this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2023
409 points (98.1% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7153 readers
509 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.ml 30 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (12 children)

Why do people feel the need to have a $60K+ massive behemoth? 99% of the time if I glance in the bed it is spotless. It is probably only used for commuting and carrying groceries. It might haul a load of mulch once a year. The things are so high that if they hit a car they are going to ride up over the hood and crush you. At least my state finally got its act together and banned those goddamn frontend lifted trucks that made it impossible to see anything within 50 ft and guaranteed a deadly collision. Now I know someone will say "But I need it for my building job/farm/etc", you are the exception, the vast majority sold are not being used for that.

"reasoning that these vehicles are safer for drivers in the event of a crash" Sounds like an arms race. Soon we will be driving armored personnel carriers.

It is bad enough they make them with ridiculously loud exhausts as bad as muscle cars and fart exhausts. Electric cars and trucks quieting everything can't come fast enough.

[–] xhieron@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

“reasoning that these vehicles are safer for drivers in the event of a crash” Sounds like an arms race. Soon we will be driving armored personnel carriers.

Well, yeah. It is an arms race. I drive a "midsize" SUV, and a large part of the reason is that these trucks are going to be on the road no matter what. Statistically, in the event of a collision between a truck and a car, the truck driver will live and the car driver will die, no matter who is at fault. Is it more dangerous for drivers of small cars and pedestrians? Absolutely! But it's safer for the person in the tank. Ergo, if you want to maximize the safety of yourself and your passengers, be the one driving the tank. Am I selfish for driving my SUV? Probably--but it's hard to make a moral argument that defeats "This is more likely to keep me alive."

I live in a rural area, so walking isn't an option even if we had the infrastructure (which we don't), and I dream of a future in which we have commuter rail here. But until then, I'm going to be in the thing that's most likely to keep one of these monsters from killing me, and once my son is old enough to drive, you bet your ass I'm putting him in one too, because these things are on the road whether I like it or not. The tragedy of the commons is that everyone contributing to the calamity is rational.

All of these ridiculous trucks should be off the road, and I will cheerfully give mine up--once everyone else has, and not a moment sooner. Until then, anybody selling APCs yet? It looks like that Abrams has better sight lines than a 2500. Where do I get a road legal one of those?

[–] Locuralacura@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

This is similar logic that 2A people use to claim citizens should have access all weapons that the military has. My man, no citizen needs a swarm of deadly drones, but since the guy up the block has an AR 15, I gotta keep up. The truth is, nobody really wins a war against a military superpower with small arms unless they have tenacity, balls of steel, support, and organization. Unless the gravy seals are digging tunnels, eating rat meat, they are not going toe to toe with the army like the Vietnamese. You could give them all weapons in the world and they still can't find grit, tenacity and balls. Key ingrediesum.

Anyway...

That's why I still drive my Corolla, and also, coincidentally, I can't afford a big suv.

load more comments (10 replies)