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

zincoxide

Woah!! Off topic again - my original post was based on the fact that 4x4 cars (such as Range Rover & Porsche Cayenne etc) should be banned, primarily because if a child is hit, ithits them at head height and there is a greater possibility of severe injury.

I'm not too bothered about the size & MPG of the vehicle, more the actual structure of them.

There would of course be exceptions etc but as a general idea I just wanted to get the feeling of other MSE users.

zincoxide

Yes you should - but simply because of the vehicle and risk it poses to pedestrians.

Sure, if I knock someone down in my Mondeo it would cause damage, but if you hit them at the same speed in a 4x4 you will cause more damage.

Unless of course it has a 5 star euro ncap rating for pedestrians?

For large off-roaders see here:
http://www.euroncap.com/content/safety_ratings/ratings.php?id1=9

For small family cars see here:
http://www.euroncap.com/content/safety_ratings/ratings.php?id1=2

You can browse all sorts here but I think you'll find on average - the large off roaders are more dangerous to pedestrians.

iwanttosave_2

I remember watching top gear and in most hatches you are actually safer being hit by them than while in them, I notice they never said the same about the defenders or CR-Vs

VincentVega

I dislike 4x4s (or, to be more accurate, SUVs, which is what most people are talking about here). A four-wheel drive VW Golf is surely no problem to anyone, unlike, say a Humvee. However, due to the fact that some people may actually have a legitimate need to drive into town in one, such as a farmer, I disagree with banning them.

Driving a SUV is not the same as driving a normal car. SUVs have a higher centre of gravity. They are large and impair visibility for people in small cars (like my MINI). People who choose to drive a SUV should be forced to take a tougher driving test so they can prove they can handle their behemoth effectively and safely. Tailgating someone when you're in a SUV with all its bulk and huge mass, for example, is not wise. You can't stop something that big as quickly as something smaller, like a Corsa or a 206. I have no objection to someone driving a SUV so long as they are educated in how to use it safely. However, whilst I may not seek to deny your right to drive what you want, I will exercise my right to think you're a snob, overly-obsessed with image and terribly, terribly vain. Most people do not need a SUV. Someone who owns a boat does; a mum who wants to take Tara and Jake to school in Kensington (five minutes from home) does not.

Anyway, the ever-increasing price of petrol/diesel will soon make gas guzzlers and SUVs uneconomic and have the same effect as banning them. We'll just need to wait a few years.

Murphy_The_Cat

No I don't think that they should be banned from city centres.


All of my vans are bigger than ANY 4x4 in the UK and no-one (yet, but some half wit will before long) has suggested that vans should be taken off our town/city centre roads.

If you're going to ban something off our roads to make life safer for pedestrians, may I suggest the moronic cyclists that enjoy riding against traffic flow, on pavements, who never signal, who never check the road before manouvering, who disobey traffic lights, ignore road laws, are unlit etec, etc etc I could go on but whats the point

and of course its never there fault when one of these uninsured menaces is involved in an acident is it.

MTC

apologies in advance to the cyclists who do not fall into the above category - but like anti 4X4 campaigners, everyone SEEMS to get tarred with the same brush.

Murphy_The_Cat

nelly wrote:

hat wearers

people with facial hair combined with any headwear - accident waiting to happen.

Instant ban.

All BMW drivers, the WORST drivers on the road (IMHO) and if they've got headware and facial hair...............................

MTC

skyrocket

I wish that people driving these 'status symbols' would learn to drive them and also stop bashing my car doors whenever they park them! I agree that they are rarely driven by people who might venture off-road and are usually pristine! My dad drives one and he has been told! I heard that the road tax is going up to £900 a year on these I hope it's true because it will price them off off the road.

exel1966

Bring back the Green X Code Man and make kids more aware of their surroundings. It's not the vehicles that are dangerous, it's the people who drive them and the pedestrians who don't pay attention to what's going on around them !!

waster_2

zincoxide wrote:

Woah!! Off topic again - my original post was based on the fact that 4x4 cars (such as Range Rover & Porsche Cayenne etc) should be banned, primarily because if a child is hit, ithits them at head height and there is a greater possibility of severe injury.

I'm not too bothered about the size & MPG of the vehicle, more the actual structure of them.

There would of course be exceptions etc but as a general idea I just wanted to get the feeling of other MSE users.

This is the sort of argument and reason that does really p*ss me off. Yes there will be accidents with pedestrians. But:


- Firstly, how many are actually with 4x4 vehicles? Probably (and I do not have the statistics to back up or refute this as my anorak is at home today!!) not very many.

- Secondly, how many of these accidents cause fatal or very serious injuries? Again, probably not a significant percentage? Although I agree the potential is currently higher.

- Thirdly, how many of these accidents are caused as a result of the pedestrian stepping off the footpath and in to the road without properley checking the road is clear? Probably a significant number.

The bottom line here is that we have the old treat the symptom rather than cure the disease syndrome. If children were kept under proper control and taught how to cross the road in a safe and sensible manner the majority of accidents would be elliminated. The types of vehicles using the roads (not the footpaths) would then be generally irrelevant. Yes, there will still be accidents and there will still be the loony who jumps red lights, ignores pedestrian crossings, drives at speed unsuitable for the conditions, etc, etc. But you will not stop these people regardless of what type of vehicle they drive.

The only way to make any real impact upon pedestrian casualties is to make pedestrians more aware of the road and the fact that some drivers do not care if they hit and maime them. Generally a vehicle can be seen (and perhaps heard?) from a distance away. If a pedestrian makes a sensible and informed decision as to whether it is safe to cross most accidents will not occur. Yes the vehicle may be breaking all sorts of laws re speed, giving way etc, but the pedestrian must take this is in to account and make a sensible decision to preserve his or her own personal safety as no one else will be botheted about it - unless we are going for a complete nanny state? Many pedestrians seem to think that a motor vehicle can stop in the same distance that they can, i.e almost immediately. The sooner they realise that this is not the case the safer they will be. They need to take most if not all the responsibility for their own safety, not pass the buck to a particular group i.e. 4x4 drivers. Parents must ensure their children are taught safe and adequate road sense. This is not just the Highway Code and/or The Green Cross Code or whatever it is nowadays? They must be shown and it must be reinforced regularly that cars, lorries, motorbikes, vans, 4x4 etc, etc, cannot stop immediately and they must be treated with respect. Even if 4x4's were banned this is still sound advice as a lorry, bus, motorcycle, etc will do as much or more damage than a 4x4 if it hits you.

If parents are concerned about the health of their offspring it is their duty to make sure they are safe to be out and about on the public highway. After all, if you are not on the road you will not be hit by any vehicle let alone a 4x4 (loonies excepted). It is like the ads you see on the TV to try and attempt to deter speeding. Yes, the driver does have an accident with the pedestrian. But what the hell was the pedestrian doing in the road in the first place? If the pedestrian had remained on the footpath until it was safe to cross it would not matter whether the car was doing 5mph or 50mph, there would have been no accident.

In my view there is too much emphasis on trying to “educate” the motorist, when a lot more would be achieved in reducing injuries and deaths if the pedestrian was the one subject to a more concerted road safety and awareness campaign.

intel

Oh yeah I forgot to mention its a Biased arguement of sorts.

4x4 Owners will defend thier vehicles at all costs.

People who dont like them will say they are a pian on the roads...

Well the second statement is the truth that 4x4 owners cant and wont see
that they are a complete menace on our roads and should be scrapped

HTH