Should SUV Driving amount to Drunk Driving?

On Dec 10, 10:21 pm, Jeff DeWitt wrote:

All right, I'll see your Republican member of the optomirists board and
raise you one Ted (hic)Kennedy who killed a girl and then ran and hid,
unlike Mr. Vellanoweth.-

He was a young man back then.

Anyway I do a Google search for "road safety" and all the returns are
from other countries, where they already have better safety.

I wonder when it will become an issue in the national elections.
Probably Republicans (and Democrats) will flunk the test...


Premier launches Christmas Road Safety Campaign

(Media-Newswire.com) - Premier Anna Bligh has urged all Queenslanders
to make staying alive their priority, as millions of people hit the
nation's roads over the Christmas holiday period.

Launching the Christmas Road Safety Campaign with police on the Gold
Coast yesterday, Ms Bligh said motorists must take responsibility for
their actions, if they are going to make it home safely in the New
Year.

"2007 has been a shocking year on Queensland roads, with 342 lives
already lost - 33 more than this time last year," Ms Bligh said.

"At this rate the annual road toll is likely to be the highest in a
decade, since the road toll reached 360 in 1997.

http://media-newswire.com/release_1058561.html

On Dec 11, 12:54 am, "David L. Johnson"
wrote:
Jack May wrote:
"David L. Johnson" wrote in message
.. .
Jack May wrote:

The last I saw, the average MPG did not change over the last couple of
decades with the introduction of SUV's.
You weren't paying attention, then. The corporate MPG requirements
specifically excluded "light trucks", which is why SUV's exist. They are
classified as trucks, thus don't count in the CAFE statistics.

Hybrid SUVs are now coming onto the market with decent gas mileage.
So, with fancy technology a bigger-than-sane car can get half the mileage
as my old '94 Honda Civic CX (40 mpg -- really). Such advancement.

It looks like the EPA adjusted MPG report includes SUVs (light trucks) and
the average fuel economy has been steady at about 20 MPG. I don't think it
is just reporting CAFE data

What the EPA report includes is one thing, the requirement was for the
CAFE to rise to something like 27mpg by the early years of this century
(or late in the previous one). The US car makers managed this by
classifying many cars as "light trucks", exempting them from the
requirements.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but
what they conceal is vital." ~Aaron Levenstein

So the real issue is what's hidden behind that loophole. They
classified them as "light trucks" so the statistics showed what they
wanted to show.

So "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and
statistics."

On Dec 11, 11:03 am, Bawana wrote:
On Dec 11, 10:13 am, donquijote1954
wrote:

Bicycles though are the ultimate weapon against Climate Change and
safer roads...

Tard.
Bicycles cannot replace the auto.
They certainly cannot replace trucks, buses, planes, and trains.
Do the math.

Only lib-tards celebrate stupidity.
You should toast yourself, you ignorant ****-wit.

What's wrong with the idea of HAVING OPTIONS? Or do you want an
America where all drive SUVs?

Buses suck and trains stink, so what's the option?

For your information, most trips by car take only a few miles, and
that you can do in a bike. Unless you are one of those fat lazy SUV
driving couch potatos.

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 14:43:57 -0800 (PST), donquijote1954
wrote:

Are SUVs' tinted windows a sign of shame? Or are they a sign of
misanthropism?

I find the tinted windows in my SUV (Mercedes-Benz ML 320) do a
pretty good job of hiding the fact that I'm hauling my bikes, which
are standing upright in the back courtesy of a Bike-Tight Glider
Board.


--
jeverett3ATsbcglobalDOTnet (John V. Everett)

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:04:13 -0500, "David L. Johnson"
wrote:

Jack May wrote:


The last I saw, the
average MPG did not change over the last couple of decades with the
introduction of SUV's.

You weren't paying attention, then. The corporate MPG requirements
specifically excluded "light trucks", which is why SUV's exist. They
are classified as trucks, thus don't count in the CAFE statistics.

Ah yes, the old law of unintended consequences.


--
jeverett3ATsbcglobalDOTnet (John V. Everett)

In article , jeverett3
@sbcglobal.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.net says...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:04:13 -0500, "David L. Johnson"
wrote:

Jack May wrote:


The last I saw, the
average MPG did not change over the last couple of decades with the
introduction of SUV's.

You weren't paying attention, then. The corporate MPG requirements
specifically excluded "light trucks", which is why SUV's exist. They
are classified as trucks, thus don't count in the CAFE statistics.

Ah yes, the old law of unintended consequences.

The other big reason there are so many SUV's on the road is the federal
tax break for "business" use of large vehicles. I put business in
quotes because the test you need to pass to call it business use on your
taxes doesn't amount to a whole lot more than driving it to work (a
little more, but not a lot).

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

"donquijote1954" wrote in message
...
On Dec 11, 11:03 am, Bawana wrote:
On Dec 11, 10:13 am, donquijote1954
wrote:

Bicycles though are the ultimate weapon against Climate Change and
safer roads...

Tard.
Bicycles cannot replace the auto.
They certainly cannot replace trucks, buses, planes, and trains.
Do the math.

Only lib-tards celebrate stupidity.
You should toast yourself, you ignorant ****-wit.

What's wrong with the idea of HAVING OPTIONS? Or do you want an
America where all drive SUVs?

The problem with options is that Government often spends far more money than
can be justified to support those options.

Even after the California legislator gutted transit funds in the budget this
year, the Bay Area is still spending two thirds of it transportation funds
for four and a half percent of the travelers and only a third of its money
on the 90% plus of travelers using personal vehicle.

The increase of funds for personal vehicles if from the $40B bonds the
voters approved to partially repair the damage done to California by the
foolish spending on transit over the last decades.

Having options is the brain dead cliché used by people that don't understand
that funds are limited and options are often far more expensive than main
stream transportation. Options usually carry far too few people to be of
any real value.

"David Kerber" wrote in message
t...
In article , jeverett3
@sbcglobal.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.net says...
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:04:13 -0500, "David L. Johnson"
wrote:

Jack May wrote:

The other big reason there are so many SUV's on the road is the federal
tax break for "business" use of large vehicles. I put business in
quotes because the test you need to pass to call it business use on your
taxes doesn't amount to a whole lot more than driving it to work (a
little more, but not a lot).

Yes, that tax break is very large. Just for the record I do not own or
drive an SUV

"George Conklin" wrote in message
...

"Jack May" wrote in message
. ..

"donquijote1954" wrote in message
...


NC has laws on tinted windows and they must pass inspection, be they on
cars
or trucks.

So does California. The law is not enforced much because it requires the
police to measure the percent of light passing through the window. Police
seldom carry the measurement device.

"donquijote1954" wrote in message
...
On Dec 10, 7:42 pm, "Jack May" wrote:
"donquijote1954" wrote in message

...

Scooters get 80MPG, and don't add to traffic congestion.

Something is not a solution unless a lot of people use it. Scooters will
never be used by more than a very few people, Scooters are a non-solution.


Bicycles though are the ultimate weapon against Climate Change and
safer roads...

1- They are cheap, so they are DEMOCRATIC.

2- They are healthy, so we keep the Medical Industry on a diet.

3- They are here now, not sometime in the future.

Since the food used to power bikes is air shipped from all over the world,
it is an energy hog.