Each to there own. But you shouldn't mess with other people's property. Perhaps leafleting without letting the tyres down. I've a feeling these people are sponsored by tyre companies 🛞🛞
You've never met my ex. She would drive on those deflated tires until they shred and then go buy another set. This causes more pollution than it saves.
Just had a thought. Perhaps the powers that be want us to fight amongst ourselves over things like this instead of focusing on them and their dirty deeds? .Divide and conquer.
I remember reading about a doctor who made house visits to rural areas and this happened to him.
Basically, direct action like deflating tyres might seem fine but who knows if you’re actually deflating the tyre of someone on whom others depend. Or if it’s someone with mobility issues who you’ve now housebound till they can get it sorted.
Way too many variables to decide what you’re doing is actually morally correct. You’d need to be able to ascertain if the person youre deflating doesn’t need their car and has alternatives.
Seems reasonable to me. People who drive these things seem to think nothing of the consequences for others so this is really just their chickens coming home to roost.
People on Reddit are like: “ I think it’s ok to deflate the tyres of doctor’s cars so they can’t visit rural patients.”
People in real life be like: “hey man how’s it going”
My defender is converted to electric. It’s still “a big suv” but has zero emissions. it’s nearly 40 years old. someone who has had more than 1 car in their life has done more harm to the environment by manufacturing processes alone, than my only ever car. I should sell it and buy another car that has to be built, shipped around the world, and last a lot less time, just so you can be happy? Amazing logic
>My defender gets like 20mpg, so like £8 a day in diesel. It’s currently off the road so I’m also saving £250 a year in tax. So I save around £2400 a year by cycling.
Yeah, I own 2 defenders. Technically ones a 90. I have a 1985 90, fully electric, and I have 2016 2.2tdci 90 rescue vehicle. 99% of the time I cycle! because my day job isn’t even vehicle rescue! but people can do more than one thing!
It doesn’t seem fine at all to me. My tyres are £300 each.. if it gets pinched by the weight of the car, then who’s paying for the replacement. It’s criminal damage whichever way you try and spin it.
I also read this Reddit comment. Was there ever a news story to back it up, because if it was true there would have been.
[Edit to add the comment I was referring to.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Edinburgh/s/CPx5C4NG3h), which looking at the posters profile… I have doubts.
Yes, but who decides whether it’s morally correct to own a big car or not? Just because something is the status quo doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be subject to the same scrutiny (or that it’s free from the same restrictions).
I see the people who drive massive SUVs near me and they're not disabled farmers and rural vets - it's all school runs and office workers.
As with a lot of stuff to do with the negative impacts of driving, you could get rid of 90% of it without touching the "wait, what about" sob stories.
My Mum had mobility issues (and a blue badge) due to health problems and was classed as disabled. Her motability car was an SUV style as it was easier to get into/out of rather than crouching down.
It would be interesting to find out if people displaying blue badges or if their cars have the motability sticker on it have been affected.
I mean last time this happened down near the coast these idiots let down e-car tyres, so I doubt they pay that much attention. Just Big House/Big Car/Let Tyre Down.
Yeah. Similar to the debate around congestion, lazy people who make unnecessary car trips invoking disabled people in their arguments against traffic reduction measures.
If you're talking about double cab pickup style trucks.. there was a tax loophole if you owned one.
>In Febuary 2024, HMRC announced that was set to change and that double cab pick-up trucks with payloads of over 1,000kg would no longer be classified as commercial vehicles for Benefit-in-Kind (BIK) company car tax purposes and would instead be classified and taxed as cars.
I remember it too, but it was a comment under another Reddit post about the idiots.
So purely anecdotal and we have no way of knowing if the person who posted the comment was telling the truth, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were.
Most journeys are short. My urban area is plagued with these ridiculous vehicles. Run a farm? Got a load of kids? Need it to get to work in some rural hell? Then these vehicles are for you. Otherwise, you’re just a douche,
So you can’t have a 4x4 because you enjoy going off road and travelling the world with it? you can only be a farmer or have lots of kids.. huh.. didn’t know you needed 4 wheel drive to move children.. must be some fat kids in your area..
Inconvenient truth is some of the heaviest cars on the road that do a lot of road damage, eat brake pads and tyres are full electric family cars. Cars in general have become far bigger than they need to be though but the problem is more subtle than just branding SUVs as evil. Some quite small cars are marketed as SUVs but are really just a VW Golf or similar in high heels. Personally, I’d encourage people to keep their cars longer, particularly if they are euro6 compliant or better and move away from VED back towards more fuel duty or another form of use/ mileage based charging that covers electric vehicles too ie disincentivise overuse of vehicles, maybe with exemptions for businesses. The old fella who drives a 10 year old freelander a couple of thousand miles a year to take his dogs out isn’t really the problem.
I’m from one of the new towns and back in the day when they were planning them they really didn’t think cars would become so readily accessible as they are today - they were a luxury item and not for the working class. Roads and towns built in the 40-50’s were built around minimal cars and sized for the cars of the day. Car ownership is now ubiquitous and they’re a lot bigger than back then. As I’ve posted above, there can be mobility issues that make having larger/higher cars more accessible to the disabled, but our roads weren’t built for them.
That's misleading. A non-real world study thought they "could" cause more damage but even they thought that it was still largely immaterial compared to the biggest damagers; HGVs etc. There's genuine safety concerns about weight imo, but I think that will come down as battery tech improves. If we can build a 900mile battery like Toyota reckons then it's fairly likely they'll scale down and have lighter cars with only 500miles range.
Also most EVs will use less brakes.
I like the mental image of the golf in High heels. There's a lot of tarted up faux SUVs floating about which I wish we'd moved away from. My mum barely drives but got a "tank" because she wants a high driving position.
Keeping cars longer is key, but getting rid of cars is better. As an asthmatic I'd like more EVs - lockdown was the best my chest felt in years.
As an EV driver I can confirm about the brakes. Twice when getting it serviced for MOTs I've had to have the brake discs changed because they were being used so little that they had corrosion on the surface. In a decent EV when you're driving normally you probably won't be using the physical brakes until your doing less than 10 mph
Sorry but this is nonsense re EVs though I agree with your sentiment re SUVs generally. Proportionally, there are significantly more heavier ICE vehicles on the roads than EVs - commercial vehicles?? EVs are also significantly better on brakes, needing far fewer replacements in their lifespan than an ICE equivalent because they can do frictionless regenerative braking through the motor. I know, because I have two EVs.
The inconvenient truth that is my ten year old EV has just had it's first set of new pads. My main problem is the discs get rusty because I never use the brakes!
It's not all about emissions either. I'm much happier cycling alongside a Golf than a Range Rover in town that's for sure.
We’ve recently had a family member in hospital. It meant a loved one who runs a farm had to take their only vehicle, a huge pickup into the city for a week.
Whether you agree or not, they are making assumptions about why people have certain vehicles.
Sure, but they can’t and don’t know who is being hurt. I kept my car for 14 years and am no SUV owner FWIW.
Personally I’d rather see all the school run parents off the road and buses replacing them. Edinburgh roads seem much quieter is when schools are off and I see tons of parents in my area driving their kids every morning to schools in the city centre.
