UK SUV Petition

[roubaixtuesday]

Why would that be the case? It would make no commercial sense to design a car to kill people.

The people buying the cars are concerned with their own safety, not other people.

One of the key reasons people buy these is because it makes them feel safe.

Impact on others (as can be richly observed from this thread, on a cycling forum) isn't a big concern.

 

[Alex321]

Impact on others (as can be richly observed from this thread, on a cycling forum) isn't a big concern.

Can you point to any post suggesting that?

There have been disputes about what the impact is, but I haven't seen anybody suggesting the impact isn't a concern.

 

[Jody]

The people buying the cars are concerned with their own safety, not other people.

It's more for prestige than safety

Impact on others (as can be richly observed from this thread, on a cycling forum) isn't a big concern.

That's not how I feel about it but sure, believe what you want.

How dare cyclists have an opinion that isn't blindly following the anti car rhetoric?

 

[icowden]

The people buying the cars are concerned with their own safety, not other people.

That has nothing to do with what you stated which is that these cars are specifically designed to kill pedestrians:-

And SUVs are shaped and powered to maximise pedestrian impact.

One of the key reasons people buy these is because it makes them feel safe.

By killing pedestrians? How does that make them feel safer?

 

[roubaixtuesday]

That has nothing to do with what you stated which is that these cars are specifically designed to kill pedestrians:-

No, I said they are designed that way, not that was the purpose of the design.

In the same way that aeroplanes are designed to burn copious quantities of kerosene. It's inherent to the design, but not its purpose.

 

[icowden]

No, I said they are designed that way, not that was the purpose of the design.
In the same way that aeroplanes are designed to burn copious quantities of kerosene. It's inherent to the design, but not its purpose.

I see you are misunderstanding design and intent.

Aeroplanes are not designed to burn copious quantities of kerosene. They are designed to fly and transport people. A requirement of that design is the capability of carrying enough fuel for it to be able to carry out its designed purpose. If anything it is designed to be as fuel efficient as possible just so it can fly further.

SUVs are not designed to kill pedestrians. They are designed to transport the occupants from A to B via off road terrain. In point of fact in this country and the EU designers are required to make sure that their cars are safer for pedestrians - hence the banning of rigid bull bars for example.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

I see you are misunderstanding design and intent.

Aeroplanes are not designed to burn copious quantities of kerosene. They are designed to fly and transport people. A requirement of that design is the capability of carrying enough fuel for it to be able to carry out its designed purpose. If anything it is designed to be as fuel efficient as possible just so it can fly further.

SUVs are not designed to kill pedestrians. They are designed to transport the occupants from A to B via off road terrain. In point of fact in this country and the EU designers are required to make sure that their cars are safer for pedestrians - hence the banning of rigid bull bars for example.

Semantics.

And yes, regulations prevent them being even worse - they're basically as bad as they are allowed to be.

Radical thought - maybe we should tighten up the regulations.

 

[BoldonLad]

The people buying the cars are concerned with their own safety, not other people.

One of the key reasons people buy these is because it makes them feel safe.

Impact on others (as can be richly observed from this thread, on a cycling forum) isn't a big concern.

I think you are wrong there. One of the key reasons people buy the large (Range Rover etc size) SUVs, not the Suzuki size SUVs is to make them look flash and superior.

 

[Fastpedaller]

I'll add an observation ........ My experience (in the narrow lanes of Norfolk) is when traffic approaches me (be I on bike or in car) the smaller vehicles are apt to slow and maybe stop - the large ones just go blundering on as if there isn't anything in front of them! If we are interested in primary safety as well as long-term emissions, then yes I think the SUV's are too big, but they match the egos of the drivers. Heavier penalties for poor driving, and maybe 5-yearly theory tests/video hazard awareness tests for all drivers?

 

[DRHysted]

Not really. Being against excessively heavy vehicles that are more damaging to pedestrians and cyclists doesn't seem an unjust singling out. Fair enough farmers having them as work vehicles, but for city use by those who never go off road or tow is antisocial as it harms others

But most SUVs don’t actually fall into your description, my old estate was bigger, thirstier and a damn sight less safe for me and for everyone around me. But hell let’s not let your opinion get in the way of facts.

 

[DRHysted]

I'll add an observation ........ My experience (in the narrow lanes of Norfolk) is when traffic approaches me (be I on bike or in car) the smaller vehicles are apt to slow and maybe stop - the large ones just go blundering on as if there isn't anything in front of them! If we are interested in primary safety as well as long-term emissions, then yes I think the SUV's are too big, but they match the egos of the drivers. Heavier penalties for poor driving, and maybe 5-yearly theory tests/video hazard awareness tests for all drivers?

In my observation most drivers force me across, to use a sweeping statement (no different to the stuff being spouted here) the worst are taxi drivers and self righteous cyclists.

 

[DRHysted]

They are a pretty significant impact, actually.

...If SUVs were a country, they would rank as the sixth most polluting in the world... ...The vehicles are larger and heavier than regular cars and use on average 20% more fuel. The increased number of SUVs in 2022 were responsible for a third of the increase in global oil demand...

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...global-suv-sport-utility-vehicles-oil-climate



The power and weight of EVs are indeed a big problem, yes



It's their choice, but the impact is on others - they don't pay for the consequences of their choice. Hence the debate.



And SUVs are shaped and powered to maximise pedestrian impact.

Have you heard of NCAP, part of this is the impact with pedestrians!

 

[DRHysted]

Instead of silly talking of banning this, or banning that, which never produces the desired result. Why not work on dealing with driving standards!!

 

[newfhouse]

In my observation most drivers force me across, […] the worst are […] self righteous cyclists.

You must be terrified.

 

[DRHysted]

You must be terrified.

Not really, seen to much stupidity to be phased nowadays.