|
Fox hunting? Poor foxy woxy's...
|
|
sod the fox, wot about all them dogs going without exercise?
|
|
|
|
There's 2 questions that I would raise: (1) Would it be possible to form a legal definition of an S.U.V.? One that would include all the 'offending' vehicles but exclude similar but 'innocent' vehicles? Are there any quantifiable performance measures that are unique to S.U.V.s?
With this government's track record in defining laws, I very much doubt it. Expect to see everything from the Subaru Justy and Suzuki X90 to the Dodge Ram included in this piece of nonsense when it goes ahead (note I don't say if, because that's the favourite ploy of this bunch of morons; announce something unworkable then dish up a watered down but no less viscious and vindictive piece of legislation before announcing an "ammendment" 2 years down the line to bring the original piece of nastiness into play. Can anyone tell me why we put up with it?
I'm sick of it. I don't know anyone who voted for these thieves and liars and I sure as hell can't think of any reason why our government has any moral authority when it finds itself in power due to the whims of the Scots, a fine bunch of people but a bunch of people with their own parliament and therefore no stake in the English parliamentary process.
Now I'm way off topic and I've ruined my week. Look what you all made me do!
I'm going to have moderate myself....
No Do$h - Alfa-driving Backroom Moderator
mailto:moderators@honestjohn.co.uk
|
Right, I've had a coffee and feel a lot better now.
Back on topic and directly related to the above post. No SUV ban will work as half of rural Wales and Scotland, Labour heartlands, will grind to a halt for 3 months of the year if such a ban took place.
To make exemptions by postcode is unworkable as it is easy to work around.
Nothing to worry about then.
|
"To make exemptions by postcode is unworkable as it is easy to work around."
Unfortunately not. It is very workable. And Ken has the tools and authority to do it now. Congestion zone. All set up. All he has to do is move certain makes and models of cars into a higher charging band (say £50 day)
As the ken model is spreading to a town near you expect.........
|
|
Hmmm, further disenfranchising of the countryside community. Yup, that would fit in with the grand scheme of things.
|
I'm intersted in what opponents of SUVs actually want - i.e. what sort of legislation they propose. So, I went to the Alliance Against Urban 4x4s website (see above).
I learned that the Alliance has no objection to rural SUVs, (though they do want owners of them to pay more tax) and only wants them banned from urban areas. 'Urban' is, interestingly enough, not defined.
I was interested in what kind of 4x4s they actually oppose. They specifically deny opposing the Fiat Panda, and say "The 'big 4x4s' we talk about are four-wheel-drive off-road vehicles with large engines, high ground-clearance and a tall, boxy shape."
They continue "When measures are introduced to discourage big 4x4s, a comprehensive list of relevant vehicles will have to be drawn up. In the meantime, here are a few examples of the kind of 4x4 models we want new regulations to address." And they include not just Range Rovers and Land Cruisers, but the Audi Allroad Quattro, Honda CR-V, Nissan X-Trail, and Subaru Forester.
I'd be interested to know what legislative action NoWheels and other Backroomers who don't like SUVs would propose.
|
So if they include the Forester, do they include the Espace or the Chrysler Voyager?
& if not, why not.
What if there were a 2WD version of the Forester.
This is fascinating stuff. Really, it is.
|
|
|
They continue "When measures are introduced to discourage big 4x4s, a comprehensive list of relevant vehicles will have to be drawn up. In the meantime, here are a few examples of the kind of 4x4 models we want new regulations to address." And they include not just Range Rovers and Land Cruisers, but the Audi Allroad Quattro, Honda CR-V, Nissan X-Trail, and Subaru Forester.
Bwaaaa-haa-hahahahaha! ::snort:: Ah, (hee-hee-hee) they really are a bunch of muppets. So they want to ban estate cars that, coincidentally, have 4wd. This really is most chortlesome.
I look forward to their consultation paper on overly aggressive tyres on mountain bikes and the desirability of civil servants walking sedately in front of pushchairs whilst bearing a red flag.
::muffled laughter:: Forester an SUV..... Priceless, truly priceless. I bet that piece of stunning logic stems from that Top Gear review where Richard Hamster gunned one around a field for 30 seconds. I hope they never watch Braniac - Science Abuse or they'll be proposing bans on swivel chairs and fire extinguishers next.
That has cheered me up no end. Thanks for that.
:oD
|
I am discovering one of the very real joys and pleasures of retirement. Having ticked all the boxes on life's list regarding career, family, bringging up kids, one is now free to annoy any and all, indulge oneself in whatever activities one chooses as opposed to what the corporation used to decide and enjoy prodding the nannies into their oh-so-predictable responses on the grounds one has paid one's dues and now it is one's turn.
