Meh, if that type of introspection results in turning into a self-righteous bloviating douche bag as seems evident in this thread I'll give it a hard pass.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Tyre Extinguisher’ climate activists ‘disarm’ 100 SUVs in one night across Edinburgh
- Thread starter Puroresu_kid
- Start date
Meh, if that type of introspection results in turning into a self-righteous bloviating douche bag as seems evident in this thread I'll give it a hard pass.
Ah yeah, because climate change isn't a real thing. Forgot. Let's marginalize what some people consider real issues.
I think the term "douchebag" is being thrown around in this thread in a couple places, and it means exactly nothing lol
Someone calling out the behavior of others doesn't make them a douchebag or self-righteous, especially when it's just facts. When we're talking about modern society at large developing into the next age, think we gotta toughen up to feedback and swallow our pride.
But I think it WOULD be douchey of me to say that it's okay if someone has a little wee wee and needs a truck or an SUV to feel okay. So I won't do that
You're proving their point....
Who sucks more? The person who admits they can try to do more but still have a ways to go while they try or the person doing just as much and no more but wagging their finger in others faces? I say the latter.
It's not facts, lol. It's a bunch of assumptions. Some posters are turning people into caricatures then chiding them for it.
People don't want to be inconvenienced, politicians feed of that and it's a never ending loop of doing the bare minimum.
I wouldn't normally approve of messing with individuals but a huge fucking shitstorm is coming. I'm not gonna cheer but i ain't weeping either.
I wouldn't normally approve of messing with individuals but a huge fucking shitstorm is coming. I'm not gonna cheer but i ain't weeping either.
When that shitstorm hits minorities will be the first ones to feel it. Wish some of ya'll would keep that shit in mind when ya'll say shit like this...
I know it's coming too, dude. For real. Kinda not hard to see where shit is trending. And I will weep when it does cause it's gonna be fucking terrible.
User Warned: Antagonizing Fellow Member
Plumbob acts like a clown with a smarmy attitude. Ignore him because all I've seen him do is antagonize here. Not worth your energy.
Last edited:
I'd argue someone who admits they need to do more are fucking rad. I'll admit I only glanced at a few pages here, but it seems like people who are defensive enough to be SUV owners haven't been that humble and earnest in admitting the need for improvement. To anyone out there I missed, you rock bro/sis!! Change is hard and slow, and I respect anyone who can't make quick changes for any reason, but want to.
My arguments are literally just owning an SUV/not owning one in a vacuum. But if we're talking about me, I do a shit ton of stuff to help the environment. There's a fine line between finger-wagging and trying to inspire change, and I think the difference is the amount of shame the receiving party is feeling usually.
And, SUVs being worse for the environment than basically any other passenger automobile is pretty factual, right? Not counting newer range rovers, SUV body type hybrids, etc.
I argue change is change lol. It's like people who sell back their guns to the government for money, and not because they want less guns on the street. The ends are all that's important
Sorry bout double post, I gotta learn how to be more effective on my cell phone haha
Find me a EV that costs 20k?
Because it's performative.
I'd prefer activists actually do tangible shit. I'm sure there are many NGOs need volunteers
Climate changes will also affect minorities and poor people first, especially people who live in developing countries (and are already being affected). White billionaires don't give a shit because they'll keep their lifestyle until they're dead.
I care so much because where I live will be one of the first places to go (is already slowly being flooded)
Last edited:
They aren't going to be minorities where they really, really get hurt first(i might just have crossed wires by what you meant)
I ain't going to see 50c (in the UK where this is going down) as a regular thing, that's a few decades away, it's going to be Asia/Africa that bear the brunt, it's coming for them fairly quickly.
We will get the far right fuckers rising because of the refugees and all that comes with that, so i know it's not going to be pretty for minorities on that front.
Look, I feel you 100% on that. I just think in this thread we don't need folks posturing to prove how they clearly care more because someone else doesn't have all the boxes on their checklist marked yet.
