Anti 4x4

Utter c*ck..

Id rather watch Hugh make a chicken run.

What was the programme? Might be able to see it on iplayer.

"here is a roundabout, there are no pedestrian crossings on it - here is the old geezer who insists on trying to cross and complains because the lights won't let him" - er no crossings for a reason tosspot!

usual anti 4x4 claptrap - heres a question - which is larger - mondeo or discovery 1? which exerts more ground pressure - mondeo (1615kg) or disco 1 (300 tdi

5dr 2100kg)

I don't think you'd be impressed at all.

Martin

I never am, hence the lack of telly!

I doubt I'd bother watching it anyhow, might watch it if it mentioned me by name specifically but that's about it.

Are we all so insecure in our love of Land Rovers that any programme that dares to suggest 4x4's are not the perfect vehicle for every occasion that we have to immediately deride it as anti-4x4 rubbish (or utter crap as one respondent put it)? This wasn't exclusively an anti-4x4 programme - it was far more critical of cyclists - but a relatively comprehensive look at the state of our road infrastructure and it's users - well as comprehensive as you can be in an hour.

The big 4x4 is not the best car for the inner city. It takes up too much space, is difficult to manoeuvre in tight spaces, cuts down the visibility for other drivers, cyclists and pedestrians and is far from the safest vehicle to use for the school run.

What the programme did show is that the majority of road users think they own the road and that no-one else has any right to be there. It highlighted the thoughtless, selfish, indeed callous, disregard that many people have towards their fellow man and the rule of law.

Simply pooh-poohing programmes like this in public does nothing for our collective reputation and just gives the anti's more evidence to suggest we are mindless morons with no concern for anyone or anything but ourselves ... and if that's all we can do, then maybe they've got a point.

Martin, this post was not aimed specifically at you but is a general response to the first four or five replies to your OP. Nothing personal :-)

I didn't think for one minute that it was but you have some very valid points that I hadn't given much thought to. What pissed me off was the amount of cycles that were deliberately making it worse by illegally travelling more than two abreast, should have been done for it. It would be alright I suppose if most of the women driving their kids to school could expect their kids to be safe on the streets if left in someone else's care and, let's face it, how long does it take them to park and drop their kids off FFS? Thankfully I'm long past those duties but I always made sure my kids made it to school and bollocks to the parking problems. No big deal. :-)

Martin

Some road rage guff. Probably had some saloon car driving inadequate foaming about another 4x4 driving inadequate. Both of them hate cyclists even more than they hate each other, probably.

Chicken run was interesting, free range for me from now on.

On or around Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:15:21 GMT, SteveG enlightened us thusly:

I agree with all that, but would add that there shouldn't be school runs. It's a modern phenomenon and not a good one. Kids close to the school should walk, those further away should use a bus, provided by the LEA in cases where there isn't any suitable public service.

for example... if the children I take on my minibus were to be taken by car, there'd be 3 or 4 cars instead of 1 minibus.

I wonder if it was the same one that was on a year or so ago, certainly fits the description, if so then no I'm not missing anything ;-)

And then there's the truckers! And tractors!

And old ladies at 30MPH in 60MPH zones etc etc...

I'm not missing anything in that programme because it's all up here ..

The ONLY reason our two get dropped at school is that it is directly on the way to work. If Steve has to be in work early the boys and I walk in. If Steve has the car away on business ditto. For us the school run is also pull up near to school, let boys out, see them safely across the road & onto school grounds, drive off to work. None of this occupy all the spaces nearest school and then hang around in the supervised playground for half an hour gossiping. Mind you there are a fair few parents round here who stay to make sure their offspring have actually entered the building, not just been seen to the school - maybe they don't trust them to stay there.....

And don't get me started on the taxi drivers that pull up on the yellow zigzags thus blocking the road 'cos of the parents all legally parked down the other side of a not terribly wide road while they are in the playground.

Lizzy

The feature of them that annoys me most as a Londoner is that you can't see through them (or rather some designs) from a car when they're parked on a corner and you're trying to get out of a side street. Of course this also applies to some SUV type estates. And of course vans - but then a van is a working vehicle rather than a fashion statement which is all many are in an urban environment.

Ditto for my lad. However taking a bright yellow SIIa with extended shackles, largish tyres, rock sliders and a generally battered appearance is so popular with all the kids that they all know me by name and their parents seem to approve of the amusement and interest value. Over the last few years I reckon about half the kids in the school have been for a ride in it, and a few of them (and several parents) have ventured offroad with me at some time.

Agreed. Picking up or dropping off using the 101 is always a popular option with the kids :)

Lizzy

Every single new car available is a fashion statement of some description - is it just the 4x4 statement you can't abide?

and that's the problem, it isn't the most sensible vehicle for in town use and the people who tend to use them for that are in general upper/middle class, which annoys the anti's (let's be honest, these people are generally anti anything that isn't on their socialist agenda) as much as the vehicle itself, and unfortunately now anyone with a 4x4 gets tarred with the same brush because of the proliferation of them in towns.

However, is is their choice to drive such a vehicle though, and why should anyone tell them they can't? You could equally argue that my

300+ year old house isn't very economical, totally impractical, and that I should move into a nice modern square box that has been built with lots of insulation, the environment and practicality in mind - but I don't want to - it is my money and my choice!

I agree that it wasn't totally anti-4x4, though I do think they chose to film a private school - a school chosen by parents, rather than just being the closest one to them (hence more people will live further away and drive) in an area with a high number of 4x4's around generally - I do wonder if they would have had the same impact filming near where I use to live in Bristol, as I hardly recall seeing any 4x4's around the state schools that were near us, it seemed that most children appeared to walk.

I did like the program though, particularly the bit about stopping the idiots on bikes at red lights, and my wife and I pissed ourselves laughing when we saw the Police pedal bike with sirens & lights!

Matt

I think the problem with 4WD's at school is you can't see kids walking because you and your view are so high. You get and your kids get there safe in your tank, but running over someone else's kids is a real possibility.

Yes - even a G-Whizz ;^O

No need to state "but then a van is a working vehicle rather than a fashion statement" just to get a prickly response then eh?

It's a real possibility in any car, and there's no reason why "you" can't see kids walking when you're in a 4x4, total nonsense. What car do you drive?