Author Topic: 4X4: To be or not to be  (Read 113037 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline shads

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Forum Member
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #30 on: February 05, 2004, 11:54:08 am »
 ;D,best reality tv show i've seen for years
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #31 on: February 05, 2004, 02:44:59 pm »
Wherever you are in the world you will meet someone from Tottenham.
regards,
jet
BTW Football is the most crass so called sport ever invented, played by prima donnas for the amusement of the lower orders. :-*
 

Offline shads

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Forum Member
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #32 on: February 05, 2004, 02:48:19 pm »
looks like i'm of the lower order then...............or is THFC
 

John_fraser

  • Guest
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #33 on: February 05, 2004, 06:56:42 pm »
Quote
;D,best reality tv show i've seen for years



They're saying that our next manager is going to be David Blunkett. At least he's capable of holding a lead.  :)
 

AgentOrange

  • Guest
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #34 on: February 06, 2004, 02:54:58 pm »
Bringing the thread back to the original purpose, I am afraif yes I have dismissed most of the arguments against 4x4s because in the light of the FACTS they can be dismissed. Bjorn Lombok demonstrated that most environmental claims are based on selective data. So it is with this debate. Without making my identity knownm I have shown that my 4X4 is roughly the same size as my old estate, it uses no more fuel than many of the larger engined saloon cars that also prowl BP and that like all considerate motorists I try to drive responsibly and that includes when I drive. Other vehicles have appalling fuel efficiency, but I see no complaints about them. Estate cars can take up the same if not more room. So frankly the arguments put up do NOT STACK UP. The problem is then inconsiderate parking and driving (which 4X4 drivers do not have a monopoly of). If there is still a problem with 4X4s, then it is not based on fact and must be based on opinion. That makes it prejudice. And I haven't even touched on the misogynistic element in some of the comments about Lady 4X4 drivers. I would have thought some of these comments infringe the rules of this site.
Two final points:-
By the way, Bjorn Lombok does dismiss most of the claims of the so called green movement - try reading the book!
One respondent noted that visibility when following a 4X4 was a problem. That merely suggest you are driving too close. Try the Highway Code and adhrence to the 2 second rule. Works a treat!
 

Offline Editor

  • David Brewer
  • Administrator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 8926
  • Thanked: 142 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Media Helping Media
  • Expertises:
  • Walking
  • Real ale
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #35 on: February 06, 2004, 03:21:55 pm »
Quote
That makes it prejudice. And I haven't even touched on the misogynistic element in some of the comments about Lady 4X4 drivers. I would have thought some of these comments infringe the rules of this site.

Hi AgentOrange, I've read through the many threads that mention 4WDs looking for any comments that infringe the forum rules, but so far I haven't found any. That is not because there aren't any there, it's just that I might have missed them. The issues seems to have been mentioned in many different threads, so it's becoming harder to keep track.

If you see a post that offends could you please message me through the instant message system so I can look at it please. You can use the quote facility in messages too, which means that when I click on it I will be taken straight to the post you are referring to. (Simply go to the offending post, click quote, cut and paste what appears in the box, and put it in the internal message to me).

I will then check it out and, if it is offensive, will write to the author and suggest it be edited.

I think it is fair comment to say a male or female was driving if it is fact and refers to a particular incident being discussed, but it's not acceptable to come out with sweeping generalisations that target one sex or other.

By the way, if anyone thinks they might have done this in any posts about this, or any other issue, would you mind editing it out to save time please. Again facts are fine, sexist generalisations and sterotypes are not.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2004, 03:23:25 pm by admin »
The Brookmans Park Newsletter has been supporting the village and our local community since 1998 by providing free, interactive tools for all to use.
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #36 on: February 06, 2004, 03:49:03 pm »
It is not unusual for politically correct thought police persons to attempt to suppress the democratic freedom of expression and impose their will on others.
I recall something about fighting wars to defeat dictators who would seek to control the rights of free people to have their say.
The vast majority do not take offense at anything and if they do they merely decline to get involved or offer their own opinion.
regards,
jet
« Last Edit: February 06, 2004, 03:49:48 pm by jet »
 

Offline Editor

  • David Brewer
  • Administrator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 8926
  • Thanked: 142 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Media Helping Media
  • Expertises:
  • Walking
  • Real ale
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #37 on: February 06, 2004, 05:05:18 pm »
Dear jet,

It's not about 'politically correct thought police', ' democratic freedom of expression', or 'dictators'. It is about sexist generalisations that cause offence.