They already are in a higher tax bracket. Ask Craig how much he pays for that Overfinch beast he drives 😉
I paid half that for my first Leaf. Gen 2's can be bought for less that £20k now.
Overall, I dont think it is intended to discourage people to buy SUVs directly. More bring the issue to public attention and charge the debate around it. The actual discouragement ultimately needs to come from other kinds of disincentives. But this is part of the mix, since bugger all much is being done by government to deal with this issue.
I think things over here in the UK are going to be much worse than people expect, partly because we are likely to get weather than genuinely causes disruption. For instance, drought is going to be an issue in London, which is already pretty water deficient. There are the climate factors, then the supply chain issues. Plus I dont think the social and political psyche in this country is well set up to deal with the kind of disruptions on the horizon. So while it will likely be worst in the polar regions and parts of the tropics, I think people are understanding the picture here. Well particularly if there are changes to the Gulf Stream, which would massively fuck us.
Last edited:
I mean higher still. If you're driving a SUV around a city, you should be paying a much much higher tax rate than you even are today.
Fortunately, we know exactly how to save the Earth from turning into a cinder. We let the air out of grandma's tires in Fartingshire.
It isn't. Its an Evoque. You can tell by the fenders, lights, and that plastic thing on the side compared to the rest of the Land Rover line-up.
Last edited:
Where do you draw the line on a "SUV" and a crossover? As has been stated a bunch many sedans are the same foot print as "SUV".
Not who you quoted, but the line is very blurry. While they have the same foot print, they're often taller, higher off the ground and heavier.
The only way you could classify them for tax reasons like the poster wants is maybe by weight or ground clearance, which is usually more than normal cars.
But of course even then there's outliers. For example a small crossover SUV could be lighter than a large luxury sedan. Closest you could get is ride height from the ground, but even then sporty crossover SUV's can be close to car heights.
How many times it gotta be said in the thread letting the air out of the tires can ruin both the rims and tires. Which would produce more emissions.
Ok so you go with fuel economy, is it just on new cars or are you rolling this back on existing ones on the road? A Dodge Charger is smaller than Ford Bronco in terms of overall height, but a Charger gets 30 highway to the 21ish of a Bronco. Yet a Charger is a long, wide, powerful car that is equally as unnerving to be near as a cyclist than the smaller overall base of a newer Bronco.
Not trying to be ins ome gotcha here, just genuinely want people to think on this rather than some broad sweeping thing like "tax em". Because as you've been doing, you're applying nuance to the blurred lines in many of the cars today.
Honestly, letting out the air is not the only way (or even a way) to raise awareness. That brochure is a great way to do so and a lot of people would feel compelled to act, without such actions that could potentially damage their cars.
There's a lot of nuance to SUV ownership as well. There's socioeconomic conditions to owning cars that's just not as simple as "I chose to buy a SUV". There's also varying mpg that make an SUV better than another car. Do we go after hybrid SUVs?
There's a lot of nuance to SUV ownership as well. There's socioeconomic conditions to owning cars that's just not as simple as "I chose to buy a SUV". There's also varying mpg that make an SUV better than another car. Do we go after hybrid SUVs?
The arguments in this thread...classic!! This thread full of so called liberal Westerners is a prime example for why western countries will not do anything about climate change. People are fundamentally selfish and refuse to make even the slightest changes to their lifestyles while at the same time pointing fingers at poor people in India for using cheap coal to cook their food so that they can eat and not go hungry.
People will still be arguing about SUVs while Island nations and people in third world nations continue to suffer from climate change.
People will still be arguing about SUVs while Island nations and people in third world nations continue to suffer from climate change.
.
Can you connect this point to a bunch of randos letting air out of a few SUVs in the dead of night?
Can you connect this point to a bunch of randos letting air out of a few SUVs in the dead of night?
You seem to be under the impression anyone would care what we're labeled as from someone that is irrational enough to think this vandalism has any positive outcome.
