A girl I work with lives in Blanchardstown, she drives daily to Summerhill in her car. Why t f?
What’s wrong with a modest hatch back?
She’s unmarried and no kids. What the f does she need it for?
The cars/SUV's/Vans/Trucks are all on the roads as they meet the legal requirements; The "excess" road space another ridiculous argument. Should we all drive the smallest car on the market and all others be removed?
Most people who drive massive 4x4's have bought them on credit or finance not straight up cash.
As opposed to those who drive saloons/hatchbacks etc. have not bought on credit/finance?
It's a nonsensical point you've made.
The stats on the average length of a car journey, and the average occupancy is there in the CSO website, which I have already quoted in this thread and where I get my FACTS from, I don't see any stats coming from you just your own personal blather.. sorry opinion.
Cars are cars, even when the cars are 500kg heavier than an average car, or when the front of the car stops you from seeing small children in front of you thus creating danger… I can assure you no one is jealous of a Panzer tank driving down Belmont Ave.
https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/dublin/2022/08/17/restrictions-to-stop-suv-drivers-mounting-south-dublin-footpath-to-be-introduced/
Panzer tank driving down Belmont Ave.
Now SUV's are "Panzer Tanks". If the menacing image of a military vehicle from nearly a century ago is the level of hyperbole required, you're argument isn't great.
Sorry, not my fault boards dropped me into this thread 4 months back 😀
But in the summer months I regularly drive either in bare feet, or socks if it's a long trip and the feet will stink up 🙂
The only practical reason I've ever seen for driving in shoes was to be able to apply more force to the brake. But that reason doesn't apply to any car with servo-assisted brakes.
Much safer to drive bare/sock foot than in flip flops/sliders/sandals.
So, Range Rover drivers can't spot approaching children now? Surely, that's not a subtle dig at them, right? Modern SUV's are fitted with safety cameras and automatic braking systems, making them technically safer on the road than a humble Dacia Sandero. Don't worry Aurora and her mum will be safe crossing the road from the organic shop. I haven't seen too many SUV's ramming into children around Ranelagh recently.
A couple of points………
Keep throwing your toys out of the pram though, it lets everyone else know that you're full of it.
They can't even get the terminology right. The correct term is "W@nkpanzer".
You people need to start driving 4x4's less and reading more (news articles).. what was the other phrase that caused you lot to get all giddy? Ah yes, SUV arms war.. Now have never heard of SUV's referred to as Panzers?
Here's a nice picture to illustrate where the idea came from:
I stopped reading after your argument winning statement that "people have approximately 0.9 testicles" is this the level this thread is at now…
Needs to be locked.
You don't know what is going on in peoples lives. She might have a boyfriend in prison being raped and terrorised by his cellmates. She might need a big car to visit her boyfriend at the week ends.
So we're using the sensationalism of the dailymail to justify your poor analogy….
You'll note that out of the three metrics used for comparison on the length is the only one where it is slightly bigger. Also you fail to realise that comparing two vehicles in a simplistic way doesn't demonstrate you point; the uses and consumers are completely different. You'll note the long bed in the longest 4x4's; it's there for carrying materials etc. and/or trailers. Also the rear seats for passengers.
Why doesn't the article, or you, quote the weight of the vehicles as a comparison…..is it because the weight is many tonnes more and would fit your faux outrage?
You'll also do well to note the models used aren't on Irish roads, safe for a few imports of the longest ones.
You people need to start driving 4x4's less and reading more (news articles)
Just can't stick to discussion without jibes and insinuation can you?
As for "reading" more…I wouldn't count the Daily Mail as demonstrating someone as 'well read'.
Edit: Just FYI - you/The dailymail have only used one 'panzer' tank in your comparison. There were substantially bigger ones that could've been used in your/their comparison. I read about them somewhere.
That. Was. The Whole. Point. Of. That. Statement.
It's supposed to be a stupid statement. It's illustrative of just how fcuking stupid your argument about driving distances is.
But let's call a spade a spade here….that's not why you stopped reading. You stopped reading because you have no comeback to my post. We're back now to refusing to address points made to you because they're stupid and not, y'know, because you can't actually counter them, due to the fact that your entire argument is built on a hill of sand. You're making ridiculous logical leaps, accusing others of things that aren't true, making sh1t up in your own head to justify your contempt for your fellow countrymen and now you're calling for the thread to be locked.
That's because you're losing the argument, nothing more. You can pretend it's because the level of discourse has dropped, but we can all see through that charade. Check and mate.
The truth is you've no idea how large a car anyone needs and instead of admitting that, you're trying to dig your way out of a hole that you created for yourself. You're {this} close to claiming the entire thing is beneath you and running away from the thread because, again, you don't know WTF you're talking about and pretending that you do.
Desperate stuff altogether.
'Panzer Tank' translates to 'Tank Tank'. So good, they named it twice.
