lunatics

[Slugsie]

Tell you what.... Lets all go out nick a motor blast round the streets untaxed uninsured and give these delicate little flowers something to really moan about.

You mean like half the mini cab drivers in London do???

[stara]

heres a copy of an e-mail i've sent to these nutters:
i am confused, does owning a 4x4 mean you become a mobile crashing machine hellbent on killing other road users, as this is what you are implying on your hypocritic site, does this same type of thinking mean you should try to ban people carriers, after all, the ford galaxy v6 does 18mpg and is as big as the biggest 4x4's, even though the shogun and the galaxy both carry 7 passengers, and return similar mpg, and are the same size, what about banning all cars that are bigger than the smallest cars, we can all drive around in Smart 2 seaters, then again that would be unfair to motorcyclists, so everyone ditch their cars, which are much more dangerous and polluting to motorcyclists, than other motorcycles, but wait, what about the bicycles, motorbikes would be too dangerous to be on the roads with bicylces, so ban all motor vehicles, hang on though, aren't bicyles a little bit dangerous to pedestrians, lets get rid of all wheeled transport, that way everyones a winner. Maybe you and your utopian ideas would be better channelled into harrassing the government to stop pretending that bio-fuels are a no go, or even trying to educate children at early school level that roads are dangerous places, are what about a decent alternative to cars, there is not a decent alternative to cars outside of london, the point of my argument is the size of a vehicle is relative, as are pollutants, and to criticise a vehicle for being bigger than the one YOU drive, (when your vehicle is also a weapon when driven incorrectly btw) is pure hypocrisy.

p.s. why are you using computers wasting valuable energy and dwindling resources, surely you should be using recycled paper and posting your rants to the handful of equally narrow minded hypocritic do-gooders with not much better to do, i think it's you who needs to "get a life".

[silvtr1000]

Here's My Email To Them...

Do you want to tell me what type of house to buy, too?

What clothes to wear?

What food to eat?

You go ahead and drive/eat/wear/buy whatever you want - let me do the same.

My SUV (as you like to call it) has the same footprint as a Laguna or Mondeo, or similar, and does 28mpg.

My SUV barely goes over 70mph. There are kids more experienced with Scalextric cars tearing around in Subaru STIs - are you targetting them?

The safety aspect that many SUV owners talk about is related to the protection of the occupants of SUVs from other road users, not as you seem to think towards other road users. Let boy racers/drunks/bad drivers go out and kill themselves & the car occupants they hit - these guys do exist, and with governments at a loss about how to deal with it, I like tens of thousands of other SUV drivers am doing what I see fit to protect myself and my family. If they hit me, I and my family will come off better. Bad drivers use all sorts of vehicles. If you want to improve safety on the roads, you should be targetting the DRIVERS, not their vehicles.

Do you target tractors that deposit heavy muck on blind country bends?

Ferrari drivers who's cars return 10mpg?

HGVs that spew deisel all over roundabouts?

If you do save the world and remove SUVs from the roads, what'll you move onto then? What the next enormous minority you'll try to opress?

I carry 2 kids & 2 adults on camping trips, I tow an angling boat, I carry musical equipment for my band, and I do play off road, at designated sites. I have one vehicle that can do all of this for me. And, I LIKE MY SUV. You may buy your cars purely on logical, pragmatic reasoning, and end up with a funky little electric city car, but where I apply those two criteria, I also include WANT in my decision. I don't want a funky little electric city car, or even a funky big electric city car. I want my SUV - not any SUV, but MY SUV OF CHOICE.

Yes, as your site says, a normal family car will tow a boat - but what will its mpg return be like during it? And how will its 2WD system cope with a slippery boat launch slipway? What condition will its suspension be in after a year or two of that type of work?

SUVs and their drivers HAVE the right to exist in our society.

You go ahead and drive/eat/wear/buy whatever you want - let me do the same.

[rusty]

In my 11 years as a Paramedic I have been to about 4 RTA's which have involved SUV's and each one has got out and walked away so as for unsafe that's bo**ocks. ANY vehicle (in the hands of an idiot) is potentially a lethal weapon. Primarily RTA's occur due to a lack of concentration, over-confidence and poor control. The problem nowadays is that vehicles come with so many safety features (sort of pi**es on their argument really) that people now have a feeling of safety and rely on the vehicle too much.
Amazing really that they haven't tried to ban HGV 1 trucks as these do tend to cause mayhem when it goes wrong.
TW*TS!!!

[laser_jock99]

An anecdote on the relative safety of 4x4's......

My brother recently did a six month engineering contract at MIRA (where they crash test cars for the European motor industry, amongst other things). Now have a guess what kind of car many of these guy's prefer to drive their families around in? Big 4x4's or supermini's?

Nuff said.

