Who would decide whether a person can "justify" a car or not?
Many people like them because they're safer to be in than a normal car in an accident; is that sufficient justification?
Why should some "greenie" decide what car somebody else can drive?
Whatever happened to freedom of choice?
Supplement from 07/10/2008 07:52pm:
It's crazy to identify one particular group of vehicles as polluters, based on what type of transmission they've got.
Would you put Subarus, Lada Nivas and Fiat Pandas into the same tax bracket as Land Rovers?
Many large 4x4 vehicles are bad polluters with terrible mpg.
As a consequence of this, many have been converted to run on LPG, so in truth they pollute less than an average car.
The green brigade always ignore this point.
I used to have a 4x4-style vehicle which was built from an old Granada so only 2wd. You wouldn't believe the looks I used to get from some people - real nasty stuff.
The green nazis really are coming out in force these days.
The truth is that my car was producing better mpg than most BMWs or Mercs, had already been recycled at least once, and I kept it for 15 years with no major issues. Who's greener - me or the twonk in the new Mazda who will be looking for a trade-in every 2 years?
My car would still be around now, but for the ridiculous cost of feeding it proper fuel (not unleaded).
Being a 35 year old engine, it needed 4* from time to time, and it was legislation that killed it rather than rust or emissions.
