No more SUVs or minivans? (pickup truck, purchase, biggest, gasoline)

[Magnulus]

Raising the tax on gasoline IMO would be far better in the long term than trying to restrict what cars a person could or couldn't buy.

In general the US is far too car dependent and if we go from driving an SUV to driving twice as many small cars, there isn't any point as the fuel savings aren't there. The "car culture" is to blame for oil dependence. If you are a car buff that's hard to hear but it is true.

[8 SNAKE]

Originally Posted by KevK

Well first of all I am not going anywhere and neither are the millions and millions (and growing) who see things my way. It might be YOU that has to think about moving in a few years but then again what other 1st world country is more to a conservative's taste than this one? They ALL have "socialized" medicine and they ALL have much stricter gun laws than we have (and I am not advocating taking anyone's guns- just that we don't need to allow the sale of AK-47s and guns like that) and they ALL have either higher MPG requirements or higher gas taxes. In fact in "socialist" Austrailia, you cannot even buy incandescent light bulbs anymore! And I don't have a Prius. We have a mini van, a Mustang GT and a Corolla.

The millions and millions who see it your way? Nice to see that you're leading the charge toward a new SSA (Socialist States of America). Let me know how that little utopia works out for you.

I might offer a small suggestion though. Try not to talk out of both sides of your mouth when making campaign promises. I find it hard to take you seriously when you proclaim that you don't want to take anyone's guns away, then call for the ban of AK-47 sales. I'd also love to hear why an AK-47 (or any other "assault rifle") is more dangerous than any other firearm.

Finally, I'd recommend that you quit drawing comparisons between the USA (while we're still the USA, not SSA) and England (or Australia). The citizens of the USA (yes I said citizens, because in England they're subjects) don't want to model our nation after other, less prosperous countries that we seceded from centuries ago.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by KevK

Where do you see anything in the US Constitution that has to do with the size or MPG of a vehicle you drive??

Where in the constitution do you see anything about socialized medicine

[jdavid93225]

Originally Posted by KevK

Some segment of the US population thinks they have rights they don't have and never had. This is especially acute among conservatives but also shows up among liberals too. Some of the more popular myths are:
1. The RIGHT to drive a monster SUV
2. The RIGHT to a job
3. The RIGHT to own and carry an AK47
4. The RIGHT to "privacy" (does exist in your own home only)
5. The RIGHT to be parents
6. The RIGHT to water a much lawn
7. The RIGHT to say what you want, where you want and when you want

Some of these are not myths, but are rights granted to us by the Constitution, including the "Bill of Rights." On some of these matters, you are correct in indicating that they are not "rights," while in others you are mistaken in that they are.

Originally Posted by KevK

1. The RIGHT to drive a monster SUV

The Federal Government does not have the "right" to tell us we can't drive monster SUVs. Here's what the 10th Amendment says about the matter: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." I believe if the government stays out of this matter for the most part, the reality of cost effectiveness will make many people move away from these vehicles. Not everyone can do so, so there will be a market for them until something better comes along. With childseat and seatbelt laws being what they are, some families still need that much room. There are vans that can be used, but these don't work as well in the snow and ice as SUVs do. To think that you can force these families into several smaller vehicles rather than one larger one shows your willingness to give up your freedom and that of your neighbor which totally flies in the face of what this country was built upon. Not all these families have multiple licensed drivers, nor should they be required to, if they can make things work with one vehicle. They also should not be forced to insure and register multiple vehicles when just one vehicle will meet their needs.

Originally Posted by KevK

2. The RIGHT to a job

While this is true, Americans are also not given the "right" to health care. It is the Government's responsibility to provide for the "general" welfare of its citizens, meaning that the government should not prevent the health care system from doing what it is there to do. The government also should not interfere with the right of a company or an individual to hire the person they feel will best fill a position they are looking to fill. For instance, in the case of a private business, if the person doing the hiring wants to hire someone of a particular faith, the government should have nothing to say about it.

Originally Posted by KevK

3. The RIGHT to own and carry an AK47

This right is given to Americans by the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. What we are not given is a right to use this firearm to commit a crime such as recently happened in Omaha.

Originally Posted by KevK

4. The RIGHT to "privacy" (does exist in your own home only)

This right was given to us by the 4th Amendment. We have the right to be secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects. This Amendment does not give Americans a right to commit crimes in their own homes. This Amendment also does not give a right to privacy in things that are sent out or broadcast from our homes, such as email, forum postings, letters, telephone conversations, and so on.

Originally Posted by KevK

7. The RIGHT to say what you want, where you want and when you want

This right is given to us by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. While I agree that discretion should be used, that wasn't a condition in the Amendment. What Americans weren't given was a right to be free from being offended.

