Seriously Unnecessary Victimization
Apparently, people take issue with SUVs. Our local liberal following over at the Metroblab is in on this hatred too. They blame SUVs for (1) being dangerous to other drivers and (2) for destroying the environment.
Regarding SUVs being dangerous: I fail to understand the soccer-mom doctrine of blaming inanimate objects for the evils in the world. This mentality of trying to ban everything that could be dangerous is seriously flawed. Lawn darts, guns, three-wheeled ATVs, SUVs, action figures that shoot small pieces of plastic, etc. are not the cause of all problems in the world. It’s what people do with them. To use the old pro-gun rhetoric: ‘guns don’t kill people, people do.’ For example, if I throw a lawn dart up in the sky and try to catch it, then I am an idiot. It’s not the lawn dart manufacturer’s fault nor should lawn darts be made illegal because of a couple of idiots. Yet, in the US society of the minority oppressing the majority (the basis for political correctness), one person can screw things up for everybody.
Regarding SUVs destroying the environment: Global warming is real in my opinion. Here in East Tennessee we now get maybe one good snow per year. However, the world frequently has changes in temperatures (you know, ice ages and stuff). My problem is that there is no evidence that the acts of humans are causing this temperature increase. I challenge anyone to show me scientific evidence that humans, their actions, or their vehicles are the cause. Green Peace doesn’t count since their data have been proven wrong several times over (like the picture of the fjord, which I’ve unfortunately lost the link to). I find it kind of self-centered that we think our actions impact the planet so much, particularly since there is no hard evidence of it.
SUVs in general: Let’s take a not so untypical East Tennessee family for example. Mom, dad, two kids (who we’ll call Susie & Bobbie), and a couple of dogs. Well, one weekend Susie and Bobbie want to go to the lake. So the family loads up the Ford Expedition with ample seating. Mom & dad in front, Suzie & Bobbie in the second set of seats, the dogs in the back set of seats, various lake toys in the back, and a boat in tow on the trailer hitch. This scenario is fairly normal. What should this family do? Take two vehicles for every trip or use an SUV? I don’t think said trip would happen if this hypothetical family had, say, a Saturn or Honda Civic. So, SUVs serve a very practical purpose in some cases. Now granted, most SUVs haul a 110 lb woman and a bag of groceries at most. But, it’s the 110 lb woman’s right to do so.
On to the whackos: A group exists (the whackos) that makes bumper stickers that people (the other whackos) can put on SUVs that say ‘I’m destroying the environment, ask me how.’ The solution proposed by the anti-SUV crowd to the perceived environmental destruction caused by SUVs (though not proven) is the willful destruction and labeling of other individuals’ private property. No wonder a group exists advocating vehicle choice. I heard on the radio recently that some group in California (I know, you’re shocked) proposed a $0.50 tax per gallon of gas on SUVs only. Let me be clear, these people are irretrievably stupid.
Now, my opinion on the heart of the matter: See, it’s mostly party-line towing, extreme environmentalist, liberal, whackos who behave so irrationally. In my opinion, it boils down to haves and have nots. A SUV has a certain aesthetic appeal. It’s also a symbol of prosperity and affluence. These vehicles (though practical) are not cheap. That’s why there’s a market for inexpensive SUVs. Now, given what the party-line towing, extreme environmentalist, liberal, whackos think of personal wealth, it boils down to jealousy and classism to an extent. See, your average party-line towing, extreme environmentalist, liberal, whackos likely can’t afford a Hummer (no, not the sexual kind, the vehicle, silly). Thus, from a simple functional vehicle, a class war has emerged.