I thought it was clear. It's protest and climate activism. They are making a point about why no one needs to use SUVs. If you were not clear on this, let me link to his video again. Monbiot explains this very well.
yes the blame has been shifted from THEM to US. they did the same thing on recycling, go look it up.
Spare Yourself the Guilt Trip This Earth Day—It’s Companies That Need to Clean Up Their Acts
More and more states are looking to pass a new kind of recycling law that asks manufacturers to foot the bill for the waste created by their products....www.nrdc.org
The original episode had more. Companies were required to have the recycle programs they lobbied to change it, set up a whole keep America beautiful campaign bullshit to blame consumers.
Also shout out to Zoop, as the same companies literally coined the term litterbug
How does this relate to car choices? It's not like companies held a gun to your head and told you to buy an SUV. Especially not in Europe which has a plethora of smaller car options, and especially not in the Edinburgh city centre which has decent public transport. People chose to buy SUVs.
The greatest lie ever sold by companies in the 80s and 90s is the concept of being a littlebug and end user recycling programs making a huge difference instead of those companies moving away from garbage plastic and harmful chemicals.
Companies want people fighting other people "hurting the environment" through things like owning a SUV instead of focusing on all the corporate pollution that we actually can fix it we passed laws to do it.
Not that personal green habits don't go a long way but come on, going after each other is just what corporations want here.
Companies want people fighting other people "hurting the environment" through things like owning a SUV instead of focusing on all the corporate pollution that we actually can fix it we passed laws to do it.
Not that personal green habits don't go a long way but come on, going after each other is just what corporations want here.
It's making a statement. It's in the news isn't it? People are discussing SUVs here aren't they? There's a Panel on the BBC where Monbiot is explaining why SUVs are terrible isn't there? People are watching this aren't they?
These activists are at least doing something while the rest of us are sitting behind our computers being useless. Me included.
Wait. So, somebody lets the air out of my tires overnight and I'm supposed to go to www . youtube . com to find out why they did it?
No, you can watch the news panel on this on the BBC. and then discuss about this on Era.
Picking a random street in a wealthy neighborhood and tagging houses would be a more targeted form of 'activism'
It would also be just as dumb.
But sure keep telling yourself that some random strangers you know nothing about deserve this because you decided their vehicle falls into your laymen definition of increasingly arbitrary car classifications.
As other have pointed out there are SUVs that drastically range in size, weight, energy type, efficiency, safety features, etc.
Sure you can assume everyone that drives an SUV is a selfish asshole. You can also assume that everyone that eats meat is a selfish asshole, or everyone that participates in consumer markets is a selfish asshole, or anyone who owns a business is a selfish asshole.
At the end of the day, when you go around assuming everyone is an asshole, you are the asshole.
It would also be just as dumb.
But sure keep telling yourself that some random strangers you know nothing about deserve this because you decided their vehicle falls into your laymen definition of increasingly arbitrary car classifications.
As other have pointed out there are SUVs that drastically range in size, weight, energy type, efficiency, safety features, etc.
Sure you can assume everyone that drives an SUV is a selfish asshole. You can also assume that everyone that eats meat is a selfish asshole, or everyone that participates in consumer markets is a selfish asshole, or anyone who owns a business is a selfish asshole.
At the end of the day, when you go around assuming everyone is an asshole, you are the asshole.
Because corporations pollute far more.
And also these cars have gotten more fuel efficient and has been pointed out numerous times many SUVs are just bigger sedans running on the same platform and engine.
Simply saying it's everyone who drives an suv fault is not only disingenuous its factually wrong. If every suv were taken off the road, people would still be driving *something*
Because of the way corporations lobbied for roads and highways and suburbs. These things didn't just happen by accident. They happened on purpose.
It's trying to pass the blame onto individual choice.
Fucking exxon knew climate change was real and fucking hid it for decades. Not only hid it purposefully put out bad science saying it wasn't real, so yall can all spare me the bullshit.