Whatver my life expectancy now, and that is for the good Lord to decide, I do not give a toss. I shall drive/ride whatever I want until the day they cart me out in a box. Let the tree-huggers writhe in paroxysms of guilt as they don their open-toed sandals, I intend to live the life my Dad and his comrades thought they were fighting for and thought they had won before the pinko wimpies took control and decided they knew better how to run a life than one of HM's soldier's who had faced and defeated death on the Normandy beaches. At least he had something worthwhile to put on his CV, as opposed to 3 years' experience as a gender-confusion counselor among ethnic minorities.
So: (yes here comes motoring and yes moddies you can flatten me and I shall defer as required) yesterday my friend in the US Embassy in Manila calls me. The State Dept is selling off some items on a sealed bid as-is-where-is basis.
Among them is a 1996 Chevy Surburban 9 seater. It's got the modest 6.2 ltr V-8 but has armour plating, 9 seats, (sniff-- no run-flat tyres? ;+) )is all in black with black tint. Lots of holes where various apparatus has been removed, but only 28,000km. Black leather too.
He says $6k will get it. It's a diplomatic vehicle so taxes and duties have to be paid (nudge wink these can be negotiated).
You'd never get stopped by the law in this one; they wouldn't dare.
No I don't have the money but I would if I could. What an opportunity to waste all those global resources and help the cows and cyclists do their bit for global whining. Hell I could probably rent it to the local movie studios as well.
Ban SUV's? More sense banning junk food. By all accounts that appears to prejudice a nation's health more than a few large motor vehicles. And that I would support.
Growler out
+
Don't like it?
|
as i have said before, life is for living.
the anti 4x4 lobby, or the anti-any-car global warming lobby, or whatever, their only purpose is to control other people's lives. they love to be dictators.
for a second, if we assume that it is proven that global warming is here and it is due to carbon emissions, then trying to stop people in the uk or the usa using cars or 4x4s is similar to telling an 80 a day smoker diagnosed with terminal lung cancer that the cure for his disease is to stop passing by anyone who is smoking (as that will reduce his intake of cigareete smoke).
that is the analogy of the measure of effect that curtailing to zero, zilch, the emissions of carbon dioxide in the usa and the uk would have on the global climate.
by the way, i don't drive a 4x4, never have, can afford it but have never felt the need to have one. but that does not mean that i never will. and i don't ever want to tell someone where to draw the line on which size engine or what form of transport they should use for the greater good of mankind.
life is to live. enjoy.
|
|
|
Growler, absolutely brilliant post.
Couldn't you buy it as a consortium? You could make a fortune in this country. Fill it with jobsworths, "councillors", tree huggers and other fun hateing ban this, ban that, regulate this sado's. Allyou have to do then is get a ferry over the channel, get half way and dump the lot to check on fish stocks. You will have to be prepared to make "several" journeys, though.
Why do people want to control other's legal activities?
|
>>gender-confusion counselor among ethnic minorities.
I've always fancied being a pregnancy facilitator in Lambeth... (actually, K&C might be a better option, but I don't think the job was advertised for K&C).
|
>>gender-confusion counselor among ethnic minorities. I've always fancied being a pregnancy facilitator in Lambeth... (actually, K&C might be a better option, but I don't think the job was advertised for K&C).
Nepotism reigns supreme in K&C. It's who you know, not what you know....
|
It's the demise of religeon which has led to forward march of the green movement. Those who cannot believe it is possible to live an enjoyable life without suffering eternal damnation realised that society increasingly ignored them, so they had to find another way of making us wear hair shirts. The environmental nutters presented them with an unmissable opportunity, unemployables armed with half-baked facts and bogus figures that can never be disproved because they will only happen in the future, just like heaven and hell.
All the bossy little killjoys who once made us feel guilty because of our carnal desires can now do the same thing using "the future of our planet" as a substitute for eternity in hell. Like the vast majority of the population I don't pretend to understand the facts for or against the idea of global warming, so I don't try. I come down on the "it's all a load of rubbish" side, because when I look a the specimens proporting the idea - Livingstone, Scargill and all the other well known nuts - and compare them with the much more worldly and rounded individuals who poo poo the theory - PJ O'Rourke, David Bellamy etc, I know who I would rather trust.
If I could afford an SUV, I would buy the biggest and thirstiest I could find.
|
>If I could afford an SUV, I would buy the biggest and thirstiest I could find.
Your pupils would hate you.... :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