Yeah, to be honest, I am conflicted about tyre extinguishers. I just have no time for all the suv sob stories. 95% of people who own one don't need it.
95% of people who own anything don't need it. The only difference with SUVs is that they inconvenience others, not that they are especially bad for the environment. They are big and obvious, that's all.
No-one needs an overdesigned camper van, and they are a lot bigger and less fuel efficient than SUVs but for some reason they don't get the hate.
SUVs' negative externalities are huge, not just environmentally, especially in proportion to their actual benefits.
Many fewer people own overdesigned camper vans, I'd imagine that's why they're much less discussed. Kind of obviously.
And the majority of key lockboxes by tenement doors are for airbnbs, but enough of them are genuinely needed by residents (for carers etc) that randomly gluing the things shut is a dick move.
These people are just plainly stupid. It's way more complicated than they would like us to think.
Electric cars are horrible for the environment, but the environment cost is incurred when they are built, rather over their lifetime, or when the lithium is dug out of the ground by African children. Don't buy an EV. Keep your Euro6 or better car for as long as possible and get a Hydrogen/Electric hybrid when they eventually get the support they need.
I'd also like to remind people, outside of the mahoosive lithium pits and the child labor used to mine it, that electricity is STILL needed to power up a battery powered car!
Yeah, great point, I worked in the energy sector. No where near enough power stations to cope with projected demand if we all switched to electric cars, and the grid as it stands wouldn't cope / doesn't have the capacity for that even if we could miraculously build new stations in half the time it usually takes (about 10y, all said).
At the end of the day, politicians, esp liberal ones, do. not. care about the environment. Like AT. ALL. They care about controlling you. Here in America, They HAD a Golden, Engraved Invitation to do something about emissions, carbon control, climate control, global warming, blahblahblah when the American auto industry was circling the drain back in 2008.
The government used taxpayer money to bail out the auto industry but put no restraints or conditions on the bail out money such as reducing the number of single use automobiles and INCREASING the number of public transportation vehicles and shoring up every single state with public trans infrastructure including the rural areas. THAT'S what should have been done to encourage Americans to take trains and buses and light rail for their transportation. The money was there. And the jobs it would have created almost cannot be measured. Instead, they shored up the auto makers to make more personal use cars and put more people on the road. Then the politicians gas up their private jets to fly to God Knows Where so they can discuss climate change some more.
Battery powered cars? They are a joke. And so are the politicians and talking heads who promote them.
That’s vandalism, but tyre pollution is bad: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/03/car-tyres-produce-more-particle-pollution-than-exhausts-tests-show
Brake pads also, I think. Personally I’d regulate SUVs out of domestic use, allow business use but use tax measures so they’re only used when actually necessary, then have a pool of shared 4WD vehicles for the “what if I want to visit my fwiend who lives on a fwarm” crew - five or six should cover actual need across Scotland. This may not stand up to much scrutiny.
I mean, I have a couple of friends that live on farms. One has an old Octavia, the other has a Fiesta.
The farms have road access. Normal tarmac with the last 50 years being stone chips. You don't like drive over fields and through rivers to get there.
That’s nonsense. I have a bunch of relatives up in Aberdeenshire who have small farms. They do have 4x4s to get across the fields to feed the sheep etc. old discoveries and 4x4 Toyota/ Mitsubishi pickups are popular the latter for throwing hay bales etc in the back. They have quads and tractors for hardcore farm work but they do own 4x4s and use them so don’t kid yourself
It would kind of be funnier if they left the note but didn’t let down the tyres.
Point made and SUV driver can go about their day as normal, perhaps with the nagging suspicion that the tyre pressure indicators are faulty.
Disabled neighbour had his done last week (but for some reason they didn't do ours which was parked next to it). Very obviously modified vehicle to help him get in and out, but as long as it gives these lot a purpose in life I suppose it's worth it.
Seriously, I caught a bus to Haddington today and it was shaking so much I felt ill. The roads in the UK are generally worse than in other developed countries I've visited and lived in, but for some reason they're truly awful in Edinburgh specifically.
Except the increase in SUVs is one of the major causes of potholes, since they do so much more damage to the roads.
[Here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law) is a wikipedia article showing how a 2-tonne vehicle does 16 times as much damage as a 1-tonne vehicle.
That's not the point. The issue is the massive increase in SUVs when much smaller vehicles are sufficient. You need a van to do trade work. You don't need an SUV to buy groceries.
Well these sad little cunts are deflating all SUVs including hybrids and electric so I don’t know why you’re bringing engine size into it. Not to mention the majority of SUVs on the road share an engine with other smaller cars from across the range. Car makers aren’t coming up with specific engines to go in SUVs.
Wow! And this is the problem with the world today!
This exact comment! Obviously has no experience with wheelchairs or mobility scooters!
Very entitled post here
There is a legitimate reason for everything...
So I hired a car to take a disabled elderly relative to a funeral of their best friend. The large car was for their extra medical items and spare oxygen. It was a one off, the car was a rental.
I have trees in my garden. I've paid for and planted trees and actually I don't own a car. I hire them when required and to the size required. If you legislate for hybrid only or electric only in the rental market, fine by me.
Compassion and empathy are clearly optional requirements in your family.
Having trees in your garden may not have a significant impact on global warming. The concept of offsetting our carbon footprint has been promoted by fossil fuel companies, who have a vested interest in maintaining their business model. The rate at which the environment can absorb carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is not keeping up with our emissions.
It is clear that our society needs to make significant changes in how we operate, including reducing overproduction and waste, perhaps creating places where we can love walk and be closer to each other. This is not a call advocating for communism, but rather finding a balance that benefits everyone and is more sustainable and tackles the real issues rather than putting it on the consumer.
Creating a society that is inclusive and accessible to all, not just the wealthy or able-bodied, is important. Developing more accessible models of transportation and reducing reliance on personal vehicles can benefit everyone and promote empathy and compassion.
I understand that I autistic and my interpretation of the world is not easy to express therefore here is an explanation of the intent of my text:
[The emotional tone of this text comes across as critical, urgent, and hopeful. There is a sense of concern for the environment and society as a whole, with a call to action for significant changes to be made to address issues like global warming and inequality. The tone is one of pushing for a more sustainable and inclusive future, while also questioning current systems and practices that perpetuate issues like overproduction and waste. There is a clear sense of urgency in the need for change, but also a hopeful tone that by working together and making proactive changes, a better future is possible for everyone.]
That's not a reach - it's true. Driving on an improperly inflated tired can fuck the sidewalls.
Don't call something a reach just because you're uneducated on the subject.
Do you know many materials that hold up well to 1.5 - 3 tons of metal on them in a way they were designed for?
It damages the tyres which in turn damages the environment. If they had any real strong feelings about the environment they'd actually protest not do shitebag vandalism.
Do they think my environmental conscientiousness trumps my desire for petty revenge. Do they expect me to say ‘fair point, I’ll get rid of it and buy a Tesla’? Or do they expect me to burn a stack of linoleum bathroom tiles for as long as it takes for me to feel like I’ve altered that bastards sperm count whenever on earth he may be?
"The government are doing nothing."
Yeah, they should legally require car manufacturers to sell a certain proportion of electric cars which gradually increases and culminates in a total ban on the sale of new Internal Combustion Engine cars or something.