Everyone seems selfish driving big fat mostly empty cars when they could use public transport or car share or use bikes or just walk ( I see people driving just 400 meter even though easily walkable distance, and they are very well able to, but won't cuz of their selfish behaviour).... So do you also walk when you can? Or are you selfish like everyone else seems to be?
I explained where I got the Panzer/SUV comparison from and you show your snobbery about "Oh the Dailymail" as if the level of discussion being displayed is any higher than Primary school kid level by the "Pro-SUV" cohort here..
you show your snobbery
Oh really, snobbery. Who was it that said:
I explained where I got the Panzer/SUV comparison from
And I explained why it's ridiculous. Your "explanation" did nothing to rebut how silly a comparison it is.
Everyone? In all cases?
Details about the type of vehicle involved in crashes like this can take a while to come out.
I'm not reading all that blather, there no sense to be had from it..
Will just say that if someone can't see that a large heavy vehicle is overkill for the majority of people, that they are bad for the environment, a danger to every other road user, too big/heavy for the streets of any Irish city/town/village then I can't help you.
Let's hope the Government and local councils take after Paris and ban them or heavily taxes them out of existence…
And for your other friend there, here's an article from "The Times" to satisfy the snobbery:
https://www.thetimes.com/world/europe/article/paris-targets-ban-on-range-rovers-and-other-luxury-suvs-wjgr9xt0b
Don't bother quoting me, i prob won't read it.
It's easier to stick your fingers in your ears and tell yourself you're right.
too big/heavy for the streets of any Irish city/town/village
This is simply made up nonsense by someone who clearly has an agenda they don't wish to have questioned.
How do you know that without reading it? My guess is you did read it and can't counter any of it, so you're pretending not to care, while deep down you're actually seething.
Will just say that if someone can't see that a large heavy vehicle is overkill for the majority of people
That's not what you originally said, though. You said "Here we go, an example of one of those unnecessarily large vehicles been driven by someone who doesn’t give too forks about anyone else… typical!" and posted a pic of a big car. You never mentioned anything about the majority of people, you singled out one specific car and said it was too big. You were casting aspersions on someone based on their vehicle. Reverse snobbery, manifest. I asked why, and the rest is history. You're trying to change the goalposts, now, because you've lost the argument. You're pretending that you're talking about the majority of people, when you weren't.
Sure you will. You just won't be able to argue against it, so you'll pretend not to. Shameless behaviour. Just admit you were wrong about that car originally and we can all move on.
What's the point of this post, other than to try and tug on heartstrings? What are you actually saying here, because it looks like nothing more than an appeal to emotion?…………………."oh, look, this poor boy was killed by an SUV therefore they're evil and anyone who says anything else is okay with toddlers being mown down, cos, I mean, nobody is okay with dead babies, right…RIGHT!!!!?!!"
Intellectual dishonesty seems to be the order of the day.
Are you claiming he'd still be alive if this wasn't an SUV? How did you come to that conclusion, if so and, if not, what are you actually saying?
Also, what other details are you expecting to come out, given it was three years ago now? And what has it got to do with the post you quoted?
The point of the post is to answer the suggestion that children are not getting killed by SUVs with an example of how a child was fairly recently killed by an SUV.
The point about the time taken for information to come out refers to more recent cases, where the type of vehicle involved is not in the public domain as yet.
His point is that the height of these vehicles make harder to see smaller at risk pedestrians (Kids) the closer they are to the vehicle.
If it had been a micra they might have actually seen the child as a giant tank like SUV doesn't tower a few extra feet over small at risk pedestrians.
This is partucularly accurate at parking outside Supermarkets where people will be walking in close proximity to the vehicle.
Your patience is incredible. Are you the type who engages with the boring old drunk in the corner of the bar who everyone avoids? There, as here, it’s a waste of time. The brains are addled and they can’t hear you even if they wanted to.
If it had been a micra
Are Nissan Micra's much use as a farm vehicle? Do they market them as a farm vehicle?
If not, then that doesn't make any sense.
as a giant tank like SUV
More of the desperate hyperbole. There are a number of articles telling us the make and model; it categorically wasn't a "giant tank". but hey, why let facts get in the way of some obfuscation.
What if it was a "Panzer tank" ?…..
SUVs are not the only vehicles that can cause death or harm to small children.
My own nephew and godson was crushed to death by a bin lorry at the age of 4. He wasn't the first and he won't be the last.
Does that mean bin lorries should be banned too? Work vehicles? Vans? Lorries? All higher than children. So by that logic they should all go too, right?
Disgusting to bring an emotive article like this into the thread to score points.
No however the heavier and bigger the vehicle the bigger the risk. We should mitigate/remove risk where possible no?
If someone owned a work vehicle(assuming you mean trade van) without actually needing one you would ask why they have one considering there is no back window to see out of, no?
No one is saying ban them, however if you don't have an actual valid reason for owning one then use something practical like a toyota auris/mini etc.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbd35c43580ff62b54e9919958f2a898.svg)