Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 816 posts

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#641

Post by giantg2 »

gf000 wrote: post #362
giantg2 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"How would you react if told that your primary mode of transportation is causing a big increase in deaths?" I'd ask to see the data since TFA shows only a 7.5% increase due to size. The rest of the 75% increase is due to other factors. Edit: why disagee, is my data wrong?

Is that not a significant enough number in and of itself?! Like it even begs the question, how were they allowed to go onto the roads in the first place, when it's not even a hard to reach consequence.

200 out of 350M is a small number. There are plenty other things we could address that makes a bigger impact. The bigger factor is pedestrian alcohol consumption, but nobody wants to address that.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#642

Post by scottyah »

analog31 wrote: post #626
decimalenough wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither. The OP's point is that shootings consistently make headlines and occasion a lot of passionate debate, while grandma or toddler getting mowed over by a SUV or monster truck doesn't and as a consequence nobody really cares.

But to be fair, mass shootings get no policy changes.

What state are you in? Mine banned anything that "looks scary", limited the number of rounds (and made anyone who didn't read the memo and discard the standard one s a felon), prevented any ear-protection from being mounted to the gun, and found a few new ways to make buying ammo more expensive and difficult. It's hard and expensive to buy a gun just to keep the 2A alive even if you never fire it, and you're put on who knows how many government watchlists.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#643

Post by loloquwowndueo »

briffle wrote: post #561
forgetfreeman wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

omfg I would love that. Like literally force manufacturers to put air brakes on anything above a certain weight limit and demand additional certification to operate one. Full Disclosure: I own four vehicles that would trigger this requirement, each for different reasons, and would be whistling and smirking in the DMV line to take the commercial test.

A commercial driver has a physical every year, severe restrictions on how they can drive, hours behind wheel, etc. But if you have 2 cataract surguries, oncoming dementia, and a body full of arthritis that can barely move, you can drive a 50' Class A Motorhome to your winter home in the South.

That person clearly can’t walk so that’s why they have to drive, right?

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#644

Post by kube-system »

snypher wrote: post #637
alamortsubite wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd go a step further and say the high hoods reduce utility by making the vehicles harder to work on. I'm 6' and needed a step-stool to change the battery on my uncle's Silverado. The truck manufacturers leave that inconvenient detail out of their macho ads on TV.

No-one works on junky new cars; people who work on their cars have a 90's model etc. SOP now is to pull the whole cab off to work on the engine.

Good luck future used truck buyers of 2036.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#645

Post by antonymoose »

CapitalistCartr wrote: post #594

For work, I drive an F-350 diesel with a work-bed full of tools and supplies, and a ladder rack. It's a bit nerve-wracking driving through city side streets, especially with pedestrians. It's 22 feet (6.7m) long. Across the tow mirrors is 8.5 feet (2.6m). It probably weighs 4 tons. Yet people happily choose to drive bigger vehicles as commuter cars!

What common commuter vehicle do you imagine here exactly? I’m riding 2.5 Ton full-frame SUV and struggle to see anything much more than a solid 3-ton vehicle.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#646

Post by apparent »

Weird that this article did not mention the Chicken Tax [1] and the differences in CAFE standards and safety standards applicable to passenger vehicles and light trucks/trucks. Basically, the latter were more profitable for automakers, so they shifted toward selling SUVs that qualified as light trucks. This was a crucial step in the arms race toward larger/higher vehicles.

While I don't disagree with what the article says, it is surprising that they have completely missed these aspects of causality, which have been well-known and discussed by policymakers for decades.

1: https://publications.lawschool.cornell.edu/jlpp/2024/11/25/t...

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#647

Post by muti »

tinfoilhatter wrote: post #340
NDlurker wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Minivans and station wagons are just as good as a Tahoe for transporting a family.

Not if you need to tow a trailer / camper. Maybe there's a reason different kinds of vehicles exist? To fulfill different requirements of their drivers?

If the thing you are towing is so heavy you need a truck to tow it, maybe there should be stricter licensing requirements.

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#648

Post by zubiaur »

jounker wrote: post #376
tinfoilhatter wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't require commercial licenses though, because they're not large enough to and don't serve a commercial purpose when transporting families / their things. Plenty of families have the need for third-row seating and the ability to haul things around.

My minivan seats seven. It has the footprint as a toyota camry. It’s only marginally heavier than a camry. Can you please explain to me again why you need a lincoln navigator or the like?

Mazda 5?

Re: The deadly rise of giant trucks and SUVs

#649

Post by pixl97 »

lobf wrote: post #621
mothballed wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

>My county doesn't believe in all that dumb bullshit that the "public" has the right to decide about victimless regulatory crimes on your own property and if we could overturn the registration law we would, unfortunately the law is a state law that was made mostly by city slickers in the major cities in my state who have no clue places like our rural private road systems exist. I see. I assume then that you do not ex…

I'm sorry, he won't be able to reply. He was eaten by a bear while taking his refuse out.
Post reply on HN