Cory links to an article perpetuating the rollover myth about SUV's:
But before you get an SUV just for defensive purposes, think again. Any safety gains that might accrue are cancelled out by the high risk of rollover deaths, which usually don't involve other cars.
If there's any industry in the worl with a clear interest in telling the truth about safety rates for SUV occupants, it's the insurance industry. If SUV's were more dangerous to their drivers, the insurance industry could and would charge higher rates to those owners. But as I have pointed out almost two years ago, the insurance industry statistics show that vehicle weight is a key correlator with occupant safety:
occupants of the smallest passenger cars are almost three times as likely to die as occupants of the heaviest SUV's - 249 deaths per million cars vs. just 90.
The most dangerous cars to be in are the tiny, fuel-sipping matchbox cars that the anti-SUV enviro crowd prefer. And that's true no matter what hits them.
Of course, all this is just another shot across the bow - environmental activists who loathe SUV's for their lower fuel efficiency (and I wonder, if there's not an aspect of economic envy there?) and who rightly know that SUV's on the road enhance the lethality of their own vehciles of choice want them banned. And if the truth stands in the way of "saving the planet," well, then, truth be damned.
Anecdotal fallacy aside, I was safer than those around me when I drove an SUV. Someday when I have a family of my own to protect, they'll be safer in an SUV than a smaller car. Is that selfish? I suppose so, but for that I will never apologize.
Posted by wasylik at December 7, 2002 12:23 PM | TrackBack