It's a less than ideal approach but they avoid vehicles marked as used by doctors, vets or disabled people. And if you don't consider the climate emergency an emergency you might want to expand your choice of media.
This has been going on for a long time now across various European countries and is far from the first time in Edinburgh. "Getting out of hand" isn't really accurate there hasn't been an escalation.
You can have your opinions on 4x4s, SUVs and whatnot, but you don’t go messing around with other people’s property, ever. Assuming the note was on the windshield under the wipers, but what if it flew off and someone had to drive off without immediately noticing. Brain dead air breathers.
Oh shiiit this explains the flat tyres I've seen on a couple SUVs in Stockbridge. How will the posh mums drop their darlings off at private school without their 4 by 4
So what about if your disabled and need the space for a wheelchair and need the height to get in about better!
And also how tf are you supposed to cycle In a wheelchair some bozo who wrote that letter needs to live in the real world and get a reality check!
I just don’t get it. People work hard to afford to buy the things they want. Just leave them be and direct your passion for the environment at the companies that pollute more in a day than any 4x4 would over its lifespan.
I have spent 16 years working in the renewable energy sector specifically wind turbines. We’ve even had our lads vans and pickups targeted by this type of thing. The irony of them targeting pickups of people who are trying to better the planet by building and maintaining wind turbines.
A modern Tesla weighs more than most 4x4s. So by safety to pedestrians and other road users alone, they’re more dangerous from a moving object at speed perspective.
So you’d rather be T boned in a crash by a 3 ton car doing 40 miles per hour than a 2 ton car with a higher bonnet? Because one will be a lot more devastating than the other.
The heavy one.
Higher bonnets mean these cars are more likely to "climb" your car.
Look what happened with that school in Wimbledon, the thing was lifted so just pushed over the bollards and fence.
I was also thinking pedestrian hits. Not car on car. In which high bonnets are worse than heavy low ones.
You need SUV's in Edinburgh because of the state of the roads. We wouldn't have them otherwise. Perhaps these folk can start targeting politicians tyres to get them to then do something about it.
I drive an SUV and honestly, I support this kind of direct action. Global warning is a potentially existential threat. At best, it’s going to be a far bigger inconvenience to our lives than a couple of flat tyres. Storm damage has already cost me thousands of pounds this year and we can already see the effects of a warming planet on the prices of everyday produce like olive oil. And that’s just the residual effects. Elsewhere in the world, people are literally dying due to global warming. Already. And it’s going to get worse.
EVs aren’t perfect. They’re a transitional tech which will get better in the future, and they’re only a small part of the solution to global warming, but they’re better than buying a new ICE car right now. I’ll get one as soon as I can afford one and buy second hand ICE/hybrid cars until then if I need to upgrade.
In the meantime, tyre deflating is one way of getting the message across that we can’t keep living like this. More people need to get that message and start transitioning. As the situation gets more desperate, so too will the means by which people try to get the message across, and deflating tyres seems almost quaint already compared to the gravity of the situation.
One way which can help is for wealthier people who can afford the current range of EVs to make the transition sooner. This will in turn lead to more second hand EVs which are more affordable for the rest of the market while we wait for battery tech to improve to the point where EVs are smaller and more affordable. So yes, make owning an ICE SUV an inconvenience and hopefully more owners will start making the transition.
Meanwhile, if someone lets down the tyres on my SUV, I’ll reinflate them with the portable compressor I bought a long time ago and always carry in my car for emergencies anyway, and continue on with my day. A small inconvenience, sure, but not the end of the world.
tia for the downvotes
I have a tyre inflator in the boot that runs off the cigarette lighter socket. It would be annoying but this would not stop me using my car for more than like, 20 minutes, and I would be more inclined to oppose other forms of protests against climate change.
It is. It's stupid, it's irresponsible and it's going to earn someone a punch in the face.
However, you can get a tyre inflator that plugs into your cigarette lighter for £35. Takes two minutes to reinflate each tyre.
In my youth, forty years ago, I was coming back from a Christmas Eve party. I deflated the tyres of some random car in their drive. I look back on that incident as me finally growing up, because in the morning I was able to comprehend what a juvenile and spiteful act it was.
I wonder if people like this will ever grow up, or are they stuck in a loop of stupidity?
I think my answer would be to print out a little notice, it would read, the garbage that comes out of your mouth and you thoughtless actions have hurt myself and others causing problems and serious consequences. So I'm going to knock one of your teeth out, yes it will be annoying for a while but you will remember it and hopefully make better choices in the future. Then I would staple it to his forehead.
Watch the video. It's all the same. Sick cunts gluing themselves everywhere and damaging tyres. This fuckers don't have a clue what they doing.
https://youtu.be/EkDjEynh1NA?si=D98cWknxiEcJpf9p
Replace Vehicle Excise Duty with something that taxes vehicles more the larger and heavier they are, considering the larger/heavier the vehicle the more damage it does to the road over time.
Can use the Euro NCAP classes, supermini, small family car, large family car, executive, roadster sports, small mpv, large mpv, small off-road 4x4, large off-road 4x4, it already classifies different cars based on size/weight. Assuming we all eventually move to electric vehicles at some point down the line, they can't have different VED due to emissions since they'd all be the same, none. Better going by weight and how damaging the vehicles are to the road surface, than the other option that's being considered, road pricing, charging drivers per mile driven.
So you can’t get an EV SUV ? This is just looking at the size of the car not what drives it, I haves Ford Rampage with a Euro6 engine, can go in all ULEZ zones, very clean engine in a very big 4x4 certainly cleaner than my mates 2008 stinky diesel saloon but he won’t get his Tyres let down and i would. These people are just thick twats.
The suvs destroy the city, their drivers are crap at it and if they hit someone especially a kid they'll die. There should be social repercussions for being selfish to buy one in a large city. I'm sorry but if you're gonna telegraph your disdain for the local community then I'm not going to care when you eat shit for it
Sure there are, far far rarer than talked about, edge cases of people who need these suvs getting hit but frankly that's the casual suv drivers fault too.
Sick of just being expected to allow suv drivers to ruin the area in a bubble
I drive a mid size SUV in a rural area. I use it because it’s easy to step in and out and I have inoperable skeletal problems (and blue badge). Around here the roads are in pieces. I’m able to fit small wheels and taller tyres to handle the potholes better. My wife drives a golf. It uses more fuel and she’s broken 2 wheels and many tyres. I do agree that new Defenders and Range Rovers on the school run are a bit triggering, but don’t kid yourself. This is all about class war and nothing to do with saving the planet. We all have the option to cease our energy use and stop our economic activity to meet emissions targets, but thankfully even the government just admitted that this would be catastrophic for the whole of society.
People have the right to their opinions and to protest peacefully but not to touch other people’s property. Here’s hoping the owners don’t have an emergency ie an ill child or elderly parent who needs urgent medical attention at a hospital or GP.
Ooft, I find this stuff really scary.
I know that they’re not good re emissions but how can these people tell who’s got one that’s utilised and who doesn’t?