Usually I spot them, sometimes I don't. I rely on users of this site to alert me where they see posts that they find offensive.

I then usually ask the author concerned to tone it down, or, if it is particularly bad and needs to be removed quickly, I edit it myself and send a note explaining why.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2004, 05:53:43 pm by admin »
The Brookmans Park Newsletter has been supporting the village and our local community since 1998 by providing free, interactive tools for all to use.
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #38 on: February 06, 2004, 06:47:03 pm »
To clarify rather than provide reasoned arguement or just have an opinion ( whether it is right or wrong) some people tend to hide under " political correctness" and play the rascist /sexist/ etc. card.
This PC card is rarely played by men who are represented badly in the media. Just look at most adverts for concerning the family. The man is stupid, the wife/kids know it all. Men just cannot be bothered to complain because they are men and tollerant.
Everyone lampoons Victor Meldrew, imagine the outcry if he was female or ethnic.
regards,
jet
Ahhrrgggggg ooooowwwww fell of soapbox. ;) ;) ;)
 

John_fraser

  • Guest
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #39 on: February 06, 2004, 11:57:02 pm »
Quote
yes I have dismissed most of the arguments against 4x4s because in the light of the FACTS they can be dismissed.
That is possible, but you have failed to present any facts whilst dismissing them.

Quote
I have shown that my 4X4 is roughly the same size as my old estate.
Well setting aside the vast difference between “shown” and “claimed,” what does this single example in a debate on generalities prove? That you like large cars? That drivers of 4x4 lack consideration in whatever car the chose? Your sports car seems to indicate that you feel they need for multiple inefficient cars.

Quote
it uses no more fuel than many of the larger engined saloon cars that also prowl BP
Well in the spirit of Mr Lombok, would you possibly be kind enough to define “larger” and then show some evidence of the fuel performance of your chosen control when compared with a range of 4x4s and the relative proportions of each car and their usage patterns. Of course Mr Lombok would also point out the fallacy of such a comparison – indeed ten minutes on google proved both our arguments. I, however, will point out that using one appallingly petrol hungry monster to defend another is really not that much of a defense – although it is probably better than using your even worse sports car as one.

Quote
like all considerate motorists I try to drive responsibly and that includes when I drive.
Everyone thinks they are a good driver. Everyone thinks there are a lot of bad drivers on the road.

Quote
Other vehicles have appalling fuel efficiency I see no complaints about them.
True, but not much of a defense. The trouble with 4WDs is that they are becoming ever more popular. A trend not visible in other big cars, which is why people are getting fed up with them.

Quote
Estate cars can take up the same if not more room.
 I think you need a “some” in there.

Quote
One respondent noted that visibility when following a 4X4 was a problem. That merely suggest you are driving too close. Try the Highway Code and adherence to the 2 second rule. Works a treat!
Try looking further ahead than the car in front next time you’re driving and you may see my point. 4x4s obscure the indicators and break lights of the next couple of cars. They are also frustrating to sit behind in slow or stationary traffic because they limit you view of what is happening ahead. The extra visibility someone mentioned is stolen taken from the driver behind.

Bjorn Lomborg did not simply dismiss the arguments; he countered them with facts and alternative interpretations. And while his book is very interesting and while I agree with a large amount of what he says, I do not accept his arguments or all of his collusions. I have never felt that there is any argument that justifies complacency.
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #40 on: February 07, 2004, 12:49:37 am »
John,
you are wasted in banking you should have been a surgeon.
That was the best dissection I have seen in years.
I take of my hat and expose my bald head to you.
regards,
jet
 

Offline trinity

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #41 on: February 08, 2004, 01:58:21 am »
Quote

Try looking further ahead than the car in front next time you’re driving and you may see my point. 4x4s obscure the indicators and break lights of the next couple of cars. They are also frustrating to sit behind in slow or stationary traffic because they limit you view of what is happening ahead. The extra visibility someone mentioned is stolen taken from the driver behind.


The same is true of vans and wagons.

That is, though, the price paid for being able to make your own choice of vehicle, and to drive it yourself.

Vans and wagons can (and often are) driven responsibly and courteously. So are 4x4s. So, even, are BMWs (though not by the driver of the M3 who went through BP at 50-odd this morning when I was taking my sons to Jan's Pantry to get some cakes).

