4x4 Vehicles - Should they be banned from Town/City Centres

nej

I must say I am actually against bull bars, but here's a controversial idea for you:

As 110frankie says above, the pedestrial causes their own death. This is completely true. Harsh, but true. There are pavements for pedestrians (usually) and roads for cars. I don't drive on pavements, so they should be very careful when stepping in front of 1.5tons of moving metal.

But, here's the controversial bit, why should I have to suffer damage to my vehicle for their stupidity? If a car pulls in front of me and I collide with them I can claim from their insurance, so fair enough. If a pedestrial walks in front of me and causes lots of damage to my vehicle, I can't claim from them (assuming they live). If I had bull bars, the damage to my vehicle would be minimised. The pedestrian should not have been there so any extra damage he suffers to himself should not be my problem.

110frankie

But Brown didn't put tax up to 600 - so what are you gonna do? Still not take the time to teach your children not to walk in front of cars 'cos the politicians are wrong? Grow up.
Of course, bull bar or not you obviously believe that a bus, lorry or van will not kill your child. Grow up again.

As far as pedestrians not getting anything from your insurance if they walk out in front of you - they don't. That's one reason why the police have very precise figures as to who causes the accident. For one it's so that they can decide who should be prosecuted and for two so the unsurance company can decide who to pay out - or not.

I repeat, in 85 per cent of documented cases, fully investigated by the police, the pedestrian was the cause of the accident and, as a result, the motorist, no matter what they were driving, bull bar or not, was not prosecuted and the insurance company did not pay out to the pedestrian.

Now, if pedestrians were insured...

and if jaywalking was against the law the true cause of the accident would be prosecuted.

You can waffle as much as you like, bullbars may be outlawed, but 4x4s will continue to increase and, so long as society tries to find culprits without accepting the truth, pedestrians will continue to be injured and die.

That's the real sadness of a thread like this...

rdwarr

110frankie wrote:

...
That's the real sadness of a thread like this...

No, the real sadness is that people are starting to put the risk of a few dents in their car ahead of the risk it poses to pedestrians.
If somebody walked out in front of my car and I hit them I wouldn't be worrying about whether they's dented the bonnet. I'd be hoping that they were OK and wondering if there was anything I could have done to avoid them.
The idea of fitting bull bars to cars to reduce the damage caused by stray pedestrians is one of the most callous I've come across yet. However it does typify the attitude of a few recent posters who clearly value property above life.

david29dpo

i while ago, a pedestrian walked in front of my car, totally his fault. he was a bit battered and bruised but ok. his mother then appeared and went mad at me! i told her to shut up or i would send her the bill for my damaged car, before she arrived i was not bothered. she screamed there was no way she would pay for anything. in the end she did!!

steve!_10

They gerron my nerves. I don't give way to SUVs, along with BMWs and Micras. Sorry, no offence to anyone. I find SUVs vulgar, I have a certain respect for some 4x4s though, ones that can seriously go off-road. If you seriously needed a 4x4 then you wouldn't have an X5, you'd get a Defender or something (those things are great fun to drive in the right setting). I feel slightly hypocritical using the environment arguement because my car is band F (boo! hiss!), but I can get 40+ mpg out of it with considerate driving, and it's a petrol engine with 180bhp. But then it doesn't weigh over 2 tonnes and make me look like a pretentious git.

110frankie

I don't give way to SUVs, along with BMWs and Micras. Sorry, no offence to anyone. I find SUVs vulgar<<<

I find motorists who "don't give way" vulgar and a danger on the road...

You obviously own the road and decide to not give way based on the make of a car?

You should not be on the road.

tomstickland

One thing I've noticed is that whatever form of transport I use then I notice how dumb some people are.
In the car - pedestrians walk out without looking
Walking - car drivers speed through busy pedestrian areas
Cycling - half asleep drivers who aren't paying attention do stupid things
It goes on. I do wonder if some people find very simple things a bit too taxing.

highguyuk

I must admit to having scan read most of the posts ...

A couple of points I agree with though, such as a test for typical 4x4 vehicles such as Landrovers etc and People Carriers. They are much bigger to drive, and greater consideration has to be given to driving one. Unfortunetly, a Kia Picanto hire car turned up at work one day to which I was given the keys and I was expected to just jump it in and be able to drive it with no problem, even though it is nothing like my Pug 306.

Also, I think steve! may have meant giving way as in letting people out - in which case I see no arguement. You don't have to let people out! However, what have Micra drivers done to you?! lol.

steve!_10

110frankie wrote:

I don't give way to SUVs, along with BMWs and Micras. Sorry, no offence to anyone. I find SUVs vulgar<<<

I find motorists who "don't give way" vulgar and a danger on the road...

You obviously own the road and decide to not give way based on the make of a car?

You should not be on the road.

I mean specifically when I have right of way to begin with, like when another car wants to join the road I'm on. I often give way just out of courtesy. But yes, the type/make of car determines your chances with me, and some are big no-nos because I get irritable while I drive (don't we all), and those drivers typically irritate me more than usual.

steve!_10

highguyuk wrote:

However, what have Micra drivers done to you?! lol.

One ran over my cat.