Call for £20 4x4 congestion charge

[editor]

So... Who is focussing on them...? The only people I see getting worried about them are those on U75...

You've missed the stories that have been on the news for years on end? All of them?!!!!

Blimey.

Here's some clues to get you up to speed - and these are just from the BBC!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5075722.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4164001.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4900000.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3739495.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2940776.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4829628.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/C2314

 

[toggle]

Why wouldn't parents want their kids walking to school, then?

Or is it because you think they'd be right to be worried about the increased chance of an accident caused by...err... 4x4/SUV drivers?

My kid is 8, and we walk to school unless I'm heading of somewhere in the car straight after. I'm already starting to walk him half way and let him walk the rest on his own in the morning. In september, I'm considering meeting him in the park, so he can walk home most of the way on his own as well.

the traffic botheres me a hell of a lot more than the tabloid led hysteria about the 'huge' risk of him being snatched by a roving nonce on the way there or back. Any consideration of him going to school on his own, or being allowed to walk to the shops on his own is led entirely by my consideration of thesafety of the roads and his ability to judge traffic speeds safely enough not to throw himself in front of a speeding vehicle.

The 4x4's are worse, because they are far more liklely to cause fatal injuries than a car would at comparable speeds, add the chance of bull bars on the front, and the fact that they are often driven faster because the drivers are less concerned with the effect of racing over speed bumps than car drivers and they are a danger.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Just following your arguement to its logical conclusion/reading between the lines.
As soon as you find out that the average bike above 600cc struggles to manage 30mpg (mines 22mpg ) you will be attempting to charge/ban them out of existence.

"Logical conclusion"?
Care to establish your chain of "logic"?
I'm betting it has more holes in than a tramps' underpants.
And I believe you'll find that motorbikes are exempt from the congestion charge, not on grounds of engine size, but because of their mobility. Even a Yank piece of shit Harley is more manouverable than an Austin Mini.

Where's that "logic" of yours again, gone AWOL has it?

So stop being so trendy and have the intellectual integrity to identify other vehicle types you wish to villify.

Are you going to stop trying to be "controversial" if he does?, or will people have to read more of your sad "look at me, aren't I iconoclastic" witterings?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Here we go label me as a Troll. Lining me up for a ban are you?

It's what you expect and want, isn't it?


Can't think of any other reason (except perhaps brain damage or membership of the tory party) that you'd have made so many of your few posts so aggressively contrarian.

 

[editor]

It's what you expect and want, isn't it?


Can't think of any other reason (except perhaps brain damage or membership of the tory party) that you'd have made so many of your few posts so aggressively contrarian.

Indeed.

 

[Dan U]

Also, it does seem that a lot of the anti- 4x4 debate is based on a dislike of the perceived owners or type of people that own these vehicles ("Chelsea Tractor owners") and it seems more than a little hypocritical to be criticising people for spending their money how they want to

thats not my motivatation for disliking them.

there's plenty of Shoguns on the estate near me!

 

[Descartes]

The 4x4's are worse, because they are far more liklely to cause fatal injuries than a car would at comparable speeds, add the chance of bull bars on the front, and the fact that they are often driven faster because the drivers are less concerned with the effect of racing over speed bumps than car drivers and they are a danger.

Bull bars are banned and have been banned for a number of years, driven faster.... the white van man is the faster of the two even over the humps

I was chatting to two 4x4 users, both rely on the size to carry their trade bits and at weekends, their large than normal family... average fuel consumption, one had been modified and gave a fuel consumption of approx 35 to the gallon the other was the larger engined but still returned approx 30 on a long run.... I will admit that town mileage did not get into the conversation...

both said that a comparable people carrier or large saloon would not be suitable for their needs...

 

[laptop]

I was chatting to two 4x4 users,

Thing is, I'd rely on an SUV owner's rationalisation to be a true account about as much as I'd rely on an alcoholic's rationalisation of their drinking...

 

[Descartes]

I was chatting to two 4x4 users,


Now, if you had asked in what circumstances this took place I could give your argument some credence.. but such ... well, not a lot I can say about your stance on this.

 

[laptop]

In the absence of additional information, I would rely... But SUV owners' conversation is more boring than alcholics'. Don't want to encourage it.

If this discussion took place at the Society for Epistemology it might make a difference to my assessment.

 

[pk]

Yep, fuck 'em.

£20 for a 4x4, no problem with that.

 

[Descartes]

Epistemology

Hmm, to which I can only refer ypu to Gödel's first incompleteness theorem, This would establish the validity of the comments and render your argument as superfluous to the debate

PK, isn't that a screw, self tapper, metal thread, it can screw itself into anything... sounds about right.

 

[boskysquelch]

Now, if you had asked in what circumstances this took place I could give your argument some credence.. but such ... well, not a lot I can say about your stance on this.

Said by a cunt who thinks it acceptable to race around Central London if you have a vehicle that enables you.

My stance is that you are a Twat.​

Freely given with prejudice.

If you have nothing to comment upon another posters reasoning then fuck off and shut the flow of shit come from your fingers.

 

[editor]

Said by a cunt who thinks it acceptable to race around Central London if have a vehicle that enables you.

Stop the personal abuse, please.

 

[smokedout]

Spoof penalty tickets spook SUV owners

 

[jæd]

Spoof penalty tickets spook SUV owners

Oooh look... Yet another news report that shows there is no actual cause for alarm, and apart from a few tree-huggers, suvs are quite popular.

Btw, gotta love the way 4x4 opponents use abuse and emotive arguments against them, and the actual owners & drivers use practical reasoned. comments...!

 

[editor]

Btw, gotta love the way 4x4 opponents use abuse and emotive arguments against them, and the actual owners & drivers use practical reasoned. comments...!