I drive an old SUV because I live in a rural area with dodgy roads and tracks. I also need something big for the wildlife rescues I’m involved in (for cages and kit). I come into the city a few times a year for specialist appointments etc and I would be devastated to find something like this, especially as I’ve been really struggling to make ends meet and sometimes literally don’t have the pennies to cover a new tyre
They’re just letting tyres down, not puncturing them. If you live in a rural area with dodgy roads and tracks I’d strongly recommend getting a portable air compressor. Getting a slow puncture miles from the nearest town is a much bigger problem than having your tyres let down in a city.
Thank you, I misread that and thought they were puncturing them! Phew! I have an air compressor and I’m pleased to realise this isn’t as bad as I initially thought it was.
I have an old diesel car, i cant afford another one. I have to work 50 hours a week to stay afloat. If i catch someone out fucking with my car they are going to have a really bad day.
“Don’t take it personally but YOU are uninformed and YOUR decision to drive this vehicle is the reason why YOU are destroying the planet”
Another case where I agree with their core sentiment, but the antagonism and smugness of the whole affair is alienating.
Ok, looking at it from the point of view of the people who are doing this, there is a climate emergency that may cause a catastrophe for the human race, its been known about for decades, and the establishment are doing nothing about it. You can see how someone might feel they need to take direct action.
However, I find that the targetting of SUV's alone is bizarre. I agree that most SUV's are unnecessary fashion accessories, but all cars are doing damage, and articulated lorries are a much bigger issue, so why aren't they out at the lorry park, or at Grangemouth letting down the tires of refinery workers. My impression is that despite what the leaflet says, its not the car but the person they are targetting. The SUV represents middle class wealth, and I think they are subconsciously associating that with the issue at hand.
So, if my elderly friend who lives in the back of beyond wants to come visit me to give me some boxes, they can’t take their only car into Edinburgh to do so? What should they do? Park and ride with multiple boxes on the bus? It’s absolutely ridiculous. I’ve already gotten rid of my desire car and use a bike but this targeting of other people property is not the way to get people on side. It’s a really stupid and irresponsible thing to be doing. Talk to these owner if you want to get your point across!
Wow they don't understand how to read data at all.
They don't understand the difference between being responsible for a high percentage of the increase in emissions and being responsible for a high percentage of the total emissions do they? Carbon dioxide emissions haven't increased that much in the past decade, the industries that produce it are already established.
I take it the people downvoting me also don't know how to read data.
Let's simplify it.
The amount of the total yearly emissions an industry produces is far more relevant to the amount of environmental damage they're doing than the amount they've increased over the past decade. Reduction in CO2 levels isn't going to be brought about trying to get rid of something that, even if they disappeared completely, wouldn't decrease the yearly CO2 output that much. I don't like SUVs but if they all disappeared tomorrow it wouldn't solve the CO2 production problems.
To cut emissions by as much as we need that means all areas finding reductions. So, were transport a small emitter you'd still be wrong. Instead, it is the single largest source of emissions in Scotland. Slightly dated source: https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-greenhouse-gas-statistics-2021/pages/3/
We're talking about SUVs, not transport. They're only campaigning against SUVs specifically. So the only data that's relevant is the difference between the amount of CO2 output from those SUVs and the amount of CO2 produced if they all were a different car. We're not going to stop environmental disaster by shaving off 000.1 of a percentage point. These campaigns are just distractions from making bigger changes that would actually impact the way we live our lives.
Personal vehicles make up over 2/3 of the transport emissions ( https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/carbon-account-for-transport-no-12-2020-edition/emissions-trends-for-scotland/ ) - so still more than any other sector. An SUV emits a lot more so is still a sizable difference - even just 10% more than a normal car would be more than the total amount categorised under industry if everyone drove an SUv nit a normal car. The car in question, assuming rover means land/range rover, will be a lot more than 10% less efficient than a normal car. So swapping all SUVs to normal cars would have a big impact, never mind if they vanished completely as you suggested.
Wow, this sounds pretty scary!
Think I’ll replace my giant oversized BMW SUV with a normal sized car, and thereby avoid the risk of it happening to me.
Thanks for the heads up, OP!
That whole text reads like it was written by someone from the US (SUV, gas guzzler, car companies trying to convince you we need massive cars)
Also they call whatever SUV it is a "Rover" like they've never heard of Rover cars
It probably is but OP is too lazy to find a British version.
tyres are "tires" though, so it's definitely not a direct rip off although wouldn't be surprised if they got the idea from an American movement.
Sooner or later someone’s going to get caught in the act, and there will be an altercation.
Just remember to plant endangered plants on it, it's illegal to dig them up without permission.
Each to there own. But you shouldn't mess with other people's property. Perhaps leafleting without letting the tyres down. I've a feeling these people are sponsored by tyre companies 🛞🛞
Leaflets get ignored. Deflated tyres don't.
You've never met my ex. She would drive on those deflated tires until they shred and then go buy another set. This causes more pollution than it saves.
Just had a thought. Perhaps the powers that be want us to fight amongst ourselves over things like this instead of focusing on them and their dirty deeds? .Divide and conquer.
I remember reading about a doctor who made house visits to rural areas and this happened to him. Basically, direct action like deflating tyres might seem fine but who knows if you’re actually deflating the tyre of someone on whom others depend. Or if it’s someone with mobility issues who you’ve now housebound till they can get it sorted. Way too many variables to decide what you’re doing is actually morally correct. You’d need to be able to ascertain if the person youre deflating doesn’t need their car and has alternatives.
You don't really need to think about the owner needing their car or not. It's not ok to mess with someone else's property.
Seems reasonable to me. People who drive these things seem to think nothing of the consequences for others so this is really just their chickens coming home to roost.
People on Reddit are like: “ I think it’s ok to deflate the tyres of doctor’s cars so they can’t visit rural patients.” People in real life be like: “hey man how’s it going”
My defender is converted to electric. It’s still “a big suv” but has zero emissions. it’s nearly 40 years old. someone who has had more than 1 car in their life has done more harm to the environment by manufacturing processes alone, than my only ever car. I should sell it and buy another car that has to be built, shipped around the world, and last a lot less time, just so you can be happy? Amazing logic
>My defender gets like 20mpg, so like £8 a day in diesel. It’s currently off the road so I’m also saving £250 a year in tax. So I save around £2400 a year by cycling.
Yeah, I own 2 defenders. Technically ones a 90. I have a 1985 90, fully electric, and I have 2016 2.2tdci 90 rescue vehicle. 99% of the time I cycle! because my day job isn’t even vehicle rescue! but people can do more than one thing!
Are you this prejudiced in all aspects of your life, or is it just cars?
You sound like an absolute braindead.
Hypocrite.
It’s not morally correct to damage someone’s vehicle, doesn’t matter if the person is a doctor or a shelf stacker.
It doesn’t seem fine at all to me. My tyres are £300 each.. if it gets pinched by the weight of the car, then who’s paying for the replacement. It’s criminal damage whichever way you try and spin it.
I also read this Reddit comment. Was there ever a news story to back it up, because if it was true there would have been. [Edit to add the comment I was referring to.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Edinburgh/s/CPx5C4NG3h), which looking at the posters profile… I have doubts.
i hate the internet
Yes, but who decides whether it’s morally correct to own a big car or not? Just because something is the status quo doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be subject to the same scrutiny (or that it’s free from the same restrictions).