How many here regularly go abroad on business or holiday, and fly to their destination. Airliners can burn 2 *tons* of A-1 just getting to the point where they are on the runway ready to go. I've not seen these people being castigated for environmental hostility.

So whilst it is true that "something else is worse" is not a defence, it is also true that attacking any particular manifestation of environmental hostility might be a source of splenetic satisfaction, but it is little more than that.
 

Offline Margaret

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #42 on: February 08, 2004, 10:31:24 am »
It appears that this thread is getting out of control, nobody said 4 x 4 drivers were any worse than other bad drivers. The only adverse comment is that they guzzle fuel (not environmentaly sound) and block the view of the car behind and are too big along with other large vans etc. for the roads of a small village.  As to 4 x 4 being the same size as estate cars, width and length wise they might be but certainly not in height.
 

Offline Margaret

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #43 on: February 08, 2004, 10:38:32 am »
Also I am not sure about the remark 'spleanic satisfaction'. Why would suggesting improvements to the environment, no matter how small, be using 'spleanic satisfaction'. After all isn't that what discussion is all about. Why would you assume that because someone criticises something it is through jealousy. How could you possibly be jealous of something that you find ugly and unsuitable, which I personally do of large vehicles driven round BP for personal use. A matter of taste nothing to do with jealousy or 'speanic satisfaction'. Another tasteless remark by someone who doesn't read the posts properly.
 

Offline trinity

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #44 on: February 08, 2004, 01:38:35 pm »
Quote
Also I am not sure about the remark 'spleanic satisfaction'. Why would suggesting improvements to the environment, no matter how small, be using 'spleanic satisfaction'. After all isn't that what discussion is all about.

Indeed.

Quote
Why would you assume that because someone criticises something it is through jealousy.

I wouldn't. What gives you the idea ?

Quote

How could you possibly be jealous of something that you find ugly and unsuitable, which I personally do of large vehicles driven round BP for personal use.


OK. As to "ugly", I consider the Audi TT utterly hideous - ditto those Renault things with the "bustle" boot. So what ? They seem pretty popular and I'm sure most of those who bought them are happy with them. Unsuitable ?  BP is small - even from the A1000 to Bradmore Green I'm not convinced that the use of a car is generally "suitable".

Quote
A matter of taste nothing to do with jealousy or 'speanic satisfaction'.


That is "splenetic", dear. The choice is a matter of taste. Writing about it here is a matter of splenetic satisfaction.

Quote
Another tasteless remark by someone who doesn't read the posts properly.


I agree. Your post does fall into this category. :-)
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #45 on: February 08, 2004, 02:32:01 pm »
Vans and wagons have a use for transporting bulky items.
4WDS have no reason to exist in built up/tarmaced areas.
They are designed for off road use on rough terrain.
They are by their design cumbersome yet fast and dangerous due to there mass/velocity ratio.
Large but with no great carrying capacity.
Usually occupied by one driver.
All in all an environmental blight which is not needed with regard to the planets resources.
I see no problems with people carriers.
regards,
jet
Ohh me spleeeeeen ;D
 

Offline Margaret

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #46 on: February 08, 2004, 04:04:51 pm »
Indeed what?

Jealousy is usually indicated when using 'Splenetic Satisfaction'.

Cars are suitable for the roads, that's why they were built.

'Spleanic', obviously a typing error 'dear'. People do have them.
Choice IS a matter of taste, my point exactly, not being bad-tempered or peevish, which is the dictionary's definition of splenetic.
 

Offline trinity

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #47 on: February 08, 2004, 05:08:21 pm »
Quote

Jealousy is usually indicated when using 'Splenetic Satisfaction'.


Oh, really ?  So you reckon that people ought to feel jealous of you (if not of your typing) ?  Whatever for ?

 

John_fraser

  • Guest
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #48 on: February 08, 2004, 05:27:30 pm »
Quote

That is, though, the price paid for being able to make your own choice of vehicle, and to drive it yourself.
The point is that this is the price I'm paying for you to make your choice.

True, vans are just as bad to be behind, but as jet points out there is a point to these.

