NEWSFLASH! 4WDs most dangerous on roads

The author of this particular article has issues: "Mr Scruby, wh
drives a Subaru Outback". It's a 2.5 Litre, 4 cylinder, 1,960k
vehicle which hardly compares to the kind of 4WDs he's referring t
(4.1 Litre, 6 cylinder, 3,180kg Landcruisers). Anyway, have a read

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117...873-421,00.htm

June 28, 200
FOUR-wheel drive owners will often tell you they chose their vehicle
for safety reasons but a new study has found they are the mos
dangerous cars on the road

4WDs are far more likely than conventional vehicles to kill or mai
other road users, the Monash University study found.

But Pedestrian Council of Australia chairman Harold Scruby reckons i
has less to do with safety and more to do with compensating fo
anatomical deficiencies.

"There's a Freudian factor; certain people have to buy these large car
because they're missing elsewhere," Mr Scruby said today.

"The majority of drivers see (4WD owners) as aggressive and arrogant
it's a certain type of person who has to have one of these vehicles an
sit above everyone else."

Mr Scruby today called for the removal of tariff reductions for 4WDs a
a study showed what many already suspected – that 4WDs are the mos
dangerous cars on the road.

Mr Scruby, who drives a Subaru Outback, said it was hard to tell t
what degree the people driving 4WDs were responsible for the hig
injury rates, and how much was due to the physical nature of 4WDs. I
was not really possible to improve safety for the occupants of on
vehicle in a crash without compromising safety for the occupants of th
other, he said


Mr Scruby called on the Federal Government to scrap tariff reduction
on 4WD vehicles and to apply lower tariffs to safer vehicles.

People who genuinely needed 4WDs, such as those in remote areas, coul
be exempted from increased tariffs, he said.

But elsewhere 4WDs should be "taxed off the road".

"I don't think people in Mosman and Toorak should be getting thes
vehicles at 5-per-cent tax when a Corolla is taxed at 10 per cent," M
Scruby said.

He also took aim at young drivers in regional areas who drove souped-u
utes often adorned with bullbars, aerials and stickers.

"In the bush every young driver wants to drive a Holden ute with
bullbar," he said.

"It's a testosterone thing, it's all about 'mine is bigger tha
yours.'"

NRMA vehicle policy expert Jack Haley said the high rate of injurie
caused by 4WDs was due to the type of vehicle involved, not th
behaviour of 4WD drivers. The same tariffs should be applied to al
cars, Mr Haley said

--
LotteBum

Im shocked!!!

what an amazing study

"FOUR-wheel drive owners will often tell you they chose their vehicles
for safety reasons but a new study has found they are the most
dangerous cars on the road."

well, they are fine in their little fortresses. i doubt they buy em for
others' safety! No, honest!

shoulders (ouch, other shoulder...) anti-4WD-rocketlauncher

perhaps the argument could be that they should be slugged more
TAC/whatever levy seeing as they cause more damage (when in a
collision, i aint touching the 'more accidents/more dangerous bit) to
others and therefore cost society more medical/etc costs due to their
choice of vehicle to drive johnny/jane to soccer

F"preachin to the converted"Dutch


--
flyingdutch

LotteBum wrote in
:


The author of this particular article has issues: "Mr Scruby, who
drives a Subaru Outback". It's a 2.5 Litre, 4 cylinder, 1,960kg
vehicle which hardly compares to the kind of 4WDs he's referring to
(4.1 Litre, 6 cylinder, 3,180kg Landcruisers). Anyway, have a read:


Just a short warning, no one takes Scruby very seriously except for the
current affair crowd and only then because they can guarantee
controversy.

This is the same idiot that campaigns against bikes on footpaths or on
bike paths. He has campaigned to have certain bike paths declared
shared paths and then campaigned against bikes on shared paths. He is a
complete prat with absolutely no background or knowledge of road safety.
His "council" is his own invention and mostly appeals to those with
walking frames (he doesn't like r*nners either).

Oops, a not so short warning. I'd rate him right up there with the
Roger Brattons of the world.

Cheers

BrettM

On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:03:52 +1000, LotteBum
wrote in aus.bicycle:

FOUR-wheel drive owners will often tell you they chose their vehicles
for safety reasons but a new study has found they are the most
dangerous cars on the road.


I have never been able to understand why the state government doesn't
encourage smaller cars by making rego free on vehicles under (say)
1500cc and under a certain weight. Then recouping the loss of revenue
by increasing the rego on large 4 wheel drives. Smaller vehicles; less
road maintenance etc

Makes sense to me.


Regards
Prickles

Flying Echidna wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:03:52 +1000, LotteBum
wrote in aus.bicycle:


FOUR-wheel drive owners will often tell you they chose their vehicles
for safety reasons but a new study has found they are the most
dangerous cars on the road.



I have never been able to understand why the state government doesn't
encourage smaller cars by making rego free on vehicles under (say)
1500cc and under a certain weight. Then recouping the loss of revenue
by increasing the rego on large 4 wheel drives. Smaller vehicles; less
road maintenance etc

Makes sense to me.


