John Edwards: "Give up your SUV's"

[JohnRich 4]

News:

Presidential candidate John Edwards wants Americans to give up their SUVs

"Presidential candidate John Edwards wants all Americans to give up their SUVs. He wants them to sacrifice their favorite kind of vehicle in favor for more fuel efficient ones. He gave his thoughts in a speech at the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers..."

Source

[shropshire 0]

An a non-American... can I also tell that chap to STFU? My 4x4 uses the same (or even less) than a lot of high performance sports cars... so why isn't he and his ilk spouting on about them and the Politicos armoured sedans etc?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[vortexring 0]

Do people really believe giving up their SUV's will make any significant difference to global warming?

Or is it perhaps an effort to be more conservative with dwindling fuel supplies?

Or! Is it a means to try and generate extra votes from the increasingly fashionable green element of todays societies?

And does anyone really give a f***?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[willard 0]

I'll give up my SUV (as soon as I get one) when they pry my cold dead hands from it's steering wheel.

[billvon 2,400]

> Do people really believe giving up their SUV's will make any significant
>difference to global warming?

If large numbers of people did - yes, it would.

>Or is it perhaps an effort to be more conservative with dwindling fuel
>supplies?

If large numbers of people did that, it would have that effect as well.

>Or! Is it a means to try and generate extra votes from the increasingly
>fashionable green element of todays societies?

Quite likely. That would be a form of government called "democracy."

[Channman 2]

Quote

News:

Presidential candidate John Edwards wants Americans to give up their SUVs

"Presidential candidate John Edwards wants all Americans to give up their SUVs. He wants them to sacrifice their favorite kind of vehicle in favor for more fuel efficient ones. He gave his thoughts in a speech at the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers..."

Source

My wife's Hummer is clasified as a Truck...not to mention our 179 deduction made it a win win.

The best part about it, is it gets far better gas milage than a M1 Tank.

[vortexring 0]

Really?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[lawrocket 3]

Hmm. He's got two kids. Are he and the wife planning on transporting them in a Prius?

Honestly - until I had kids, I thought SUV's were a joke. Now that I've got two of them, it is fairly nice - and almost necessary - to have one. And if Edwards thinks I should sacrifice the safety of my kids for gas mileage, well, shove it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 2,400]

>And if Edwards thinks I should sacrifice the safety of my kids for gas mileage . . .

SUV's are no safer for children than your average car. People just _feel_ safe because they feel like they're sitting up higher - and that makes people feel more secure.

[Scoop 0]

Quote

...if Edwards thinks I should sacrifice the safety of my kids for gas mileage, well, shove it.

What about the safety of other kids? The ones that get knocked down by these giant monstrosities. If you want/need to go off roading get a Land Rover or a Jeep.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

>And if Edwards thinks I should sacrifice the safety of my kids for gas mileage . . .

SUV's are no safer for children than your average car. People just _feel_ safe because they feel like they're sitting up higher - and that makes people feel more secure.

Well, I drive a Volvo. I got the XC-90 BECAUSE of its safety. 5 Stars. I'd put it up against a Prius any day.

As an aside, my other car is a 2002 Mercury Sable - and I purchased it for its safety rating. 5 Stars. I purchased it BEFORE I had kids.

I WILL put my saftey and that of my kids above other considerations.

As an aside, recall the days of "Unsafe at Any Speed" by Ralph Nader. It basically suggested that we should have vehicles built to tank-like specifications.

Well, now I have a vehicle built for safety, and I'm being told to ditch it for a light, fuel-efficient model that offers less survivability?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 2,400]

>Well, I drive a Volvo. I got the XC-90 BECAUSE of its safety. 5 Stars.
>I'd put it up against a Prius any day.

If safety had really been your #1 concern, you would have purchased an Acura RL or a Honda Civic - the two safest cars in the world per Consumer Reports and the IIHS. And if you wanted the safest car in the world with the best gas mileage it would have been the civic hybrid.

Instead you chose another car. No doubt you had good reasons to do so - perhaps the additional room was a plus. But it also says that you have other considerations besides safety. Gas mileage should be one of those considerations (IMO.)

>I WILL put my saftey and that of my kids above other considerations.

That's fine. But choosing an SUV over a car does not accomplish that goal.