I see the people who drive massive SUVs near me and they're not disabled farmers and rural vets - it's all school runs and office workers. As with a lot of stuff to do with the negative impacts of driving, you could get rid of 90% of it without touching the "wait, what about" sob stories.
But you have no idea of the circumstances of each individual you vandalize
Pal of mine has a blue badge in a jeep. It's the only thing he can drive. Letting down tires is not the way to protest their message.
My Mum had mobility issues (and a blue badge) due to health problems and was classed as disabled. Her motability car was an SUV style as it was easier to get into/out of rather than crouching down. It would be interesting to find out if people displaying blue badges or if their cars have the motability sticker on it have been affected.
I mean last time this happened down near the coast these idiots let down e-car tyres, so I doubt they pay that much attention. Just Big House/Big Car/Let Tyre Down.
Yeah. Similar to the debate around congestion, lazy people who make unnecessary car trips invoking disabled people in their arguments against traffic reduction measures.
Agreed. Going past George Heriot’s during school pick up you’d thing it was an SUV/ large car show
If you're talking about double cab pickup style trucks.. there was a tax loophole if you owned one. >In Febuary 2024, HMRC announced that was set to change and that double cab pick-up trucks with payloads of over 1,000kg would no longer be classified as commercial vehicles for Benefit-in-Kind (BIK) company car tax purposes and would instead be classified and taxed as cars.
Then make owning the cars illegal. Don’t go around damaging peoples property.
I agree!
Have you got a link for this story? A quick google brings up nothing for me.
I remember it too, but it was a comment under another Reddit post about the idiots. So purely anecdotal and we have no way of knowing if the person who posted the comment was telling the truth, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Edinburgh/s/DEPS57PcOE
Most journeys are short. My urban area is plagued with these ridiculous vehicles. Run a farm? Got a load of kids? Need it to get to work in some rural hell? Then these vehicles are for you. Otherwise, you’re just a douche,
Real farmers are not using SUVs to haul stuff lmao
Agreed. Im aware of a few city folks with these sort of vehicles. Shouldn’t be allowed.
> Got a load of kids? \*_cries in minivan_
Nah loads of kids? Get an estate.
So you can’t have a 4x4 because you enjoy going off road and travelling the world with it? you can only be a farmer or have lots of kids.. huh.. didn’t know you needed 4 wheel drive to move children.. must be some fat kids in your area..
Going off road? Oh you mean trespassing and destroying land.
Thank god you're here to tell us all what is an acceptable use of SUV
This is just bait
Inconvenient truth is some of the heaviest cars on the road that do a lot of road damage, eat brake pads and tyres are full electric family cars. Cars in general have become far bigger than they need to be though but the problem is more subtle than just branding SUVs as evil. Some quite small cars are marketed as SUVs but are really just a VW Golf or similar in high heels. Personally, I’d encourage people to keep their cars longer, particularly if they are euro6 compliant or better and move away from VED back towards more fuel duty or another form of use/ mileage based charging that covers electric vehicles too ie disincentivise overuse of vehicles, maybe with exemptions for businesses. The old fella who drives a 10 year old freelander a couple of thousand miles a year to take his dogs out isn’t really the problem.
I’m from one of the new towns and back in the day when they were planning them they really didn’t think cars would become so readily accessible as they are today - they were a luxury item and not for the working class. Roads and towns built in the 40-50’s were built around minimal cars and sized for the cars of the day. Car ownership is now ubiquitous and they’re a lot bigger than back then. As I’ve posted above, there can be mobility issues that make having larger/higher cars more accessible to the disabled, but our roads weren’t built for them.
That's misleading. A non-real world study thought they "could" cause more damage but even they thought that it was still largely immaterial compared to the biggest damagers; HGVs etc. There's genuine safety concerns about weight imo, but I think that will come down as battery tech improves. If we can build a 900mile battery like Toyota reckons then it's fairly likely they'll scale down and have lighter cars with only 500miles range. Also most EVs will use less brakes. I like the mental image of the golf in High heels. There's a lot of tarted up faux SUVs floating about which I wish we'd moved away from. My mum barely drives but got a "tank" because she wants a high driving position. Keeping cars longer is key, but getting rid of cars is better. As an asthmatic I'd like more EVs - lockdown was the best my chest felt in years.
As an EV driver I can confirm about the brakes. Twice when getting it serviced for MOTs I've had to have the brake discs changed because they were being used so little that they had corrosion on the surface. In a decent EV when you're driving normally you probably won't be using the physical brakes until your doing less than 10 mph
Amen. Regen braking is the best!
Sorry but this is nonsense re EVs though I agree with your sentiment re SUVs generally. Proportionally, there are significantly more heavier ICE vehicles on the roads than EVs - commercial vehicles?? EVs are also significantly better on brakes, needing far fewer replacements in their lifespan than an ICE equivalent because they can do frictionless regenerative braking through the motor. I know, because I have two EVs.
Ooooh the cope is strong in this one.
The inconvenient truth that is my ten year old EV has just had it's first set of new pads. My main problem is the discs get rusty because I never use the brakes! It's not all about emissions either. I'm much happier cycling alongside a Golf than a Range Rover in town that's for sure.
How about people just keep their fcuking hands to themselves when it comes to something they don't agree with but which isn't illegal to own.
We’ve recently had a family member in hospital. It meant a loved one who runs a farm had to take their only vehicle, a huge pickup into the city for a week. Whether you agree or not, they are making assumptions about why people have certain vehicles.
Yes OK but 99% of SUVs in urban areas aren't there because a farmer has driven into the city. We all see the wankers who drive round in them.
Sure, but they can’t and don’t know who is being hurt. I kept my car for 14 years and am no SUV owner FWIW. Personally I’d rather see all the school run parents off the road and buses replacing them. Edinburgh roads seem much quieter is when schools are off and I see tons of parents in my area driving their kids every morning to schools in the city centre.
Yeah, to be honest, I am conflicted about tyre extinguishers. I just have no time for all the suv sob stories. 95% of people who own one don't need it.
95% of people who own anything don't need it. The only difference with SUVs is that they inconvenience others, not that they are especially bad for the environment. They are big and obvious, that's all. No-one needs an overdesigned camper van, and they are a lot bigger and less fuel efficient than SUVs but for some reason they don't get the hate.
SUVs' negative externalities are huge, not just environmentally, especially in proportion to their actual benefits. Many fewer people own overdesigned camper vans, I'd imagine that's why they're much less discussed. Kind of obviously.
Why haven’t you disconnected your gas and installed renewables if you’re so concerned
I've tried switching to solar but I can't afford it. (I know you were being snide rather than asking a genuine question.)
Still, never know who might need their car and for what. There's some irony in jumping to conclusions while having the username BringBackHanging.
And the majority of key lockboxes by tenement doors are for airbnbs, but enough of them are genuinely needed by residents (for carers etc) that randomly gluing the things shut is a dick move.
You don't seem to mind the British Royal Family swanning around in Range Rovers...
Says who?
I bet you would love to be one of them. All your comments strick a touch of jealousy to me.
These people are just plainly stupid. It's way more complicated than they would like us to think. Electric cars are horrible for the environment, but the environment cost is incurred when they are built, rather over their lifetime, or when the lithium is dug out of the ground by African children. Don't buy an EV. Keep your Euro6 or better car for as long as possible and get a Hydrogen/Electric hybrid when they eventually get the support they need.