Regards
Prickles


Cos then they would have to make motorcycles free.
Seeing as most motorcycles are under 1500 cc and under 500 kilos weight

Or if they based rego on the % of accidents at fault they would have to
make motorcycles free.

Instead of stinging em an extra 50 bucks in order to educate car owners
into looking for motorcycles.

Dave

Flying Echidna Wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:03:52 +1000, LotteBum
wrote in aus.bicycle:

FOUR-wheel drive owners will often tell you they chose their vehicles
for safety reasons but a new study has found they are the most
dangerous cars on the road.


I have never been able to understand why the state government doesn't
encourage smaller cars by making rego free on vehicles under (say)
1500cc and under a certain weight. Then recouping the loss of revenue
by increasing the rego on large 4 wheel drives. Smaller vehicles; less
road maintenance etc

Makes sense to me.


Regards
Prickles

They kind of do by default, bigger less fuel efficient vehicles us
more petrol (and therefore pay more taxes).

The age was talking about the effect of petrol price rises on th
average $150 a month family petrol bill. Sheesh, I bitch when I have t
buy petrol once a month

--
PiledHigher

PiledHigher wrote:

Flying Echidna Wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:03:52 +1000, LotteBum
wrote in aus.bicycle:

FOUR-wheel drive owners will often tell you they chose their vehicles
for safety reasons but a new study has found they are the most
dangerous cars on the road.


I have never been able to understand why the state government doesn't
encourage smaller cars by making rego free on vehicles under (say)
1500cc and under a certain weight. Then recouping the loss of revenue
by increasing the rego on large 4 wheel drives. Smaller vehicles; less
road maintenance etc

Makes sense to me.


Regards
Prickles

They kind of do by default, bigger less fuel efficient vehicles use
more petrol (and therefore pay more taxes).

The age was talking about the effect of petrol price rises on the
average $150 a month family petrol bill. Sheesh, I bitch when I have to
buy petrol once a month.

--
PiledHigher

I only bitch when I have to buy petrol more than once a month. The other
day my mum criticised my male friends who don't have cars, saying they
were all dependent on me for getting to races, etc. Which isn't true,
because if I'm not around, they just use public transport and their
bikes. She's always hassling me to drive, "You have a car, why not use
it?" It's very infuriating.

Tam, the only cyclist out on Logan Rd in the pouring rain on Monday
night...

Tamyka Bell Wrote:
PiledHigher wrote:

Flying Echidna Wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:03:52 +1000, LotteBum
wrote i
aus.bicycle:

FOUR-wheel drive owners will often tell you they chose thei
vehicles
for safety reasons but a new study has found they are the most
dangerous cars on the road.


I have never been able to understand why the state governmen
doesn't
encourage smaller cars by making rego free on vehicles unde
(say)
1500cc and under a certain weight. Then recouping the loss o
revenue
by increasing the rego on large 4 wheel drives. Smaller vehicles
less
road maintenance etc

Makes sense to me.


Regards
Prickles

They kind of do by default, bigger less fuel efficient vehicles use
more petrol (and therefore pay more taxes).

The age was talking about the effect of petrol price rises on the
average $150 a month family petrol bill. Sheesh, I bitch when I hav
to
buy petrol once a month.

--
PiledHigher

I only bitch when I have to buy petrol more than once a month. Th
other
day my mum criticised my male friends who don't have cars, saying they
were all dependent on me for getting to races, etc. Which isn't true,
because if I'm not around, they just use public transport and their
bikes. She's always hassling me to drive, "You have a car, why not use
it?" It's very infuriating.

Tam, the only cyclist out on Logan Rd in the pouring rain on Monday
night...

Non-cycling parents will stop stressing about cycling eventually (afte
about 10 years!

--
PiledHigher

Flying Echidna wrote:

I have never been able to understand why the state government doesn't
encourage smaller cars by making rego free on vehicles under (say)
1500cc and under a certain weight. Then recouping the loss of revenue
by increasing the rego on large 4 wheel drives. Smaller vehicles; less
road maintenance etc

Makes sense to me.

WA rego charges are $13.93 per hundred kg of vehicle weight. This formula
includes motor cycles. This is not the majority of what you pay when you pay
rego however. My motorcycle costs $41.83 for the annual rego but other items
on the bill bring it up to $200.
A 3000 kg Land-Crusher will pay $417.90 plus all the extras bringing the
total to $706.

Makes sense to me.

Theo

Theo Bekkers wrote:
Flying Echidna wrote:


I have never been able to understand why the state government doesn't
encourage smaller cars by making rego free on vehicles under (say)
1500cc and under a certain weight. Then recouping the loss of revenue
by increasing the rego on large 4 wheel drives. Smaller vehicles; less
road maintenance etc

Makes sense to me.


WA rego charges are $13.93 per hundred kg of vehicle weight. This formula
includes motor cycles. This is not the majority of what you pay when you pay
rego however. My motorcycle costs $41.83 for the annual rego but other items
on the bill bring it up to $200.
A 3000 kg Land-Crusher will pay $417.90 plus all the extras bringing the
total to $706.

Makes sense to me.

Theo



My motorcycle cost $470 so you will perhaps forgive my envy.
Here in the 4wd state we have to subsidise their accidents