A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
Honestly this is absurd. These death machines shouldn't be legal in europe. That thing doesn't even fit in the parking space, even though the parking lot has the biggest spaces in the whole city. The ~~Golf~~ Polo is so small in comparison, it could even hide in front of the engine hood of the truck.
EDIT: It's a Polo and not a Golf, I don't know my cars, sorry for that!
We all understand there are actual uses for a large truck. The issue is A) these trucks keep increasing in size well beyond what is practically needed, and B) more and more people who don't have a practical use for these vehicles are commuting to work in them. The average person driving a large truck today does not live on a farm. They live in the suburbs and use it to commute to their office job and occasionally to grab a can of paint from home Depot.
These tanks aren't safe around pedestrians or smaller cars, they take up way too much space and either don't fit in most parking spots or necessitate the building bigger and bigger parking lots, they're fuel inefficient, their headlights are obnoxiously high and blind everyone else at night, etc.
They're obnoxious, dangerous, harmful to the environment, and simply unnecessary for the vast majority of people, so fuck 'em.
You can't possibly know each person's reasoning on why they may need or not need a particular thing. Saying someone cannot get it at all will end up hurting the little guy. The person why can't go through all the hoops to get some random exception for their specific use case.
You talk about it being dangerous, doesn't every driver go through roughly the same certification process for that state? If you're problem is the quality of their driving, you should be pushing for higher standards for getting a license
You say they are wasteful on gas. Wouldn't that mean the owner would need to pay extra money out of pocket to maintain it's use? They are bearing the cost extra cost of ownership, so why not let them use it? For example, you are probably paying for internet. Should I be allowed to stop you from using the internet you paid for because I don't agree with your reasoning? No, and that's completely ridiculous.
I absolutely can. Look at trucks from 50 years ago and compare them to the monstrosities of today
The trucks being sold today are ridiculously oversized and I can say pretty confidently that no one actually needs a vehicle that size for 99.999% of use cases. Car manufacturers are the only ones that benefit from this arms race to sell bigger and tankier vehicles to people for commuting.
They're dangerous because of their size, not because of who drives them. A collision between a giant truck and a small passenger car has a high likelihood of severely injuring or killing the occupants of the small passenger car, A) because of the weight of the larger truck, and B) because the collision safety features of a small car are only engineered to protect well in a collision with another similarly sized vehicle.
Also, the sight-lines for these behemoths is pathetic. The Abrams M1 Battle tank has better forward visibility than a modern F250.
We're all paying for the environmental impacts of hydrocarbon usage. Low-efficiency vehicles should not be used for commuting.
Looked at the image you provided. I can see your point about some of the sightlines. For regular commuting in most circumstances, I'll give you it. But that's the thing, you seem to be assuming a very specific circumstance and applying it to everything. You are trying to take a role of a general passenger vehicle for daily commute and applying it to a vehicle meant for work.
So yes, for regular commuting I'd say you are 100% right. But there are uses outside of such a limited scope.
So everyone agrees then?
The only difference between you two is that you have different beliefs about the owners of these vehicles.
I also believe that these are mostly not used for work, but rather as ego-boosting commuter vehicles.
I was pushing back against the idea that the vehicles shouldn't exist and nobody should have them. I definitely seen some people who probably don't need it.
From my personal anecdotal experience, I know someone who lives out of a trailer and they are mobile all the time. It doesn't make sense to have a truck + sedan because they move around all the time. So instead they have one of those big trucks to lug a home trailer that they can drop off and then go do anything else they need in the area. Very specific niche case, probably would be ridiculed here if seen driving on the streets.