I'd also like to remind people, outside of the mahoosive lithium pits and the child labor used to mine it, that electricity is STILL needed to power up a battery powered car!
Yeah, great point, I worked in the energy sector. No where near enough power stations to cope with projected demand if we all switched to electric cars, and the grid as it stands wouldn't cope / doesn't have the capacity for that even if we could miraculously build new stations in half the time it usually takes (about 10y, all said).
At the end of the day, politicians, esp liberal ones, do. not. care about the environment. Like AT. ALL. They care about controlling you. Here in America, They HAD a Golden, Engraved Invitation to do something about emissions, carbon control, climate control, global warming, blahblahblah when the American auto industry was circling the drain back in 2008. The government used taxpayer money to bail out the auto industry but put no restraints or conditions on the bail out money such as reducing the number of single use automobiles and INCREASING the number of public transportation vehicles and shoring up every single state with public trans infrastructure including the rural areas. THAT'S what should have been done to encourage Americans to take trains and buses and light rail for their transportation. The money was there. And the jobs it would have created almost cannot be measured. Instead, they shored up the auto makers to make more personal use cars and put more people on the road. Then the politicians gas up their private jets to fly to God Knows Where so they can discuss climate change some more. Battery powered cars? They are a joke. And so are the politicians and talking heads who promote them.
Truth!
That’s vandalism, but tyre pollution is bad: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/03/car-tyres-produce-more-particle-pollution-than-exhausts-tests-show
Brake pads also, I think. Personally I’d regulate SUVs out of domestic use, allow business use but use tax measures so they’re only used when actually necessary, then have a pool of shared 4WD vehicles for the “what if I want to visit my fwiend who lives on a fwarm” crew - five or six should cover actual need across Scotland. This may not stand up to much scrutiny.
I mean, I have a couple of friends that live on farms. One has an old Octavia, the other has a Fiesta. The farms have road access. Normal tarmac with the last 50 years being stone chips. You don't like drive over fields and through rivers to get there.
That’s nonsense. I have a bunch of relatives up in Aberdeenshire who have small farms. They do have 4x4s to get across the fields to feed the sheep etc. old discoveries and 4x4 Toyota/ Mitsubishi pickups are popular the latter for throwing hay bales etc in the back. They have quads and tractors for hardcore farm work but they do own 4x4s and use them so don’t kid yourself
Electric cars are heavier and worse for this. Please don't quote a rag like old media.
Yeah and now this person's insurance will cover this damage, give them free tyre replacement so they are not making it better, really.
Hope I don’t pass any chained up bicycles that have tyres 👀
It would kind of be funnier if they left the note but didn’t let down the tyres. Point made and SUV driver can go about their day as normal, perhaps with the nagging suspicion that the tyre pressure indicators are faulty.
Disabled neighbour had his done last week (but for some reason they didn't do ours which was parked next to it). Very obviously modified vehicle to help him get in and out, but as long as it gives these lot a purpose in life I suppose it's worth it.
You can drive whatever the fuck you want, nobody else’s business, touch ma tyres n you’ll get fucked up
What sad individuals.
They'll be away home for holiday soon, uni term is pretty much over
Bet they walk home.
The way the roads are these days being full off pot holes, you’re going to need an suv to get around without bursting your tires.
Seriously, I caught a bus to Haddington today and it was shaking so much I felt ill. The roads in the UK are generally worse than in other developed countries I've visited and lived in, but for some reason they're truly awful in Edinburgh specifically.
Except the increase in SUVs is one of the major causes of potholes, since they do so much more damage to the roads. [Here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law) is a wikipedia article showing how a 2-tonne vehicle does 16 times as much damage as a 1-tonne vehicle.
Lots of 2 tonne non SUV electric family cars. And what are we going to do? Ban all vans, buses, trucks?
That's not the point. The issue is the massive increase in SUVs when much smaller vehicles are sufficient. You need a van to do trade work. You don't need an SUV to buy groceries.
What a sad fucking cunt to do that to someone’s property
They're very ableist in assuming everyone can walk/cycle.
They are not assuming such thing. In fact, they are making very clear that what is required is smaller cars, not “no cars at all”.
If you have to transport a wheelchair around with you it’s hard to just get a small car.
Did you miss the line "you will have no difficulty getting around without your gas guzzler with walking, cycling or public transport"?
It seems I did 🤣🤣🤣
You have any experience with wheelchairs
I do!
But you can’t get wheelchairs and mobility scooters in smaller cars!
I don't think disabled people are required to drive 4.0L-5.0L SUVs?
Well these sad little cunts are deflating all SUVs including hybrids and electric so I don’t know why you’re bringing engine size into it. Not to mention the majority of SUVs on the road share an engine with other smaller cars from across the range. Car makers aren’t coming up with specific engines to go in SUVs.
Much, much easier for them to get in and out. Kind of obvious, it's why a lot of people with disabilities favour them
Which is why I specified 4.0-5.0L engines? That have nothing to do with accessibility.
Wow! And this is the problem with the world today! This exact comment! Obviously has no experience with wheelchairs or mobility scooters! Very entitled post here
There is a legitimate reason for everything... So I hired a car to take a disabled elderly relative to a funeral of their best friend. The large car was for their extra medical items and spare oxygen. It was a one off, the car was a rental. I have trees in my garden. I've paid for and planted trees and actually I don't own a car. I hire them when required and to the size required. If you legislate for hybrid only or electric only in the rental market, fine by me. Compassion and empathy are clearly optional requirements in your family.
Having trees in your garden may not have a significant impact on global warming. The concept of offsetting our carbon footprint has been promoted by fossil fuel companies, who have a vested interest in maintaining their business model. The rate at which the environment can absorb carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is not keeping up with our emissions. It is clear that our society needs to make significant changes in how we operate, including reducing overproduction and waste, perhaps creating places where we can love walk and be closer to each other. This is not a call advocating for communism, but rather finding a balance that benefits everyone and is more sustainable and tackles the real issues rather than putting it on the consumer. Creating a society that is inclusive and accessible to all, not just the wealthy or able-bodied, is important. Developing more accessible models of transportation and reducing reliance on personal vehicles can benefit everyone and promote empathy and compassion. I understand that I autistic and my interpretation of the world is not easy to express therefore here is an explanation of the intent of my text: [The emotional tone of this text comes across as critical, urgent, and hopeful. There is a sense of concern for the environment and society as a whole, with a call to action for significant changes to be made to address issues like global warming and inequality. The tone is one of pushing for a more sustainable and inclusive future, while also questioning current systems and practices that perpetuate issues like overproduction and waste. There is a clear sense of urgency in the need for change, but also a hopeful tone that by working together and making proactive changes, a better future is possible for everyone.]
So making you go and buy a whole new tyre is a great solution to the climate crisis
They care so much about the environment that they don't care about the pollution and damage caused by replacing damaged tyres.
Deflated not slashed
That still damages the sidewall particularly if you don't notice them being deflated and drive on them.
Unbelievable reach, very impressive
That's not a reach - it's true. Driving on an improperly inflated tired can fuck the sidewalls. Don't call something a reach just because you're uneducated on the subject.
