The latest paintball vehicle...
- Thread starter manike
- Start date
Obviously i drive an SUV, but the difference between me and many other SUV drivers is that i do go off-roading. And the part about most SUV owners buying them for the roominess......... People buy SUV's because it ties together the benefits of many other vehicles. They have room, power(for example towing something), and are equipped for off-roading, or even handling bad weather like snow. As far as being a danger to other drivers, SUV's are safer, ignoring the fact that they are prone to rolling over(and even that's the driver's own fault 9 times out of 10), and so it's not that they want to be a danger to other cars, it's that they don't want to be the one in danger.
Unfortunately SUV's have become somewhat of a status symbol, look at all the luxary SUV's out there. Now those vehicles are equipped the same as other SUV's, but you will almost NEVER see somebody taking a Lexus off-road. The whole concept of a luxary SUV bothers me because they are simply an attempt by major car producers to keep the profits up by accepting the popularity of SUVs. A lot of people buy SUV's more so they can say "hey look i have an SUV, look i can tow stuff, go off-roading, and i've got tons of room!" more than anything else. Another thing that's wrong.
The best comparison i think is to look at really fancy sports cars. People buy them to go fast and to show off, while people buy SUV's so they can have the benefits i already mentioned and show off. It's the same mentality behind it, power. People like to feel like they're in power; with a sports car it means they can drive fast, with an suv it's that they can do whatever.
I'm both for and against SUVs. I'm for them because of the benefits they provide and i'm against them because of what they've become- a yuppy status symbol(for most people that is)
Look how much information I got having a fit.
OK, I can see practical uses for an SUV, but there are significant costs. If you are driving one for increased functionality, you are in the minority. If you need it, then fine. NASA needs an even bigger and less fuel efficient vehicle to get their job done moving shuttles around. It is the pervasiveness of a vehicle that is largely impractical for the majority of drivers. That is the foible lampooned in the site that started this thread.
The danger I mentioned is to drivers struck by SUVs. I realise that SUVs are safer to their occupants, but that increased safety comes in part at a cost to other motorists' safety.
If you need something with these costs to the owner and to society, fine. Most people don't. For most people it is the worst in conspicuous consumption, a "yuppie status symbol".
OK, I can see practical uses for an SUV, but there are significant costs. If you are driving one for increased functionality, you are in the minority. If you need it, then fine. NASA needs an even bigger and less fuel efficient vehicle to get their job done moving shuttles around. It is the pervasiveness of a vehicle that is largely impractical for the majority of drivers. That is the foible lampooned in the site that started this thread.
The danger I mentioned is to drivers struck by SUVs. I realise that SUVs are safer to their occupants, but that increased safety comes in part at a cost to other motorists' safety.
If you need something with these costs to the owner and to society, fine. Most people don't. For most people it is the worst in conspicuous consumption, a "yuppie status symbol".
I have a mate who bought a SUV and his wife takes it shopping for the greater carring load and he gets her hatchback to go to work in.
most of the anti-suv people just use other vehicles as alternatives to an suv given whatever situation people say they would use one in, in your case "get a mini-van" i'm sure would be a quick response