“The movement have now deflated tyres on around 9,000 SUVs in cities across the world since March, striking continuously, and look set to surpass their goal of 10,000 SUVs deflated by Christmas,” the statement added.
The group has said its aim is “to make it impossible to own an SUV in the world’s urban areas”, condemning the vehicles as “unnecessary ‘luxury emissions’, flaunted by the wealthy, that are a climate disaster, cause air pollution and make our roads more dangerous”.
lol, lmao
I'm legit interested in hearing the argument for small-scale stuff like this. It seems like all risk and no reward.
A pipeline is at least big enough to make waves on a national or even international scale. Look at the impact of Russia taking Nord Stream 1 offline. That kind of impact justifies all the stuff in the second point, and makes the action itself more defensible.
Then read the book the title of which you used as a foundation of your argument. The basics are that when this action took place in 2019 it saw a very significant dip in SUV sales in Sweden as a response.
deleted by creator
If we throw enough people in prison for drugs, will that lower the incidence of drug use? General deterrence mostly doesn't work.
This has got to be a troll.
You’re now comparing using the police state against people with drug addiction to deflating tires of SUVs??
No, I'm saying "punish a few people for X and you'll lower the incidence of X" usually doesn't hold water if X is in any way desirable.
There's a wealth of literature that extremely harsh penalties for recreational drug use don't deter recreational drug use. So why would a relatively mild penalty for driving an SUV deter people from buying SUVs?
Because the things are so entirely different that your analogy makes 0 sense in the actual world.
Sorry man, this isn’t academic hypotheticals. It worked in Sweden in 2019 so idk what to tell you.
How well do speeding tickets keep people from speeding?
If something worked once but failed a million other times, "it worked once" isn't very convincing.
Cool, I listed the worked once now list a million other times it hasn’t. I’ll wait until you get to one million.
when was it tried a million other times, dipass?
Also, newsflash driving an SUV might be slightly less addictive than heroine. Not sure though, might have to check the extensive literature.
We're talking about it right now -- can you give even a sentence or two on this point? I can't go and read a whole book immediately.
I just did.
I thought that was responding to something else, sorry. If that's the evidence for it generating a larger effect, I'm wondering why general deterrence seems to work with this and not work in so many other contexts.
Because having your car tires deflated leading to selecting a different vehicle is so entirely different than being thrown in jail for drug charges like you are running around this thread talking about.
It’s difficult for me to think of two things that are more different.
Fine, look at speeding tickets. How well do they keep people from speeding?
Why do you keep insisting on looking at different things. This thing has already been done and was effective, why would we disregard that and instead look at the migration habits of pigeons that have been given tickets for shoplifting corn at regional state fairs instead?
Idk what your real hang up is about this, but it’s getting weird.
Why am I searching for more tested comparisons for this hyper-specific and small scale action? Seriously?
You're intentionally missing a very simple point, so I'm done replying.
Probably pretty well, considering the fact that I don't speed to avoid tickets, and if there were no chance of a ticket, I would speed all the time.
(Do you seriously not believe in incentives or enforcement of any kind lol?)
I do it =/= most people do it. Some people respond to incentives and enforcement, but the manner of enforcement for stuff like this usually doesn't work. Tons of people speed even if the possibility of a ticket causes you personally not to.