What I think needs to be done about oversized trucks and SUV's.

[All Else Failed]

Indeed there is. It's call the order of the strong if I'm not mistaken. The guy with the most guns and the biggest army wins.

You can't say that guy won't be in this imaginary society, because who's going to stop him?

....no. Pleaseeeee read up on how a anarchist society would be ran.


The people would stop him, obviously. Anarchists aren't pacifists. Look at the various anarchist societies during the Spanish Revolution.

 

[IntruderLS1]

Okay, I'll look more into it.

I know that anarchists are not pacifists though. That's why I (maybe incorrectly) think that eventually there is going to be a tough guy who is willing to force his views on everybody else.

I'll report back to you with my findings. Do you have a 'best example' I should pay particular attention to? I'll start in 1920's Spain.

 

[IntruderLS1]

....no. Pleaseeeee read up on how a anarchist society would be ran.


The people would stop him, obviously. Anarchists aren't pacifists. Look at the various anarchist societies during the Spanish Revolution.

I want to say this in no uncertain terms. I've spent time tonight delving into your little world of anarchy. If you can support this idea, then I consider you to be dilusional, ill, and incompetently blind to reality.

I am deeply offended by this ideology. I don't think it is a stretch to call it the enemy of all humanity.

I'll hear nothing more from you on the blind, mis-guided ideals of anarchists. I could just spit to think there are people in the world like this. Let alone right here in America.

Spain was rule by militia. Not no rule at all.

 

[All Else Failed]

I want to say this in no uncertain terms. I've spent time tonight delving into your little world of anarchy. If you can support this idea, then I consider you to be dilusional, ill, and incompetently blind to reality.

I am deeply offended by this ideology. I don't think it is a stretch to call it the enemy of all humanity.

I'll hear nothing more from you on the blind, mis-guided ideals of anarchists. I could just spit to think there are people in the world like this. Let alone right here in America.

Spain was rule by militia. Not no rule at all.

My world of anarchy? I don't even subscribe to it in any way. I'm a democratic socialist. I just like certain points the ideology makes.



I can tell you don't understand it at all, due to your apparent anger. People only get angry over things like this because they don't understand it. Do yourself a favor and go read one of the dozens of books that have been written on how a anarchist society would be run. There out there.

If you REALLY, actually looked into it tonight, I want to hear at least 5 points that you came across that you found so detestable that you want to label it as "the enemy of all humanity". Really, 5 points on why you think its the bane of mankind, go.


Anarchy is a form of communal rule through all. Anarchy in no way implies that there is no social structure or determining bodies of law in that kind of society. I can tell you didn't really look into this at all. its not like it matters though, you seem to be pretty dead set in being a good ol' patriot.


You "could just spit to think there are people in the world like this. Let alone right here in America."????? You do realize there are people that think differently from you...right? It just seems like you JUST discovered that there are ideas like this out there. Do you want these people who think this way kicked out of the country?

I'm also not interested in speaking with you if you're going to be this knee-jerk about it and calling me mentally ill. Have a good night.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

Yes? :confused


Its responsible car maintenance.


If i had a family of five I would just buy a minivan.

no its common sense. Bigger engines normally ----->use more gas---->burn it off at a more expedient rate--->thus more pollution---->lends to the natural process of global warming.

Well, your Elantra has a small engine which gets good mileage.

If you buy a minivan you're getting a bigger engine, which burns more gas at a more expedient rate, thus creating more pollution.

You enjoy he idea of minimalism. Only buy what you need and not anymore.

You can shovel the snow off your driveway, don't buy that gas powered snow blower.

They have perfectly good blades on wheels you can mow your yard with. Don't buy that gas lawnmower.

It's called a convenience. YOU could be riding a bicycle to class or work, but you don't. You get into your little car and help contribute to global warming.

You could buy blocks of ice to put into an ice box to keep your food cold. But you don't, you have a refrigerator. Last I checked refrigerant if released into the atmosphere burns off the ozone.

Let me guess you have never ever ever used the AC in your car? (yeah right)

Your ideolgy makes me sick as it does Scott. Let go of it.

