Definately don't agree with the banning of assault rifles.

 

...haha, another application of my idea...bullets should cost $10,000/piece UNLESS you're in a shooting range and use all the ammo before you leave. Home protection? Well you know they aren't gonna shoot at $10,000/shot...so beat them with an unloaded shotgun or a heavy pistol...

 

Well at least you're consistent. I definitely respect that.

I need the people that side with SUVs but are against assault rifles. Would be a good debate.

 

I love shooting my buddy's M4A1, I just can't afford one myself....

 

Easy.

If I should ever have to deploy against an American coup de etat, I'd rather the militia I'm facing have rocks than Kalishnikovs. Other than that, I don't see a purpose for Joe Civilian having them, however, I personally don't have enough of an issue with assault rifles to be to terribly upset either way.

To be honest, it's not so much that I agree or disagree; more that I really don't give a crap....at least until it becomes a real problem.

"Oh boo hoo. My right to liquify squirrels has been violated!"

 

Assuming you did have a problem with assault rifles and not SUVs, then why not "Oh boo hoo. My right to drive my status symb... errr... escalde on 24'z has been violated"?

I can argue this from any angle until i'm blue in the face and never ever loose ground.

Nobody can possibly justify a comparable reason for having an SUV that surpasses the need to plunk cans and 2 liter bottles with an AR-15. But when you put it into perspective with regular automobiles and an old S&W revolver, then damn near everybody, including myself, doesn't wants to give-up both of those and for damn good reason. It's because we can justify their use in more practical, less-wasteful needs and scenarios.

 

Okay, I'm in a similar situation on a the other side of the boat.

I believe that SUV's should not be banned per-se, but instead taxed to a much higher degree than regular cars. I can explain this more later, but I'd rather argue against your point

You talk about poor weather conditions in a SUV verses say, a minivan, stating that the SUV would take more effort and feel more safe in poor weather conditions. I myself, as well as my family, drive up to our ranch in the mountains nearly every weekend. It is a meeting place for family who are at college, away from home, and on their own. It is about 2hrs from school, and about 1.5 hours from the family's houses in Denver. The entire drive up there is normally snowy in the winter, and is a two lane road that gets less than desireable maitnence even though it is a federal highway (US285). Driving up there, nearly every single one of the vehicles that are upside-down or sideways in the ditches are SUV's. Why? They give a feeling of "safeness" and thus a feeling invincibility. A SUV, no matter how advanced the anti-roll over system, no matter how good the 4WD system is, is still no match to a AWD, even a FWD car with snow tires. Need to haul people and things? Buy a quad-cab pick up truck and it will work just fine.

Another point is Europe. Even in the most snowy sections of the Alps you still see very few SUV's. The diffrence? Snow tires. Most those cars are only FWD but with snow tires they are great in the snow.
-Jeff

Disclaimer: if the above makes no ****ing sense, it is a result of jet-lag and not the fault of the author.

 

You once again prove how goddamn idiotic extreme right-wingers (and extreme left-wingers) are.
1. Volcanic activity has been happening for hundreds of millions of years. Why then has the earth's climate been changing so rapidly and why is there a hole in the ozone layer? More volcanoes my ***.
2. True story there. However why not try and do your part? We can try and get them to stop, but you have the power right now.
3. Just like we need to shut the pie holes of people who spit out extremist propoganda.
4. Once again, has been happening for thousands of years. Are there suddenly hundreds of thousands of more trees producing more methane than ever before? And all this in the last 10-20 years when rainforests have been destroyed?

 

I love lamp

 

We should always avoid writing blanket legislation because freedom is what its all about. The problem isn't SUV's themselves so why ban them? For example: if Ford designed an SUV with an emission rating comparible to a sedan, that didn't tend to roll over on corners, and had a safe impact area around the vehicle so it wouldn't ride up on lower cars in an accident; would you be against them? Or is it not even an SUV if it doesn't portray one of those flaws? In my opinion it may still be ugly but it's still an SUV; so then what would be your problem with Ford's new vehicle?

How would you define what an SUV is? There are so many crossover models, what exact measurements would you use?
Instead it'd be easier to tighten up the well defined safetly requirements of their vehicle class. Last I knew (correct me if I'm wrong) they classify as trucks for emissions. So maybe the truck/car emission classification is too lenient and should require more hauling capability to be considered a truck or something. Likewise collision needs to be more strictly legislated and enforced (I believe they did something to help with this recently, requiring new vehicles to have an impact bumber zone a minimum distance from the ground or something). And as for rollover, same thing. Force better designs, tighter restrictions on safety, etc.

As for the assualt rifle argument; just because both cars and guns kill people doesn't make them analogous. Guns are designed for killing people while cars and suvs are not. The laws passed for assault rifles are to make guns less effective at what they are designed to do but still allow them in some form as a token to our rights so you have weird laws like you can fire bullets but only so many at a time unless the bullets are made of plastic or rubber or filled with paint.

How about this; fireworks are legal (in most states) but C4, TNT, nitroglycerin, and others aren't. If we allow small guns and small explosives and we want to allow large guns should we then allow large explosives? How about nerve agents?
Does this really apply to SUVs? They both involve a restriction of rights but thats about it.

As for my personal opinions:
I hate SUVs but I hate superfluous legislature even more.
I don't like gun laws either but I also don't want absolutely everything deregulated. It's a fine sticky line I admit.

 

+1.

 

i don't think that comparing this kid to right or left wingers is fair to right or left wingers...in fact if i were one of them i would consider it an insult

 

Seriously, I neither of those issues are near and dear to my heart. Currently assualt rifles are against the law and SUVs aren't. I support that law due to the fact that they are codified right now and because I'm really indifferent.

There aren't many issues that fire me up enough to complain about; even fewer that I'd actually stand on some lawmaker's desk in an effort to change them.

If they forced busing gangstas into corn country, ensuring they were thoroughly pissed and heavily armed...maybe.

 

Not sure why this makes me laugh.

 

I love carpet