the cars tested that it was not even funny. However, if you get into a crash, the poor "normal car driver" will be dead while the SUV driver will be alive. Hummmmmmm.

[Commendatori]

11. Question - did they specify?

I'm curious to know what accidents make it worse for the SUV. I can't believe it would be collisions into trees, but I might understand rollovers. I'm not doubting you in the slightest, but would really be interested to know more about this.

[LittleApple81]

15. I throw away my magazines so I don't have it any more. But I am

going to the library this afternoon and I will try to get a copy of it. In my opinion it was very thought provoking.

[Commendatori]

20. Thanks in advance

for trying, whether you find it or not.

[greatauntoftriplets]

3. They are far too big for many Paris streets....

...and the parking there is impossible anyway. The French are right to do this.

[Commendatori]

5. Respectfully disagree.

This is just being done because people over there hate SUVs. There is no effort to ban other vehicles of similar size. There are plenty of minivans in the area and they're okay? Delivery trucks are, too?

What if someone has a family of six and wants to visit?

You drive the SUV, you more gas taxes and put up with more difficult parking - but it's a legal product to own. Until a motor law forces people to sneak around in their Red Barchettas, I look upon a law like this as if it's simply an issue of hatred of SUVs, and possibly a jealousy issue.

I mean no disrepect - I'm just not a member of the anti-SUV crowd (in fact, I own one). I know there are midlife crisis types that own them for show, but some people have a legitimate need for vehicles of that size. If you're going to ban SUVs, isn't it logical to do the same with minivans and pickups?

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. I'll try and find the study

but there was one that showed, I think:
sports cars were most dangerous for occupants, and fairly dangerous for others
SUVs were averagely safe for occupants, and most dangerous to others
minivans were fairly safe for both occupants and others
compacts were averagely safe for occupants, and fairly safe for others
luxury cars were safest for occupants, and fairly safe for others

It has quite a lot to do with driving styles - hence sports cars being dangerous. SUVs are driven more dangerously than average cars; but their weight makes up for it for the occupants (though the rollover problems are a significant danger). For others, the weight makes it worse.

And I think they said that professional drivers, eg delivery drivers, were the safest of all.

[muriel_volestrangler]

13. This pice may be based on the data I saw

"The occupant death rate in SUVs is 6 percent higher than it is for cars – 8 percent higher in the largest SUVs. The main reason is that SUVs carry a high risk of rollover; 62 percent of SUV deaths in 2000 occurred in rollover accidents. SUVs don't handle well, so drivers can't respond quickly when the car hits a stretch of uneven pavement or "trips" by scraping a guardrail. Even a small bump in the road is enough to flip an SUV traveling at high speed. On top of that, SUV roofs are not reinforced to protect the occupants against rollover; nor does the government require them to be.

Because of their vehicles' size and four-wheel drive, SUV drivers tend to overestimate their own security, which prompts many to drive like maniacs, particularly in inclement weather. And SUV drivers – ever image-conscious and overconfident – seem to hate seat belts as much as they love talking on their cell phones while driving. Bradsher reports that four-fifths of those killed in roll-overs were not belted in, even though 75 percent of the general driving population now buckles up regularly.

While failing to protect their occupants, SUVs have also made the roads more dangerous for others. The "kill rate," as Bradsher calls it, for SUVs is simply jaw-dropping. For every one life saved by driving an SUV, five others will be taken. Government researchers have found that a behemoth like the four-ton Chevy Tahoe kills 122 people for every 1 million models on the road; by comparison, the Honda Accord only kills 21. Injuries in SUV-related accidents are likewise more severe.

Part of the reason for the high kill rate is that cars offer very little protection against an SUV hitting them from the side – not because of the weight, but because of the design. When a car is hit from the side by another car, the victim is 6.6 times as likely to die as the aggressor. But if the aggressor is an SUV, the car driver's relative chance of dying rises to 30 to 1, because the hood of an SUV is so high off the ground. Rather than hitting the reinforced doors of a car with its bumper, an SUV will slam into more vulnerable areas and strike a car driver in the head or chest, where injuries are more life-threatening."

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=14839

[NashVegas]

18. A Country's Road System

Why should France be forced to widen and repave all of their roads and village streets in order to accomodate SUV idiots? And then repave them constantly thanks to the increasing strain on infrustructure.


What if someone has a family of six and wants to visit?

They'll travel the same way a familiy of six did before SUVs, and has for the last 100 years.

[Commendatori]

19. Why would repaving be necessary?

Those roads can accomodate delivery trucks, they wouldn't have to repave anything.

[evil_orange_cat]

10. good for them...

[lucky777]

12. Paris is Right -- We need to Outlaw or Tax the hell out of SUVs

First, they are NOT safer than cars. There was a piece in the New Yorker Magazine on this in the Spring -- they are NOT safer, they only give the FEELING of being safer. In fact, a tiny Porsche boxster is safer than a huge SUV because it can take evasive action to avoid an accident, it can move out of the way, it can slow down faster, etc.

When it hits a car, the car comes out worse -- I know because I was hit from behind while at a dead stop on US 95 in Georgia by an SUV and thrown into a Jeep: the SUV could not stop the fucking vehicle in time to slow down for the traffic jam. Those vehicles are a menace!

We are in a war for OIL people -- there is no excuse to be using cars at all, let alone SUVs. It should be up to people to decide but we ought to tax the shit out of it! I say that they should be barred from city streets and taxed out of existence.

An SUV is a SYMBOL -- that is all. A symbol of stupidity.

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. Link to Guardian article

http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/story/0,11882,1235364,00.html

Under the resolution, SUVs (sports utility vehicles), which are becoming increasingly popular throughout Europe, could be banned from Paris city centre during peak pollution periods, and their owners denied residents' parking permits. Off-roaders could also be barred from protected areas like the Bois de Boulogne and the banks of the river Seine.

The plan, which would require the approval of the city's police chief and is certain to meet stiff opposition from the motoring lobby, follows similar remarks by the mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, who last month described 4x4 vehicles as "bad for London - completely unnecessary" and called their owners "complete idiots".

The Paris resolution states: "These vehicles emit almost four times as much carbon dioxide as more environmentally friendly cars. Some consume up to 24 litres of fuel per 100km on an urban traffic cycle. At a time when dwindling oil resources are generating conflicts and price hikes, that is totally irresponsible."
...
Philippe Goujon, a councillor from the opposition centre-right UMP party, accused Mr Baupin of "arbitrary discrimination", saying the resolution "stigmatised a category of vehicles" and would have "no real impact on the environment whatsoever". But Mr Baupin said it was "only logical to let into a city the kind of cars that are adapted for it".

[markses]

16. Sounds right to me

Not only are they environmentally stupid, they are also a danger to others on the road. Categorical imperative. We're trying to have a fucking society here.

[Mr. Blonde]

17. SUV's are mostly

pointless. Very few anymore can really do the things they were originally designed for. Oh they still have 4 wheel drive, but never get off the road. That said the Suburban and Excursion do have a purpose. My dad has to pull a trailer and haul a lot of other stuff in his and it is much more useful than any other vehicle to do that. Explorers and Blazers and the like are worthless though.

But if anyone comes for my truck...ooooh there is going to be a fight.