[jdavid93225]

Originally Posted by Nashcash23

If manufactuers were told that they had to stop making suvs, crossovers and all minivans by the government, what do you think that large families would drive? Also, could the government seize everyones suvs if the environment got so bad that it was absolutely necessary?

I would assume that large families would have to start buying wagons again like we did back in the good days. It would actually be kind of fun in my opinion. I would go and get a 2008 Volvo XC70 if my Armada was taken away.

I realize this thread has gotten off topic, and I have not really helped that matter in my response to some of the things that were posted, so I felt that I should attempt to steer it back on track. To do so, I thought I would reply to the original post.

I don't believe the government would ever tell the auto manufacturers to stop building these vehicles, nor would the government confiscate them, but I could see ever increasing taxes and fees on the purchase and use of these vehicles. As others have said, it's not just these vehicles that are damaging our environment, but nearly everything we use in this country these days.

As to what large families would drive, I guess it would have to be the large passenger vans if nothing else were available. These are popular vehicles for vanpools, so I doubt they will go away any time soon. There really aren't very many large station wagons available, so I don't think very many people would move in this direction, unless the manufacturers started building them again.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by jdavid93225

I don't believe the government would ever tell the auto manufacturers to stop building these vehicles, nor would the government confiscate them, but I could see ever increasing taxes and fees on the purchase and use of these vehicles. As others have said, it's not just these vehicles that are damaging our environment, but nearly everything we use in this country these days.

I may be wrong but, isn't there a "gas guzzler" tax on the Hummers? If so, has it hurt their sales?

[KevK]

Originally Posted by notjustamom

Well, a few hours after I posted on this thread, my teens had a craving for pizza and ordered from Dominoes. We'd had a typical bit of winter weather common here, and it was getting dark and freezing into ice. The delivery man was driving a Honda Accord, and got stuck in our sloping driveway. My dh had to push him out with his truck. The delivery man couldn't even make it up our road, and so my dh had to push him all the way up to the next road. There the man struggled to make it down the next street. It's very hilly in my town, anyone who tells me we don't need an SUV can come each day to haul us lemmings out.

What you need is a salt/sand truck to properly treat the roads.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by 8 SNAKE

The millions and millions who see it your way? Nice to see that you're leading the charge toward a new SSA (Socialist States of America). Let me know how that little utopia works out for you.

I might offer a small suggestion though. Try not to talk out of both sides of your mouth when making campaign promises. I find it hard to take you seriously when you proclaim that you don't want to take anyone's guns away, then call for the ban of AK-47 sales. I'd also love to hear why an AK-47 (or any other "assault rifle") is more dangerous than any other firearm.

Finally, I'd recommend that you quit drawing comparisons between the USA (while we're still the USA, not SSA) and England (or Australia). The citizens of the USA (yes I said citizens, because in England they're subjects) don't want to model our nation after other, less prosperous countries that we seceded from centuries ago.

I don't want to get off topic too much but I will say this- we have freedoms in the USA but sometimes our freedoms have to be tempered by reason for the good of the whole. Your 1st Amendment rights do not give you the right to shout "fire" in a theatre nor to noisely picket a private residence at 2AM. The 2nd Amendment does give us the right to own and bear arms. It does not give us the right to own and bear assualt weapons and fully automatic firearms and those weapons, which are not good for any legitimiate sporting or self defense use, can be banned- and should be. Your right to bear arms gives you the right to carry a gun (in my view) but the government can and should temper that right by requring you to be licensed and to take a course so that you know how to shoot the thing should the need arise.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by jdavid93225

I realize this thread has gotten off topic, and I have not really helped that matter in my response to some of the things that were posted, so I felt that I should attempt to steer it back on track. To do so, I thought I would reply to the original post.

I don't believe the government would ever tell the auto manufacturers to stop building these vehicles, nor would the government confiscate them, but I could see ever increasing taxes and fees on the purchase and use of these vehicles. As others have said, it's not just these vehicles that are damaging our environment, but nearly everything we use in this country these days.

As to what large families would drive, I guess it would have to be the large passenger vans if nothing else were available. These are popular vehicles for vanpools, so I doubt they will go away any time soon. There really aren't very many large station wagons available, so I don't think very many people would move in this direction, unless the manufacturers started building them again.

A high tax on such vehicles would be a great idea too. In fact a real high tax BUT if you can prove you have a "large family" or a legitimate business need for such a vehicle, I would exempt such people from the tax.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by KevK

A high tax on such vehicles would be a great idea too. In fact a real high tax BUT if you can prove you have a "large family" or a legitimate business need for such a vehicle, I would exempt such people from the tax.

Great - now you are proposing a whole new level of bureaucracy to deal with "large families" and "legitimate business" reasons

And, are you aware that the PT Cruiser is listed as an SUV?