yo wrote:People are going to act irationally, make illogical decisions, be unpredictable, and in general do stuff you don't like. Suck it up. We are the only creatures that have the ability to make decisions not based on need, but on want, and you need to take the bad with the good on that one. It has produced great works of art and music, air travel that has gone from the first rickity flight to a man on the moon in 60 years, and a weird American taste for SUV's that seems to be globaly contageous (couldn't believe how many Jeep Grand Cherokees I saw last time I was in Paris and London, not to mention all the SUV's I saw last time in Korea), your going to have to learn to deal because you cannot make people do what you want, even if you think you know it's better for them, and still get all the good stuff that comes with all of that illogical unpredictableeness.
I totally agree, and thats why i threw the question out there. for some reason 'licensing' seems wrong, but one of many solutions to stop the problem.
THAT is the reason for narrowing the market: there is a PROBLEM with people buying huge trucks they dont need. Art, super technology or sending a man to mars will not come from letting people buy more SUVs they dont need. Looking for a solution might help and also may even help develop future technologies.
This is why i thought the idea of a speed limitor was a feasible solution: whoever wants to buy a super-off-road vehicle can. the catch is, how many who wont need one will still want one when they find out it doesnt go too fast? You filter down until you get the customer that truly needs one (or really really wants one).
that way YOU are not limiting who can and cannot buy this kind of vehicle, the customers are doing it themselves based on their likes/dislikes/needs etc.