 

[redsMULLT1]

no its common sense. Bigger engines normally ----->use more gas---->burn it off at a more expedient rate--->thus more pollution---->lends to the natural process of global warming.

Not all the time there chief. Depends on what the vehicle is, the aerodynamics, the weight, the fuel type, tire type, the level of rolling resistance, and many many more things. Just because it looks great on paper doesn't mean it actually is. With a diesel motor.. the bigger the mega horsepower, monster torque machine.. the more efficient.. when used properly. I got way better fuel mileage when I was driving the Peterbilt that had a Caterpillar C15-625 horsepower with 2,050 lbs.-ft. of torque than I ever got with a smaller diesel. The smaller motor has to work harder to do the same amount of work. Which requires more fuel.

 

[All Else Failed]

Not all the time there chief. Depends on what the vehicle is, the aerodynamics, the weight, the fuel type, tire type, the level of rolling resistance, and many many more things. Just because it looks great on paper doesn't mean it actually is. With a diesel motor.. the bigger the mega horsepower, monster torque machine.. the more efficient.. when used properly. I got way better fuel mileage when I was driving the Peterbilt that had a Caterpillar C15-625 horsepower with 2,050 lbs.-ft. of torque than I ever got with a smaller diesel. The smaller motor has to work harder to do the same amount of work. Which requires more fuel.

I'm not comparing truck to truck though.

 

[All Else Failed]

Well, your Elantra has a small engine which gets good mileage.

If you buy a minivan you're getting a bigger engine, which burns more gas at a more expedient rate, thus creating more pollution.

You enjoy he idea of minimalism. Only buy what you need and not anymore.

You can shovel the snow off your driveway, don't buy that gas powered snow blower.

They have perfectly good blades on wheels you can mow your yard with. Don't buy that gas lawnmower.

It's called a convenience. YOU could be riding a bicycle to class or work, but you don't. You get into your little car and help contribute to global warming.

You could buy blocks of ice to put into an ice box to keep your food cold. But you don't, you have a refrigerator. Last I checked refrigerant if released into the atmosphere burns off the ozone.

Let me guess you have never ever ever used the AC in your car? (yeah right)

Your ideolgy makes me sick as it does Scott. Let go of it.

Yes, a minivan has a bigger engine than a smaller car, but its a lot better than a huge truck engine when it comes to pollution.


Yes, I do enjoy minimalism. Its a nice way to live, but I do recognize that cars are too integrated into out society to ever get rid of them, so I just see it as a practicality problem.


To tell you the truth, I have never, EVER turned on the AC in my car. NO joking.


what ideology? I'm not a fucking anarchist.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

Basically what you're stating in this thread is you wouldn't let people buy a luxury just because they can afford the luxury. I don't know how we scored so closely on our political outlooks.

 

[All Else Failed]

Basically what you're stating in this thread is you wouldn't let people buy a luxury just because they can afford the luxury. I don't know how we scored so closely on our political outlooks.

No people can buy trucks and SUV's if they really need them. To buy something that is lending to the destruction of our Earth when you don't absolutely need it is selfish. Things like that need to be regulated.


But I'm tired of going back and forth....when gas hits $4 a gallon here (which it will) you'll see what I'm talking about.

 

[dt3]

No people can buy trucks and SUV's if they really need them. To buy something that is lending to the destruction of our Earth when you don't absolutely need it is selfish. Things like that need to be regulated.


But I'm tired of going back and forth....when gas hits $4 a gallon here (which it will) you'll see what I'm talking about.

But, as it's already been pointed out, the manufacture process of ANYTHING causes pollution.

As much as you love civil liberties and individual rights, I can't believe you'd regulate the vehicle people can drive.

 

[All Else Failed]

But, as it's already been pointed out, the manufacture process of ANYTHING causes pollution.

As much as you love civil liberties and individual rights, I can't believe you'd regulate the vehicle people can drive.

I realize this, but I'm trying to reduce this pollution as much as possible. getting rid of something that we don't need it a good step.


This isn't about rights!!!! You don't even have the right to drive, its a state mandated privilege. Plus, the government pretty much regulates what you can drive in the first place. The government regulates speed limits, what kind of vehicles can travel where, safety guidelines, inspection requirments, mileage laws, they regulate the very road you drive on. I'm all for reducing the role of government in your private life, but you DO NOT have a legal right to drive a car.

