This obviously seems absurd but I feel like I can't see any clean reason why this isn't an obviously correct and uncontroversial opinion.
The main issue I see with SUVs and trucks is that every argument defending them doesn't really respond to the obvious issue with them: other people do not deserve to die just because you want a fancy truck/SUV. Think about any argument in favor of them. Then think about the fact that in a collision with a pedestrian, they are 2 or 3 times more likely to die if it's with an SUV. The numbers don't lie. Search up a graph of US pedestrian deaths over time. It reached a 40-year high recently. It's so terrible because we made so much progress, bringing them from just above 4,000 during the 2000's to over 6,000 today, a trend that's uniquely American/Canadian due to our love for heavy SUVs/trucks. Any argument about the utility of SUVs must explain why they are so necessary that we're willing to sacrifice thousands of lives every year for their continued existence.
The other big issue is the vehicle size arms race. If you live in America, you'll probably have seen how people keep buying bigger and bigger trucks/SUVs to gain safety through size. If you're in your tiny sedan, this creates a massive safety hazard. Once your neighbor hits you with the wrath of their Ford F-250 while you're in your 2,000 lb compact sedan, you just die lol. It's not even just because of the size of an SUV, it's also because SUVs and sedans have "crash incompatibility" which overwhelms crumple zones, causing you to die while they survive. This naturally leads to you buying a larger and heavier vehicle to protect yourself, and so the cycle continues.
The issue is that while the SUV makes YOU safer, it makes the road significantly more dangerous for other users, especially pedestrians who can't even buy their own SUV to (partially) compensate. The only way to end this arms race is through outlawing SUVs/trucks. By making it illegal to take selfish actions that make you safe while harming others, you actually become safe. You are now free from the endless cycle of size one-upping.
A few more reasons why I despise SUVs/trucks:
- Fuel economy and pollution. SUVs and trucks are exempt from CAFE regulations, so manufacturers don't care about efficiency. Electrification doesn't fully solve this either, since electricity still produces GHGs and manufacturing adds to emissions.
- Road damage. SUVs and trucks disproportionately destroy roads due to their weight, yet pay the same taxes. At the very least, we need massive registration taxes on them (or, if practical, taxing on miles)
- Visibility. Look at this image and tell me you don’t despise SUVs. If you’re too lazy to click, that’s an image of NINE CHILDREN lined up in front of an SUV. Guess how many the SUV can see? (the answer is zero). 500 children die yearly due to this…
- They're not even practical. What can an SUV do that a minivan can't? And don't say offroading or towing: 75% of truck owners tow once a year or less, and 70% go off-road once a year or less. Renting one for the day is a very easy and cheap solution.
Clarifications about my position:
- Minivans should still be legal. They have a lower pedestrian fatality rate, a sloped front, better crumple zones, sit lower to the ground, and are more fuel-efficient. Additionally, most uses people believe their trucks are "necessary" for like moving their large family, tool storage for certain professions can generally be solved with a minivan or van.
- The reason I'm not proposing banning all cars because cars have legitimate advantages over biking and public transit in many situations. They're just heavily overused.
- When I say “specialized permit,” I’m purposely leaving implementation vague. I’m not super interested in a semantics/implementation debate. However, I’ll give a simple explanation for what this could look like. Basically, you could undergo a rigorous application process, a harder driving test, and extra fees. Annoying enough that only people who truly need one bother, but not impossible.
- Additional fees don't solve anything. There is no tax sufficient to compensate for killing civilians unless the vehicle is genuinely necessary, which is why normal cars are broadly accepted.
- I'm more confident in my argument against SUVs than trucks, since SUVs seem truly useless while trucks may have some legitimate use cases.
- I think the reason Americans permit SUVs is due to marketing, cultural identity, America’s “individualistic” concept of safety (just look at how they test these things) and corporate $$$. If I’m missing something significant, please let me know.
- Self-driving is not currently widespread so making decisions based on a hypothetical tech future is silly.
TL;DR: SUVs and trucks create negative externalities. While they may benefit their drivers, they have a significant net negative harm on society. A just government identifies negative externalities and corrects them through regulation. No tax can adequately compensate for unnecessary human death. Therefore, only prohibition with narrow exceptions is sufficient.