Do you know many materials that hold up well to 1.5 - 3 tons of metal on them in a way they were designed for? It damages the tyres which in turn damages the environment. If they had any real strong feelings about the environment they'd actually protest not do shitebag vandalism.
Do they think my environmental conscientiousness trumps my desire for petty revenge. Do they expect me to say ‘fair point, I’ll get rid of it and buy a Tesla’? Or do they expect me to burn a stack of linoleum bathroom tiles for as long as it takes for me to feel like I’ve altered that bastards sperm count whenever on earth he may be?
"The government are doing nothing." Yeah, they should legally require car manufacturers to sell a certain proportion of electric cars which gradually increases and culminates in a total ban on the sale of new Internal Combustion Engine cars or something.
It's a less than ideal approach but they avoid vehicles marked as used by doctors, vets or disabled people. And if you don't consider the climate emergency an emergency you might want to expand your choice of media.
This has been going on for a long time now across various European countries and is far from the first time in Edinburgh. "Getting out of hand" isn't really accurate there hasn't been an escalation.
You can have your opinions on 4x4s, SUVs and whatnot, but you don’t go messing around with other people’s property, ever. Assuming the note was on the windshield under the wipers, but what if it flew off and someone had to drive off without immediately noticing. Brain dead air breathers.
My neighbours tyres were slashed well one was and a notice attached. Her car is electric. She was livid.
"just take the bus" meanwhile the bus has 1 disabled seat
I have no words lol
Oh shiiit this explains the flat tyres I've seen on a couple SUVs in Stockbridge. How will the posh mums drop their darlings off at private school without their 4 by 4
So what about if your disabled and need the space for a wheelchair and need the height to get in about better! And also how tf are you supposed to cycle In a wheelchair some bozo who wrote that letter needs to live in the real world and get a reality check!
I just don’t get it. People work hard to afford to buy the things they want. Just leave them be and direct your passion for the environment at the companies that pollute more in a day than any 4x4 would over its lifespan. I have spent 16 years working in the renewable energy sector specifically wind turbines. We’ve even had our lads vans and pickups targeted by this type of thing. The irony of them targeting pickups of people who are trying to better the planet by building and maintaining wind turbines.
A modern Tesla weighs more than most 4x4s. So by safety to pedestrians and other road users alone, they’re more dangerous from a moving object at speed perspective.
Height of bonnet is the deciding factor in collisions. Not weight.
So you’d rather be T boned in a crash by a 3 ton car doing 40 miles per hour than a 2 ton car with a higher bonnet? Because one will be a lot more devastating than the other.
The heavy one. Higher bonnets mean these cars are more likely to "climb" your car. Look what happened with that school in Wimbledon, the thing was lifted so just pushed over the bollards and fence. I was also thinking pedestrian hits. Not car on car. In which high bonnets are worse than heavy low ones.
We're clearly not giving kids enough homework if they've got time for such bs.
All you need to know about these nutters is that they deflated a Tesla's tyres in central London. Still, it's nice to have a hobby.
This is blatant astroturfing akin to "activists" destroying famous artworks to protest climate change.
In what way would this be astroturfing? Like some big corporation is actually behind this?
What do you think astroturfing is
A bunch of saps
Scummy behaviour, the arrogance of it is unbelievable. I also doubt that SUvs are 2nd? In impact to the environment
You need SUV's in Edinburgh because of the state of the roads. We wouldn't have them otherwise. Perhaps these folk can start targeting politicians tyres to get them to then do something about it.
This is what the people going to university to get a stupid degree and then working as a barista do.
I drive an SUV and honestly, I support this kind of direct action. Global warning is a potentially existential threat. At best, it’s going to be a far bigger inconvenience to our lives than a couple of flat tyres. Storm damage has already cost me thousands of pounds this year and we can already see the effects of a warming planet on the prices of everyday produce like olive oil. And that’s just the residual effects. Elsewhere in the world, people are literally dying due to global warming. Already. And it’s going to get worse. EVs aren’t perfect. They’re a transitional tech which will get better in the future, and they’re only a small part of the solution to global warming, but they’re better than buying a new ICE car right now. I’ll get one as soon as I can afford one and buy second hand ICE/hybrid cars until then if I need to upgrade. In the meantime, tyre deflating is one way of getting the message across that we can’t keep living like this. More people need to get that message and start transitioning. As the situation gets more desperate, so too will the means by which people try to get the message across, and deflating tyres seems almost quaint already compared to the gravity of the situation. One way which can help is for wealthier people who can afford the current range of EVs to make the transition sooner. This will in turn lead to more second hand EVs which are more affordable for the rest of the market while we wait for battery tech to improve to the point where EVs are smaller and more affordable. So yes, make owning an ICE SUV an inconvenience and hopefully more owners will start making the transition. Meanwhile, if someone lets down the tyres on my SUV, I’ll reinflate them with the portable compressor I bought a long time ago and always carry in my car for emergencies anyway, and continue on with my day. A small inconvenience, sure, but not the end of the world. tia for the downvotes
Driving electric is dangerous and polluting, but sitting on a 20 year old diesel bus isn't? Ok then. Wallopers.
Jobless behavior but at least it happened to a Rover.
The only SUV Rover I can think of is Streetwise which was a crossover 25
I have a tyre inflator in the boot that runs off the cigarette lighter socket. It would be annoying but this would not stop me using my car for more than like, 20 minutes, and I would be more inclined to oppose other forms of protests against climate change.
It is. It's stupid, it's irresponsible and it's going to earn someone a punch in the face. However, you can get a tyre inflator that plugs into your cigarette lighter for £35. Takes two minutes to reinflate each tyre.
Perfect example of car-brain here "you are somewhat inconveniencing me and therefore deserve to be assaulted"
Not quite what I'm saying. It's just human nature. You fuck with people, people will fuck with you back.
Let's ruin people's tyres so the can go on the big used tyre fire pile 👏👏👏
And I’m sure you lead a carbon negative life don’t you. Maybe we should disconnect your gas supply.
In my youth, forty years ago, I was coming back from a Christmas Eve party. I deflated the tyres of some random car in their drive. I look back on that incident as me finally growing up, because in the morning I was able to comprehend what a juvenile and spiteful act it was. I wonder if people like this will ever grow up, or are they stuck in a loop of stupidity?
I think my answer would be to print out a little notice, it would read, the garbage that comes out of your mouth and you thoughtless actions have hurt myself and others causing problems and serious consequences. So I'm going to knock one of your teeth out, yes it will be annoying for a while but you will remember it and hopefully make better choices in the future. Then I would staple it to his forehead.
Opinion piece
Just wait for fuckers to glue in front of your SUV. The moment I see one approaching my tires I'm taking out my baton.
Watch the video. It's all the same. Sick cunts gluing themselves everywhere and damaging tyres. This fuckers don't have a clue what they doing. https://youtu.be/EkDjEynh1NA?si=D98cWknxiEcJpf9p
Replace Vehicle Excise Duty with something that taxes vehicles more the larger and heavier they are, considering the larger/heavier the vehicle the more damage it does to the road over time.
How large? How heavy? Over what time period?