 

[dt3]

This isn't about rights!!!! You don't even have the right to drive, its a state mandated privilege. Plus, the government pretty much regulates what you can drive in the first place. The government regulates speed limits, what kind of vehicles can travel where, safety guidelines, inspection requirments, mileage laws, they regulate the very road you drive on. I'm all for reducing the role of government in your private life, but you DO NOT have a legal right to drive a car.

I have the right to choose what I spend my money on, because NOWHERE is it written that I don't have that right.

Show me somewhere that says the government has the right to dictate to me what to buy.

Every regulation you point to is done for the safety of everyone else. I'm pretty sure the government has a right/responsibility to provide for the safety of it's citizens.

Hell, I don't have a "legal right" to live in my house. Should the government take away my house?

 

[All Else Failed]

I have the right to choose what I spend my money on, because NOWHERE is it written that I don't have that right.

Show me somewhere that says the government has the right to dictate to me what to buy.

Every regulation you point to is done for the safety of everyone else. I'm pretty sure the government has a right/responsibility to provide for the safety of it's citizens.

Hell, I don't have a "legal right" to live in my house. Should the government take away my house?

...which is why they need to be regulated because they spew toxins at a greater rate.


There is also no place where it says you DO have the right to buy something harmful to everyone else. A LOT of things that are regulated aren't in the constitution. Thats why its a living document. Should a factory be able to not use procautions to lower emission rates just because it doesn't say that in the constitution? Nope, thats why its regulated.



No, you shouldn't be kicked out of your house. You can regulate how much energy you use in a house.

 

[dt3]

What you're proposing is a complete removal of our personal rights. Whether you see it or not. I'm not going to keep wasting my time to point out how this is completely contradictory to your views on other subjects.

 

[All Else Failed]

What you're proposing is a complete removal of our personal rights. Whether you see it or not. I'm not going to keep wasting my time to point out how this is completely contradictory to your views on other subjects.

What?

Its really not.

You know what, as much as I present my view, you people won't accept it so I'm done. You have my ideas, think of them what you will. You can hold onto your suv's for all I care, when they start rationing gas out again in the foreseeable future you'll get what this was about.

 

[redsMULLT1]

I'm not comparing truck to truck though.

Well no shit

 

[TheOriginalJames]

What?

Its really not.

You know what, as much as I present my view, you people won't accept it so I'm done. You have my ideas, think of them what you will. You can hold onto your suv's for all I care, when they start rationing gas out again in the foreseeable future you'll get what this was about.

We accept your view. Your view is that regardless of whether or not driving is a right, you don't feel we're allowed to spend our money on whatever we choose; THIS is the problem we see with your arguement. You're proposing that we only drive a vehicle that will hold the bear minimum of our property or family, completely disregarding any special or extenuating circumstances such as moving or hauling large loads without having to rent/borrow a bigger vehicle.

You claim to do it for the environment when everything you do and buy harms our environment just as much as the person driving the SUV down the road.

The computer you use uses electricity. Is that powered by coal, hydro electric, nuclear? oil?

You don't live near a major waterfall or a dam, everything else pollutes.

The plastic your compuer is made from; came from presses which use power, which when created, pollutes.


Restricting what kind of vehicles are allowed to drive due to insufficient "RIGHTS" will pose a VERY minimal decline of pollutants.



This entire thread is completely inane, as is that reasoning. Once you realize what you're proposing would get you boo'd off stage as you try your run for president, you'll see our point.

 

[Maulds]

This entire thread is completely inane, as is that reasoning.

I pointed that out 11 pages ago.

 

[GameCrazed]

Jeez, I missed alot.

All Else Failed:

1.) Dude, seriously, if you can't argue my point then just say so, stop ignoring it.

Why should we be focusing on just "big trucks" and their waste, what about you and you're waste? You'rre still driving a car which is still polluting the atmosphere. Why not drive a car that runs on sloar energy? That would actually be a solution to the problem.

2.) N/A

3.) Okay, now you're using the Constitution as a backing which you jsut said you weren't. And you never rebutted my original statement about that subject.

4.) N/A