• tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    17 days ago

    The findings indicate that if governments want to reduce the number of large, dangerous vehicles on the roads, it is likely to require financial penalties, according to the psychologists at Swansea University who led the research.

    Much of the risk comes from their higher and blunter front ends.

    Why would you try to deter someone?

    If the front of a vehicle is sufficiently unsafe that it shouldn’t be out there, just update safety standards to require a safer front.

    I can’t think, offhand, of any instance where the accepted approach to dealing with an auto safety issue is to increase prices.

    • NotAnonymousAtAal@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      17 days ago

      Not specifically for car safety, but there are some other things where governments try to reduce dangerous or unhealthy things by making them more expensive rather than outright banning them. Main difference is that those usually are addictive, e.g. alcohol and tobacco, which makes a strict ban very hard to enforce; should be a lot easier for needlessly dangerous cars.

    • SomeOneWithA_PC@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      17 days ago

      How should Trucks than be handled? I don’t like big SUVs as the next one, but increasing price does nothing but outright banning them is also a bit odd while there are big trucks on the road. At least for trucks you would need another drivers license. That might be an interesting option. Higher licenses with more frequent and more rigorous testing and requirements. That might be a better deterrent and also makes those who drive it a safer driver?