What, all of them?

Nothing like a nice slice of wild stereotyping, eh?

 

[Pie 1]

Btw, gotta love the way 4x4 opponents use abuse and emotive arguments against them, and the actual owners & drivers use practical reasoned. comments...!

I must admit, I find some of the 'against' arguments on here such fact free, hysterical rants, I almost begin to start siding with the 'for' camp.
Get a grip people, really.

 

[editor]

I must admit, I find some of the 'against' arguments on here such fact free, hysterical rants, I almost begin to start siding with the 'for' camp.

Feel free to have a go at tearing mine apart.

 

[jæd]

Nothing like a nice slice of wild stereotyping, eh?

Well... "Wild stereotyping" seems par for the course for this topic...!

 

[editor]

Well... "Wild stereotyping" seems par for the course for this topic...!

Could you give me some examples where I've been as guilty as you of making wild, all-encompassing statements about an entire group of people please?

 

[Pie 1]

Feel free to have a go at tearing mine apart.

Whilst you are normally on the ball with your facts & figures, The last time we had this sort of debate you were shown to be rather fact free and about your claims of the 'size' of these vehicles, which a few people, myself included, then proceeded to show you were not correct.

I'm afraid I also find this sort of rhetoric unhelpful and frankly, rather silly.

Editor: What's so brave about intimidating pedestrians and other drivers with an over-inflated chunk of menacing metal?

Editor: Best transport the kids in big fuck-off 4x4s then.

That way, only the poor kids get killed or injured!

 

[editor]

I'm afraid I also find this sort of rhetoric unhelpful and frankly, rather silly.

You may not like the 'rhetoric', but if you bother to read the links I've posted up, you'll find it rather accurately reflects one of the reasons why some people are buying pointlessly over-engineered, resource-hogging and downright dangerous 4x4s.

 

[jæd]

...and downright dangerous 4x4s.

In terms of pedestrian harm, 4x4s are often no worse than ordinary family cars, according to Euro NCAP results.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4829628.stm

 

[The Pious Pawn]

More bollocks , This is just another tax to rip people of .

Some cretins smashed a 4 x 4 up near to me not so long ago ! the divs didnt relise the lady who owned it run a sanctuary for horses !! !!

 

[trashpony]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4829628.stm

Shall I just quote a little bit more of that, just to even up the balance a bit in case people don't have time to click through the link?

The law of physics says that when a heavy car, be it a 4x4 or anything else, hits a lighter one the big car will come off better," says Chris Patience, head of technical policy at the AA.

The height advantage many 4x4s have over ordinary cars can be a drawback to others. In head-on collisions a 4x4 is more likely to "ride over" the lower car - good news for the driver of the off-roader, bad for the other guy. With side impacts (a 4x4 driving into the side of a normal car), the height disparity is again liable to leave the "little guy" worse off.

 

[editor]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4829628.stm

Whoops! You seemed to have missed out the rest of that sentence:

In terms of pedestrian harm, 4x4s are often no worse than ordinary family cars, according to Euro NCAP results......That's still true, but getting less so as car makers up their game.

"The law of physics says that when a heavy car, be it a 4x4 or anything else, hits a lighter one the big car will come off better," says Chris Patience, head of technical policy at the AA.

The height advantage many 4x4s have over ordinary cars can be a drawback to others. In head-on collisions a 4x4 is more likely to "ride over" the lower car - good news for the driver of the off-roader, bad for the other guy. With side impacts (a 4x4 driving into the side of a normal car), the height disparity is again liable to leave the "little guy" worse off.

And let's see what else they said:

Big 4x4s are right at the bottom of the class when it comes to pedestrian safety, getting an average Euro-NCAP crash test score of just 4 out of 36, compared with 10 and 13 for large and small family cars, respectively.

And what does the BMJ say about 4x4s? Heck, they issued a health warning on them!!!!

In October 2005, the British Medical Journal called for health warnings on 4x4s because of the dangers they pose for pedestrians, and when new test results were released in November 2005, the only car with a zero rating for pedestrian safety was a 4x4 - the Jeep Cherokee.
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/331/7520/787?etoc

 

[jæd]

Could you give me some examples where I've been as guilty as you of making wild, all-encompassing statements about an entire group of people please?

Nah. Just slap a fucking huge charge on those selfish tossers in 4x4s/SUVs.

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=166355

 

[editor]

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=166355

I believe that someone driving a SUV in London is indeed being a selfish tosser.

They're endangering other drivers, they're endangering pedestrians while needlessly consuming valuable resources and contributing to greenhouse gases with their over-sized, over-engineered, resource-hogging enormo-trucks.

But feel free to defend them, if you can.

 

[Termite Man]

I believe that someone driving a SUV in London is indeed being a selfish tosser.

They're endangering other drivers, they're endangering pedestrians while needlessly consuming valuable resources and contributing to greenhouse gases with their over-sized, over-engineered, resource-hogging enormo-trucks.

But feel free to defend them, if you can.

Youv'e had 3 anecdotal references of people using SUV's as their work car for transporting equipment because they are better for that purpose than an estate ( I think thats the volvo style car type I'm thinking of ) yet your still insisiting that SUV are unnecessary and only used for a status symbol . Should small businesses be made to have 2 cars - one for work and one of home because you don't like SUV's on the streets of london ?

If pollution is the problem then you need to increase the tarriff on the congestion charge for all vehicles that have high pollution , or if it's a matter of safety then maybe SUV's need to be included in a different class of vehicle requireing a more detailed driving test before people are quallified to drive them ! I don't believe your argument isn't enough to justify charging SUV's more !