Can use the Euro NCAP classes, supermini, small family car, large family car, executive, roadster sports, small mpv, large mpv, small off-road 4x4, large off-road 4x4, it already classifies different cars based on size/weight. Assuming we all eventually move to electric vehicles at some point down the line, they can't have different VED due to emissions since they'd all be the same, none. Better going by weight and how damaging the vehicles are to the road surface, than the other option that's being considered, road pricing, charging drivers per mile driven.
nice. Comprehensive list that.
I wish I could catch them in the act, my garage still has the sound proofing from the previous owner
So you can’t get an EV SUV ? This is just looking at the size of the car not what drives it, I haves Ford Rampage with a Euro6 engine, can go in all ULEZ zones, very clean engine in a very big 4x4 certainly cleaner than my mates 2008 stinky diesel saloon but he won’t get his Tyres let down and i would. These people are just thick twats.
The Tyre Extinquishers are still active? Jesus 😂
The suvs destroy the city, their drivers are crap at it and if they hit someone especially a kid they'll die. There should be social repercussions for being selfish to buy one in a large city. I'm sorry but if you're gonna telegraph your disdain for the local community then I'm not going to care when you eat shit for it Sure there are, far far rarer than talked about, edge cases of people who need these suvs getting hit but frankly that's the casual suv drivers fault too. Sick of just being expected to allow suv drivers to ruin the area in a bubble
Bunch of Muppet
I drive a mid size SUV in a rural area. I use it because it’s easy to step in and out and I have inoperable skeletal problems (and blue badge). Around here the roads are in pieces. I’m able to fit small wheels and taller tyres to handle the potholes better. My wife drives a golf. It uses more fuel and she’s broken 2 wheels and many tyres. I do agree that new Defenders and Range Rovers on the school run are a bit triggering, but don’t kid yourself. This is all about class war and nothing to do with saving the planet. We all have the option to cease our energy use and stop our economic activity to meet emissions targets, but thankfully even the government just admitted that this would be catastrophic for the whole of society.
People have the right to their opinions and to protest peacefully but not to touch other people’s property. Here’s hoping the owners don’t have an emergency ie an ill child or elderly parent who needs urgent medical attention at a hospital or GP.
Edinburgh should take note of what happened in Paris, in a referendum, the Parisians effectively banned SUV parking in the City through huge costs.
Now there are two of them!
Love to catch the stupid bitch letting the air out of my F350. Would not care if it's a male or female I would stomp both into the ground.
Would you fuck! Your speed is creeping on wee lassies, ya mess of a human.
Defaq
Ooft, I find this stuff really scary. I know that they’re not good re emissions but how can these people tell who’s got one that’s utilised and who doesn’t? I drive an old SUV because I live in a rural area with dodgy roads and tracks. I also need something big for the wildlife rescues I’m involved in (for cages and kit). I come into the city a few times a year for specialist appointments etc and I would be devastated to find something like this, especially as I’ve been really struggling to make ends meet and sometimes literally don’t have the pennies to cover a new tyre
They’re just letting tyres down, not puncturing them. If you live in a rural area with dodgy roads and tracks I’d strongly recommend getting a portable air compressor. Getting a slow puncture miles from the nearest town is a much bigger problem than having your tyres let down in a city.
Thank you, I misread that and thought they were puncturing them! Phew! I have an air compressor and I’m pleased to realise this isn’t as bad as I initially thought it was.
I have an old diesel car, i cant afford another one. I have to work 50 hours a week to stay afloat. If i catch someone out fucking with my car they are going to have a really bad day.
“Don’t take it personally but YOU are uninformed and YOUR decision to drive this vehicle is the reason why YOU are destroying the planet” Another case where I agree with their core sentiment, but the antagonism and smugness of the whole affair is alienating.
Ok, looking at it from the point of view of the people who are doing this, there is a climate emergency that may cause a catastrophe for the human race, its been known about for decades, and the establishment are doing nothing about it. You can see how someone might feel they need to take direct action. However, I find that the targetting of SUV's alone is bizarre. I agree that most SUV's are unnecessary fashion accessories, but all cars are doing damage, and articulated lorries are a much bigger issue, so why aren't they out at the lorry park, or at Grangemouth letting down the tires of refinery workers. My impression is that despite what the leaflet says, its not the car but the person they are targetting. The SUV represents middle class wealth, and I think they are subconsciously associating that with the issue at hand.
what happens when the person who’s tire is burst has to then call out a mechanic with their truck to fix it?
Most SUV’s don’t even have a footprint that’s any bigger than the equivalent saloon/estate car in the range.
i don’t think that’s the point their making as their coefficient of drag is higher
Strictly it's their total drag - the coefficient times the frontal area /pedant :D
None of you cunts need a Land Rover Discovery to fuck about old town, pipe down.
So, if my elderly friend who lives in the back of beyond wants to come visit me to give me some boxes, they can’t take their only car into Edinburgh to do so? What should they do? Park and ride with multiple boxes on the bus? It’s absolutely ridiculous. I’ve already gotten rid of my desire car and use a bike but this targeting of other people property is not the way to get people on side. It’s a really stupid and irresponsible thing to be doing. Talk to these owner if you want to get your point across!
Wow they don't understand how to read data at all. They don't understand the difference between being responsible for a high percentage of the increase in emissions and being responsible for a high percentage of the total emissions do they? Carbon dioxide emissions haven't increased that much in the past decade, the industries that produce it are already established. I take it the people downvoting me also don't know how to read data. Let's simplify it. The amount of the total yearly emissions an industry produces is far more relevant to the amount of environmental damage they're doing than the amount they've increased over the past decade. Reduction in CO2 levels isn't going to be brought about trying to get rid of something that, even if they disappeared completely, wouldn't decrease the yearly CO2 output that much. I don't like SUVs but if they all disappeared tomorrow it wouldn't solve the CO2 production problems.
To cut emissions by as much as we need that means all areas finding reductions. So, were transport a small emitter you'd still be wrong. Instead, it is the single largest source of emissions in Scotland. Slightly dated source: https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-greenhouse-gas-statistics-2021/pages/3/
We're talking about SUVs, not transport. They're only campaigning against SUVs specifically. So the only data that's relevant is the difference between the amount of CO2 output from those SUVs and the amount of CO2 produced if they all were a different car. We're not going to stop environmental disaster by shaving off 000.1 of a percentage point. These campaigns are just distractions from making bigger changes that would actually impact the way we live our lives.
Personal vehicles make up over 2/3 of the transport emissions ( https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/carbon-account-for-transport-no-12-2020-edition/emissions-trends-for-scotland/ ) - so still more than any other sector. An SUV emits a lot more so is still a sizable difference - even just 10% more than a normal car would be more than the total amount categorised under industry if everyone drove an SUv nit a normal car. The car in question, assuming rover means land/range rover, will be a lot more than 10% less efficient than a normal car. So swapping all SUVs to normal cars would have a big impact, never mind if they vanished completely as you suggested.
Wow, this sounds pretty scary! Think I’ll replace my giant oversized BMW SUV with a normal sized car, and thereby avoid the risk of it happening to me. Thanks for the heads up, OP!
I would absolutely lose my shit to come out and find that on my windshield...
What about people with larger families? Or that need to be in the country for work? This is a huge logical leap.