I don’t know if think that 4x4 drivers are any worse (or better) than anyone else. It could be that the things are so big and ugly and annoying that the mistakes and bad drivers are more visible. Or possibly it is because the driver is so isolated from the road that they show less consideration and drive more forcefully. Someone once suggested that we could improve the overall standard of diving by having a spear in the centre placed in the steering column which would kill the driver in the event of a crash. I imagine that driving a Range Rover must be the extract opposite to that.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2004, 05:28:36 pm by John_fraser »
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #49 on: February 08, 2004, 06:38:06 pm »
Perhaps an owner of one of these "Rambomobiles" could elucidate on the reasons why they purchased one of these things in the first place.
I don't think transporting people is an option.
For an off roader you don't see many of them spattered in mud or with dawgs in the back.
Was it the looks, style, security, whatever?
regards,
jet
They seem to be driven by smaller persons or do they just look smaller in comparrason?
« Last Edit: February 08, 2004, 06:42:37 pm by jet »
 

Offline trinity

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #50 on: February 08, 2004, 07:02:08 pm »
Quote

The point is that this is the price I'm paying for you to make your choice.


You got exactly the same choice. The alternative is that others are denied that choice, that instead their choice is "anything as long as John Fraser approves of it".

Quote

I don’t know if think that 4x4 drivers are any worse (or better) than anyone else.


It comes down to the driver - as indeed does a lot of fuel economy which is dependant on the weight of the driver's right foot to a great extent. Hence the "your mileage may vary" caveat in lawyer-infested America.
 

Offline trinity

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #51 on: February 08, 2004, 07:09:26 pm »
I've already given my reasons, earlier. Mine isn't a "rambomobile" (it is a good deal smaller than most), rather a workable compromise between road (most of the driving), off-road (not extreme, but a fair amount), comfort and the ability to fit the family into the thing, with various bits of cargo stowed about the vehicle and on the roof.

It does get spattered in mud. It does have a few dents and scratches.

I don't speed in it (at least not round here, though occasionally on the motorway) - apart from anything else if I wanted to go speeding I'd get something like a petrol saloon that was more capable of doing so.

If some people don't like the idea, that is their right. But I've never seen it written anywhere that I have to give a monkeys about their dislike.
 

Offline Editor

  • David Brewer
  • Administrator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 8926
  • Thanked: 142 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Media Helping Media
  • Expertises:
  • Walking
  • Real ale
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #52 on: February 08, 2004, 07:26:14 pm »
I wonder whether we are fast reaching the stage where most points of view on this issue have been aired?

:)
The Brookmans Park Newsletter has been supporting the village and our local community since 1998 by providing free, interactive tools for all to use.
 

Offline trinity

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #53 on: February 08, 2004, 07:52:53 pm »
Quote
I wonder whether we are fast reaching the stage where most points of view on this issue have been aired?


I think we went past that some time ago.
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #54 on: February 08, 2004, 08:05:45 pm »
I don't think it has ;D

Just taken a survey on my walk and it seems that 4WDs seem to be a fashion accessory to the larger houses.

There are hundreds in this village, is it a plot to take over. :o

Imp land seems to live up to its name ;)

regards,

jet

The way this planet is going, there won't be any Monkeys left to care about soon. :(
 

AgentOrange

  • Guest
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #55 on: February 08, 2004, 11:21:54 pm »
Short on substantiated facts again!
The comment about the correlation between 4X4s and larger houses says it all.
The last word should of course go to George Bernard Shaw:
Do not do unto others as you would be done by: your tastes may be different
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #56 on: February 08, 2004, 11:48:17 pm »
I walked every road in this village and the tendency was that the bigger the house, the more 4WDs.
They could have all been visiting of course. :)
I am not jealous I've got a big un too :o :o
regards,
jet
 

AgentOrange

  • Guest
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #57 on: February 09, 2004, 12:29:28 pm »
My comment about substantiation was referring to the monkeys you referred to. I agree with your observation of the correlation between house size and 4X4 presence.
As for  your comment, something along the lines of 'the lady doth protesteth too much' springs to mind! :o
 

Offline shads

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Forum Member
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #58 on: February 10, 2004, 09:40:04 am »
I'm thinking of getting a new car.......has anyone got any suggestions? ;D
 

Offline Swan

  • Opinions on some things
  • **
  • Posts: 76
  • Forum Member
Re: 4X4: To be or not to be
« Reply #59 on: February 10, 2004, 01:08:54 pm »
Quote
I'm thinking of getting a new car.......has anyone got any suggestions? ;D


What you want is a Hummer

http://www.hummer.com/

As big as a 2 bedroom house and 4 miles to the gallon, I wonder if they do a long wheelbase version, so I can get the big speakers in the back?
Godwin's Law:

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
 

Tags: