I'm honestly curious how one can see a school bus' seat design as government oppression. I get the Libertarian perspective on some things but in many issues, it gets nonsensical to me. It's almost to the point where one vehemently opposes any government involvement regardless of good or bad. I get it with taxes and overspending but buses and seat belts? I need you to walk me through that one and I'm not being facetious here.Woodie wrote:
I get a huge kick out of the mental gymnastics you go through trying to justify what is, in reality, government oppression.Only a lawyer could actually write such things with a straight face.
The Jimny is "safe" in most other countries but not here because the US has much higher standards for crash safety than the rest of the world. In fact, most other countries don't even have government or private crash testing at all. In essence, what is considered "safe" is all relative. In some countries the Jimny is sold in, you're "lucky" if your kid doesn't come across a land mine or doesn't have parasites. Hence, a vehicle's safety is all relative to the standards of living and life expectancy in any one place. I can say this with confidence given the Jimny, according to Suzuki, is sold in over 190 countries.Ronzuki wrote: It saddens me terribly to know marvelous things in detail about that which I deeply desire and can never own. Transfer case mounting is virtually identical to that of the Samurai. If it ain't broken why fix it aye?
Free country? Let's think about that one for a long hard minute. A Jimny apparently is 'safe' for the vast majority of the rest of the world's population to own and enjoy...just not here. The machine, or most any machine, is extremely safe if properly maintained and operated within its design parameters, under the guidance of good old fashioned common sense. The fools that can't understand the requirements and dynamics of operating anything correctly shouldn't be protected by regulation, dictating design, at the great expense of everyone else. Those fools should be left to their own demise.
Also, you're assuming incorrectly that an accident is always caused by the operator of any involved vehicle. If one vehicle hit another, it's often just one of them at fault yet the laws of physics doesn't care who gets injured or killed based on fault. Hence, it's common sense that cars are to be as safe as possible. I rather replace a car than lose a leg... or my kid.
So why is a vehicle like the Jimny considered not suited for American roads? I'm going to guess population density, the number of cars on the road, the mass and weight of the average car, and the speeds we travel at frequently which are considerably higher and for longer than most other countries. I regularly and legally drive down avenues at higher speed here in California than what's allowed on overhead highways in Japan that link cities which are the closest thing they have to freeways in urban areas. These Japanese highways are also tolled unlike most of America's interstate system. When I traveled across the US twice last summer, I only paid one toll and that was on the I-70 at Topeka, KS costing me $2 or $2.50. In other countries, you need to pay a toll just to get from one city to another all while paying easily over twice the cost for fuel. So while the US may impose vehicle regulations that we don't agree with, trust me, it's much better here to own a car and drive than most other countries. Much like safety, "freedom" is all relative and most Americans don't realize how good they have it until they go visit other countries. It seems to me that most other first world nations like to regulate and tax more while others are laxed on vehicle regulations because they don't even have paved roads in many places and the government is more concerned with quelling rebels.
While I do agree that the Jimny would be a desirable vehicle in the US in most situations, it's a reality that it will not keep occupants safe enough, even compared to similarly-sized vehicles with unibodies. While I'm not actually opposed to the Jimny being sold in the US, I think it would need some modifications for it to make it more suitable in the US for daily driving in all conditions. Again, it's my position that Suzuki has largely made vehicles for Asia in mind and then sold them around the world as global models. Suzuki's business model was to largely sell to the US and Canada the models they made for other markets. While this worked for a while, most other companies adapted to the US market, not only making the vehicles larger for America but also building them here. Suzuki did neither and also allowed their products to stagnate which American consumers don't see as competitive. For example, the Honda Civic and the Suzuki Jimny both originate around the same time; around 1970. However, since then, Honda has released ten generations of the Civic. Meanwhile, Suzuki has only four for the Jimny with the latest not even sold yet. Each Jimny generation was literally sold for nearly 20 years before the newer one came along. While there is wisdom in not changing what works, it's also not very competitive in a high consumption market.
Not only that, the Civic for decades has been made in the US while Suzuki never had a North American plant, relying on GM for Canadian manufacturing for badge-swapped models. This made Suzuki more vulnerable to currency exchange rates.
Suzuki was essentially to the US what Ford was like in Japan; just bringing over the cars not even made for that market and selling them at low volume. The cars weren't bad but not exactly suited for the market and didn't resonate with the majority of consumers, especially as the consumer trends changed. Not surprisingly, each withdrew from their respective foreign markets citing poor sales.
Lastly, we can blame the government all we want for the demise of Suzuki but it doesn't go to explain why Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Mazda, Subaru, and even little ol' Mitsubishi are still around in the US (and these are just Japanese companies like Suzuki). I don't think it's government regulations that do companies like Suzuki in but rather for reasons in which they can only blame themselves. The Kizashi was a valiant effort for North America but it was too little too late and at the worst time.
, it never needed rear shoulder seat belts, or air bags or any of the now mandatory can't-live-w/o-it BS crap that priced Suzuki clean out of the country. It was never hit, nor did it ever hit anything, on a road that is 
. We strapped our first son's infant car seat in the middle of the back seat of the thing and went everywhere. He loved bouncing around back there...that was his sleeping tonic when he was cranky.
sold)
