In The Press

[\"Hummer\", heh, heh]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Z:
This was a good write in Forbes.
http://www.forbes.com/2003/02/17/cx_...></BLOCKQUOTE>


Micahel:

"Which in sum goes something like this: Why don't all these people drive minivans or more fuel-efficient cars? Why do they need towering SUVs? And aren't towering SUVs killing other people in ordinary cars? Who are these hateful people? "

How come no SUV-backlash-backlash article to date has ever argued the merits of the actual issues, instead choosing the ad hominem approach of attacked those who make the arguments as "hateful" or "hypocritical" people?

I would suggest another way to look at it is: someone who is unconcerned that his overweight, less manoeverable vehicle is more likely to cause severe damage to a family driving a smaller car is hateful. Someone who doesn't care if his vehicle causes way more pollution and associated health problems in cities than would otherwise be necessary is hateful. And "hateful" would be a euphamism for someone who is oblivious to the implications to national security of the accelerated rate they are pumping cash into Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

Your article lauds the offroad capabilities of the H2 and dismisses the consequences to society, all the while, failing to look at the big picture. Yes, the H2 is great for off roading -- and I would highly recommend them to anyone who requires those extra capabilities to buy one.

However, every survey and study of drivers' use shows that the vast majority of SUV's are just used to tool around town and are never taken off road. Depending on which of the numerous surveys over the past 5 years you choose, I have found that between 90-99% of all SUV's are the mall-bound soccer mom variety.

Think about that. 90% of the extra pollution caused by SUV's and the extra oil consumed by them is unnecessary. This is not an argument for eliminating SUV's. But it is an extremely strong argument for taking the power to set fuel efficiency and safety standards out of the hands of oil and auto lobbiests.

TV ads used to target city dwellers who wanted to cultivate an "off-road adventurer" image. Today, H2 ads don't even pretend to be for off-road use. Their current ads showing a woman driving down a city street are targeting style as their selling point.

Thanks to apologists like you, fewer people will think about the consequences as they decide whether they really need the extra capabilities of a heavier vehicle, more money will continue to flow to the oil and auto lobbiests, who in turn will continue to set their own standards so they can continue selling heavier, higher margin vehicles to soccer moms.

Jason Freund