Different argument but I can support that.

Point being people who live an apartment are far more likely to be buying a truck because they want it, and far less need for it for actual jobs & chores.

Also, plenty of people use pickups for work (plumbers, carpenters, electricians, etc) and there's no reason they might not live in an apartment.

There's even a whole class of pickups for the people that find the occasional use but don't need the big ones, and want to fit easier in places designed for cars. The small pickup.

Toyota has pivoted marketing for the Tacoma as an adventure vehicle rather than a work vehicle. It is awesome for that. Small enough to get around in a city, but big enough to fit four sets of skiing/climbing/backpacking gear. You don't have all that crap in the cab getting snagged on stuff or falling into the foot wells. No skis knocking my elbows while driving. I've had mine packed up to the ceiling of the camper shell. I used to live out of it. Now I usually spend 10-15 nights per year in it rather than getting a motel for $100/night.

>Toyota has pivoted marketing for the Tacoma as an adventure vehicle rather than a work vehicle.

Toyota spends good money on market research. They know the difference between Tacoma buyers and Colorado buyers.

I drive an older "full size" SUV ('04 Ford Expedition), mainly because my parents' gave the thing to me when I graduated college. It's fairly easy to work on, so I kind of just keep the thing running. The fuel economy is very bad (like 17 mph highway, 11 in the city), but it's one of those situations where even if I bought a new car with double the fuel economy, it'd take me over a hundred thousand miles of driving to make up the cost difference in fuel savings alone.

It's also really nice to be in a situation where literally everything I own can be moved with it. Strapped my box spring / bed frame to the top of it once.

Yeah, but often the toys people want are ridiculous.

There's something worse than "ridiculous" for insisting on a toy that has so many drawbacks for the people around you while you're using it for your own enjoyment. It's selfish.

That would include most motor vehicles, due to brake dust, tire wear, and exhaust, since the alternative of using a bicycle is always available. If you need to travel long distances once in a while, you can always rent a car.

I hope you draw and quarter your friends who spend $50k+ on sedans/coupes/sports cars that have no reason for being other than to go faster than is legal and to burn extra gas.

It's a slippery slope to go down to say you know better than others what they should be allowed to own.

Like bikers pretending they are in the tour de france amiright?

What are the drawbacks exactly?

They're basically custom-designed to kill pedestrians and bikers if you're not paying attention for one.

You're 5x more likely to kill a pedestrian in an urban area than a rural one, and 2x as likely to do so after 6:00pm.

The relative risk of being killed by a light truck compared to a car is only 1.45 (i.e. 45% greater) and is 0.96 for a heavy truck (in other words less likely than being killed by a car). Buses have a relative risk of 7.97.

So living in a city and driving at night is custom-designed to kill pedestrians and selfish to do so. Encouraging public transit is even worse.

Or you could just, you know, not turn this into a giant moral argument.

These things are not remotely comparable.

You're 5x more likely to kill someone in an urban area because more people live there (in fact, well above 5x more, so...)

> being killed by a light truck compared to a car is only 1.45 (i.e. 45% greater)

"Only"? "You're 50% more likely to die if a light truck hits you than a car, that's "only" a bit more!"

> and is 0.96 for a heavy truck ... buses have a relative risk of 7.97

People tend to bounce off of heavy trucks, for better or worse. Buses are 1) significantly different in design than most heavy trucks, and 2) for obvious reasons, operate in very heavy pedestrian environments.

Just to clarify, he asked for a downside of trucks, I said they're far more likely to kill pedestrians and bikers than normal-sized cars in the event the driver hits someone (which is true). And the next logical step is "we should all live in the farmland and not leave the house at night"?

I think there's a difference between "One drawback is higher pedestrian fatality rates" and "They're basically custom-designed to kill pedestrians and bikers".