>Well, now I have a vehicle built for safety, and I'm being told to ditch
>it for a light, fuel-efficient model that offers less survivability?

Next time you buy a vehicle, I'd recommend a light, fuel-efficient model that will better protect your family.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

What about the safety of other kids? The ones that get knocked down by these giant monstrosities.

What about kids being knocked down by OTHER vehicles? Heather Mills (an adult) lost her leg from a motorcycle - not an SUV.

Quote

you want/need to go off roading get a Land Rover or a Jeep.

Why? When I'm offroading to the site where we are building my mother-in-law's cabin at Shaver Lake, I'll just use the Volvo. It's got my kids, wife, my tools, a stroller, etc. It's all there! See? It's got "utility," too.

How about you? You gonna fit the carseats and stroller and lunch cooler (I could get fast food, but I'd prefer the kids eat healthier food) and the diaper bag and toys and my tools in the trunk of a freaking Toyota Tercel?

I guess we could take two vehicles to do the job of one. Instead of 19 miles per gallon, I'll use two cars that both get 30 miles per gallon. 3 gallons of gas for the SUV is probably worse for the environment than 4 gallons split between two cars.

Oh, yes. And if the kids AREN'T going with me, I take my other 5-star safety rated car that I average 26 mpg with.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Honestly - until I had kids, I thought SUV's were a joke. Now that I've got two of them, it is fairly nice - and almost necessary - to have one.

I never did, and still don't know why people with kids prefer to drive a SUV over a minivan. The SUV's typically cost more, have less room, get worse mileage and are harder to get in and out of. I'm guessing that it's because the Jones' have one.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

>And if Edwards thinks I should sacrifice the safety of my kids for gas mileage . . .

SUV's are no safer for children than your average car. People just _feel_ safe because they feel like they're sitting up higher - and that makes people feel more secure.

I've been looking for a new car, so we've been looking at a lot of crash ratings... And it seems that (in general) the bigger vehicle you're in, the less likely you are to get seriously injured or killed in a crash.

But I'll probably get a Honda Civic, since it had the best ratings for what is practical and affordable for me.

Edit: Oh, and I don't think that the government should ban SUV's, but I didn't vote since that wasn't one of the options.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

An a non-American... can I also tell that chap to STFU? My 4x4 uses the same (or even less) than a lot of high performance sports cars... so why isn't he and his ilk spouting on about them and the Politicos armoured sedans etc?

The difference is that people at least get the performance out of the high performance sports cars, while the percentage of SUVs with cow catchers on the front that have a single scratch can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Same for the number of people who tow boats. In California, it's the single occupant vehicle of choice.

America is wasting shitloads of fuel on SUVs for NOTHING and it is costing us dearly. If there was a nice way to distinguish need from stupidity and ban the latter, we'd be better off. Still better off if we banned em all. If we don't do it this year, we'll have to do it later, and with more severe consequences. Crank up the CAFE level to 40 in 5 years. That will get results.

But we're not ready to accept it. We'll all have our own excuses for why we need a 15mpg car. And most of us will be lying.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

If safety had really been your #1 concern, you would have purchased an Acura RL or a Honda Civic - the two safest cars in the world per Consumer Reports and the IIHS.

Well, they are the best in their "Class" of "Passenger Car." But the government itself says:

Quote

All other things being equal, a heavier vehicle will generally better protect you in a crash. This is particularly the case in two-vehicle crashes. NHTSA research historically has shown that occupants in passenger cars are at a greater risk of being fatally injured when struck in the front or the side by a heavier and higher-riding light truck (such as a pickup) or SUV.

Source: http://www.safercar.gov/BASC2007/pages/DrivingSafety.html#conweight

Rollover and side crash risks can be compared against all classes. But not frontal.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[TrophyHusband 0]

sure, as soon as he moves into a 3 bed 2 bath 2200 square foot house and starts flying commercial. fuck these rich "do as i say, not as i do" blowhards. i

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

still don't know why people with kids prefer to drive a SUV over a minivan.

Because the minivan would have more trouble doing what I wanted it to do. I didn't see one that rated as safe as the Volvo. I also didn't see a minivan that had the capabilities of the XC90 for access to unimproved roads in the mountains. The All Wheel Drive and traction control of the SUV is better than the minivan for snow. All things considered, when looking at the uses and what we needed, I agreed with my wife on choosing the SUV over the minivan.

