Lootman wrote:AleisterCrowley wrote:Lootman wrote:It is simply a matter of choice. If people want SUVs then they should have them. If you don't like them then don't buy one.
Well, I've got the choice to , for example, buy up all the fresh food in my local Sainsbury's and leave it to rot in my garden
My money my choice?
If people choose to buy huge unnecessary metal beasts to take the kids to school and do the Waitrose shop there is a knock on effect on the rest of the people on the planet. They may have the money to make that choice, but ultimately it's the wrong choice for everyone even if it's not illegal...
You are entitled to the view that people should not want these vehicles. I am not sure you are entitled to the view that people should be prevented from buying such vehicles. The difference is freedom.
I will never own a SUV but would not want to live in a nation or world where they were banned.
A bit of reductio ad absurdum should help here. Would you live in a nation where people are banned from buying/owning/using nuclear, biological or chemical weapons?
The law prevents people from having the freedom to harm the well being of others. Hence why farmers have limits on which chemicals they can spray on your future dinner. We quite calmly accept limits on freedom for the common good every day and are safer for it. These include limits on what can be sold as a safe motor vehicle or once sold, in many countries, what is safe to drive. In choosing not to choose, we currently have a situation where cars with poor aerondynamics are causing real harm and lung disease for millions it strikes me as reasonable for our politicians to do something to protect us and unreasonable that they do not.
Of course it would be best if people could just make less harmful choices but often they don't. That is the tragedy. As a former biologist I still read the journals and the picture is really not pretty and the trajectory is terrifying. O guess we must be lemmings.