[surffreak]

I want to send them an e-mail saying that i drive a 4x4 and yes i do want to kill their kids, but i know it will just get me a load of greif off them so i leave them alone to rant on as they want, as any argument you put to them is refuted as rubbish even if you can prove it with facts. they wont listen to reason as they are right no matter what.(did anyone here the argument with jeremy clarkson on radio 2 the other day? the first words out of the mouth of the enviromentalist was to attack him manhood , typical school boy attack to show how small his brain is and how week his argument was.
however being an ex london and city white van driver i do agree that the mums driving the 4x4 to pick up little jonny from school do give us 4x4ers a bad name.hampstead at 3.30pm is a compleat no go area due to them .and as for the ramblers ass it is a spin off from the comunist party. and dont get me started on taxi drivers, stards the lot of em! and i have cyclist stickers on the side to show how many i have taken out.(not true but i wish)

[jax]

I need my 4x4 for work and it is used every day. Can someone tell me where the line in the road is on my way to town (in my washed 4x4 to do the weekly shopping) that it changes into a killer machine?

[sumo]

Ok guys n gals you want to shut them up then try this one.

IT IS MY FUNDIMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT TO DRIVE A 4X4.YOU WANT TO STOP ME THEN I WILL SEE YOU IN COURT.

[Chillitt]

back at em

i was going to get a van, but they are banned from recycling centres run by warwick county council, so i may be the only person who is buying a 4x4 for enviromental reasons... unless you know different....

[kitesurf_phil]

IT IS MY FUNDEMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT TO DRIVE A 4X4.YOU WANT TO STOP ME AND I'LL RUN YOU OVER WITH 2 TONS OF METAL. THEN YOU WILL REALLY FIND OUT HOW DANGEROUS THEY ARE.

[Gizmo]

Letter received from Transport Secretary/Department

Just got letter back from Transport Department today after writing comments to combat the anti 4x4 brigade just in case anyone wrote letter to department.





DearMr G Longstaff


Thank you for your email of 13 November to the Secretary of State. Your email was referred to this Division which deals with vehicle taxation policy for a reply.



The Government does not wish to control people's choice of car, but it is committed to using motoring taxes to protect the environment. In particular tax measures offer the most cost-effective way of reducing fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions - one of the major causes of climate change - from road transport. Since CO2 emissions are directly proportional to fuel consumption, those who drive in an environmentally-friendly way and keep their vehicles properly maintained will be rewarded by lower running costs.



The Government has in place a number of measures to encourage the purchase of clean, fuel-efficient vehicles. This already is in place for newer cars a graduated, fuel efficiency-based Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) system, introduced in March 2001, under which motorists can save money annually by switching to clean, fuel-efficient vehicles. Owners of new less fuel efficient vehicles already pay up to £100 a year more under this system than owners of small, fuel-efficient cars. We also have a fuel-efficiency based company car tax system, introduced in 2002, under which company car tax drivers can save thousands of pound a year by choosing the most fuel-efficient vehicles. The Government's initial evaluation of the impacts of the company car tax system suggests that it has had a major impact on company car purchases, and has led to significant reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases from the company car fleet.



The system of Graduated VED introduced in March 2001 is based on the figure for carbon dioxide collected as part of the type approval process – the testing that all new types of car must undergo to ensure that they conform to European safety and environmental standards.



Since carbon dioxide emissions data is not readily available for vehicles registered before 1st March 2001 these cars are taxed on the basis of their engine capacity as a rough indicator of carbon dioxide emissions. Since engine size acts as a rough proxy for environmental impact, this measure gives drivers a clear signal about how they can make their motoring both more environmentally-friendly and cheaper. It also extends this choice to people especially in rural areas, for whom a smaller car may not be appropriate.



I hope this is helpful.



Yours sincerely




Seema Wason

Personally, this letter circumvents the issue at hand!! with some standard letter response

[dirtydog]

I hope this is helpful.



Yours sincerely




Seema Wason

Personally, this letter circumvents the issue at hand!! with some standard letter response[/size]

not really

[kitesurf_phil]

Looks like a typical standard letter. It looks like the one I got from TFL regarding exemption from congestion charging for using vegoil. It didn't answer a single question.

As CO2 emmissions are lower from Diesel cars do they take that into account for pre 2001 cars?

Higher taxation is the answer to every !!!!!! thing!!!!!!!!!!!! Grrrrrrrrrrrrr

[marticogo]

4x4's aah. I work @ a school in Gerrards Cross, posh you might think , but I am only the caretaker, I drive a 4x4 (SSR-g 3.0l) so that I can get out the gates, fighting thru X5's, Mercs, Porsche Peppers, Ford F100's, People Movers etc. Taking my daughter to and from school can be a nightmare, so I feel safer in a 4x4, I also take it off road in thee week as a well as W/ends. I have asked the parents why they drive them , do they go off road etc. Some answers here, 'I like the safety, I like the height , it looks good in the tennis club carpark!. There is a parent who has a son at this school and lives 25m from the school and she drives a Range Rover, the BIG one, and she said that she is worried about crossing the road, her daughter goes to a girls which is 100m from her house (Don't worry I have measured these distances!) I asked her why didn't walk her children to school
she answered that she would be late for her tennis lesson. N.B. tennis club is 150m from her house!.They are also useful for getting to health club.
I asked about fuel economy and common answer was that if they govt put up fuel prices to £1.50 a litre they would still drive the same thing.
Around here the only places people take their 4x4's offroad is onto the pavement to avoid the yellow lines!!!!!

[Sparky]

the worrying part of this is that the government seems to give in to these do gooders. look at smoking, child dissaplin, and hunting with hounds(how democraticly does that seem to have been sorted out?)to name but a few.
We seem to be dictated to at every opertunaty.