When the kids get bigger, a minivan may become a better choice. But the Volvo was ideally suited for the uses we give it. And minivans are at pretty good prices.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Rollover and side crash risks can be compared against all classes. But not frontal.

Maybe we're on to something here. What if we slapped some rubber tires on some big ol locomotives and put those babies on the road!?!?!? Just think how safe their drivers would be! They'd be a real pain to parallel park but then you'd have an excuse to take up those two spaces in the grocery store parking lot

[billvon 2,400]

>But the government itself says . . .

I was going from a more recent study from the American Academy of Pediatrics:
----------
Despite the greater vehicle weight of SUVs, the risk of injury for children in SUVs is similar to that for children in passenger cars. The potential advantage offered by heavier SUVs seems to be offset by other factors, including an increased tendency to roll over. Age-appropriate child restraint and rear seat positioning are important, particularly for children in SUVs, given the very high risk of injury for children restrained inappropriately in rollover crashes.
---------

But then again, if you just want weight, the additional battery in a hybrid will get you that - and it will be very low, thus reducing (rather than increasing) your odds of a rollover.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

If you want/need to go off roading get a Land Rover or a Jeep.

I love my Jeep Wrangler for the rare times I do go off roading but more importantly when I need to drive through a snow storm. Of course I am spending about $60/week (not counting when I go out of town) on gasoline for it and it is not the best city/highway vehicle. But it is great in the snow.

Now as far as the spirit of this thread is concerned. I am beginning to dislike all politicians no matter what party or political spectrum they belong to. They will say anything for a vote and then do nothing in return. Besides killing all the lawyers first (sorry lawrocket), the next thing we should be doing is killing off all of the blood sucking politicians.

PS: I can't vote in this poll since I do not like any of my options ... hmmm ... sounds like the next time I am supposed to vote for some politicians. LOL

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Because the minivan would have more trouble doing what I wanted it to do. I didn't see one that rated as safe as the Volvo. I also didn't see a minivan that had the capabilities of the XC90 for access to unimproved roads in the mountains. The All Wheel Drive and traction control of the SUV is better than the minivan for snow. All things considered, when looking at the uses and what we needed, I agreed with my wife on choosing the SUV over the minivan.

Sounds like you made a good decision. But actually driving your SUV on unimproved roads puts you in a very small minority. As for the snow issue, we visit friends in Vermont every year in the winter and I'm always surprised that there are so few SUVs there, but the minivan contingent is quite strong. Also, here in VA where, admittedly, practically no one knows how to drive when it snows, I'm always amazed at the number of SUV's that are stuck in the ditches or upside down in the median. I'd say that they represent more than 50% of the post storm carnage.

[Scoop 0]

Quote

What about kids being knocked down by OTHER vehicles?

Other vehicles such as standard saloons and hatchbacks have soft bumpers with no protruding parts. The bonnete are also clear of danger and are designed so they dont have reinforcements etc where a pedestrians head would strke. They are, as best as can be for a lump of metal, pedestrian friendly. That is completely wiped out when a childs head is at headlamp height, Thats my biggest complaint regarding SUV/4x4 vehicles. Also the fact that people want to be safe at any expense. Normal size cars are designed to have the bumpers etc at similar heights so in the event of an accident the greatest amount of energy is disipated and there is hopefully no intrusion into the passenger compartment of the car. So when some bitch taking the kids to school talking on her mobile phone runs a red light and has a side impact with another vehicle smashing the upper half of the innocent parties vehicle only to get out unscathed I get the hump.

[lawrocket 3]

I understand that, bill. It likely has to do much with the fact that I trust myself not to roll the SUV (but it's got stability control, anyway) and dont' trust the other drivers on the road as much. A sideswipe could lead to a rollover.

And I note that the AAP seems to be saying:

"When comparing the risk of a child properly restrained in a passenger car to the risk of an improperly restrained and improperly positioned child in an SUV, the risks are fairly similar when factoring the increased rollover risk of an SUV."

Maybe it's that the improperly restraing child faces the greatest peril in a rollover, but that seemed to be what it was saying. Kinda like saying, "So if you have the choice of a child being adopted by a loving and gentle gay couple, you would prefer that the child go to alcoholic abusive heterosexual parents." It gives two different situations to compare.

My wife is hotter than your wife.