And before anyone gets on my ass, I have solar panels, an EV that we drive more than our fuel efficient mini van. Green enegry plan. All LED lights. Etc etc.
I really don't know what's more pathetic, this incredibly ill-thought-out and half-assed attempt at activism that comes off more like something stupid bored teenagers do on Halloween night...
...Or the people here defending it.
...Or the people here defending it.
Where do eco terrorists draw the line? Not every family can fit into a 2 door car or a small sedan. Some need a Mini-Van or other similar family car.
Guess what? the Mini-Van likely gets just as bad mileage as the "Gas Guzzler SUVS" you are saying are the evilest of evils.
At the same time many New SUV are not nearly the Gas Guzzlers of cars of old and seeing how these people seem to be hitting rich neighborhoods its likely they are targeting vehicles with better MPG then the SUVs in the poorer neighborhoods. But we know the truth. They wont dare step into the poorer neighborhoods and pull this bullshit for fear of getting their asses stomped
Guess what? the Mini-Van likely gets just as bad mileage as the "Gas Guzzler SUVS" you are saying are the evilest of evils.
At the same time many New SUV are not nearly the Gas Guzzlers of cars of old and seeing how these people seem to be hitting rich neighborhoods its likely they are targeting vehicles with better MPG then the SUVs in the poorer neighborhoods. But we know the truth. They wont dare step into the poorer neighborhoods and pull this bullshit for fear of getting their asses stomped
This is targeted at rich people for pretty obvious reasons. Not saying I agree with the vandalism, just saying
Ultimately all this did was inconvenience about a hundred different families. I would be shocked if even one of them were moved to stop using SUVs, but I guess this was more exciting than advocating for pro-pedestrian infrastructure and more accessible public transportation.
Of all the arguments this one must be the worst. Why are these activists targetting rich people and not the poor!!
That's literally the problem. The fact these cars are bigger and heavier makes them more polluting and deadly than the cars people were content to drive before, and it has to stop. I'm not saying no one should be driving an SUV, but the fact that SUV sales are through the roof in the past 5 years has made this a societal problem.
We are talking about Edinburgh here not the USA. The city centre especially is a nightmare to drive in at the best of times with narrow roads and cobblestone streets. The city is decent for cycling and has good public transport.
It's not only about climate change it is also about local air pollution and how dangerous these massive cars are to pedestrians, cyclists and the more responsible drivers. Once you get hit by these things it's night night even if they are driving slow. They have no place in a pedestrian-first city centre and most urban areas.
Politicians are content to do nothing. Motorists are a big voting bloc and SUVs are their vehicle of choice. But now we're seeing that people living in cities have had enough and are taking their neighbourhoods back. I hate that it has come to this but due to political inaction definitely something needed to be done.
If this is about the climate and the vehicles in question. rich or poor doesn't matter. SUV in general are more pricey than average cars
It's also easier than putting together a list of people that work for an oil company and targeting their cars specifically.
The point of activism and protest is to bring attention to an issue. In this case to bring attention to the problem in Edinburgh where SUVs are not really necessary. This is not in the US. Their actions here are an inconvenience to the rich people they targeted rather than the poor guy struggling to heat his house or not being able to buy food. The point is to push attention to the issue and force the government to take action and provide for affordable environmental friendly options for everyone.
There are already complaints in this thread about how inconvenient this is and how this is vandalism against innocent people. And you are saying that they should have targeted the poor neighborhoods?
If this is hard to understand, let me compare this to eating more environmental friendly and healthy food. Again rich people have more options compared to the poor guy who can only afford Mcdonald's. It is on the government to build a society where the poor have more options with regards to food or being environmentally friendly.
Rich people always have more options. In all countries. Unlike the poor person struggling with three jobs and needing to take their family to the school or the doctor's. Or the poor guy in Bangladesh using coal so that he can eat his one meal a day. And having no home because of climate change induced flooding that washed away entire villages.