Any automobile is a dangerous car in the wrong hands.


RHD or LHD doesnt matter to me. RHD just means I have to be more paitent and careful. I prefer LHD, but not every car was made to America's standards. Im just happy they come with seatbelts. Alot of olders cars still on the road have lap belts, and some have no belts at all, because they were optional. Stuff like that is a safety concern to me, not which side the steering wheel is on.

Just my 2 cents. I think we are blowing this out of proportion myself.

 

+2 zillion

 

That's what I'm getting at. In this country there is a large percentage of the driving population that are dangerous and inept behind the wheel of a LHD vehicle, let alone putting a RHD vehicle in there hands. I believe THAT is the prime concern Transport Canada has.

Do I think T.C should ban RHD cars? No. Do I really care? Not really. My arguement is with this ridiculous notion that T.C is somehow being influenced by auto dealers and that this is somehow an attack on free trade, it's nonsense. I continuted my conversation with an owner of multiple dealerships today, and he again laughed saying "If we thought or it became appearant RHD vehicles were eating into our sales in any way, we would simply import and sell them ourselves, not lobby to have them banned"

 

[QUOTE=TD07]

Motorcycles are designed to operate on our road systems. RHD vehicles are NOT. Ill informed? Uh ya I'm ill informed, I guess the steering wheel of a RHD car is actually on the left, not making it more difficult to pass on single lane highway's, or make left turns into on coming traffic. Use your head.

I'm in no way, shape or form lost on the concept of having to crane your neck to the left (or if you're really dumb, swerving farther into the left lane) while driving a RHD vehicle on North American roads in order to confirm that the way is clear to pass on a two-lane blacktop.

LHD vehicles are allowed on roads in England, provided they have a sticker on the *** end that sez LHD. This has been going on for like, ever. England is one of the more socialist countries in the free world, so if there was a rash of people being killed by drivers of LHD vehicles on their roads they'd have put a stop to it a long time ago. But they haven't. I guess common sense among drivers of these cars prevailed.

So if insurance companies here are concerned about the potential risk why don't they simply raise the rate group in which these cars reside?


Well if it wasnt said earlier wasnt it what you were getting at?

Dude, ya gotta quit trying to put words in people's mouths like that--- it reflects badly on you and and takes away from your credibility on the points you make that are correct.

Again, TC will base their decisions on careful analysis rather than caving in to the wishes of a bunch of zealots-- they have their pride. But said zealots will certainly try to (diplomatically) influence TC's decision-making by appealing to aspects that they feel might sway TC: Aspects such as (perceived) safety issues (both with the car design and the boy-racer stereotypical drivers of them) and possibly emissions issues.


I am very good friends with 2 party's who between them own the vast majority of new/used car dealerships as well as a handfull of strickly used car dealerships in town. They laugh at the idea your proposing.

This of course explains everything. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
99.9999999999999% of people looking to purchase a used car will NOT even consider RHD for many reasons cheif among them the safety concerns you find non exsistant.

99.999999999999999% of car buyers won't even consider buying a rotary powered car because "they're junk and they blow up after 30,000 km due to bad seals and they only get 5 miles to the gallon." Does that make them right? Or just ignorant? But I digress.

The concept of buying a 15 year old RHD car that is in better condition and has lower mileage than comparable cars here that are only five years old --- and only pay 1/3rd the price of a comparable new car--- is relatively new so yeah, a very small percentage of otherwise new car buyers would chose to go this route--- for now. But it's a concept that's gaining in popularity, and there are those that, for their own reasons, don't want to see this happen.


Thanks for the spelling lesson

Yer welcome, and I was just razzin' ya.

Here's the big problem with the VAST majority of conspiracy theories, you would do well to listen up. The majority of these theories require the indivuduals at the heart of them to be more intelligent or as intelligent as you. This is rarely if ever the case. The average intelligence is low, very low, and 50% of the population is less intelligent than that.

Certain conspiracy theories are outrageous. The fake moon landing theory would be a prime example. Intelligence and common sense may not necessarily be mutually exclusive qualities, but you'd never know it based on the far-out garbage that some of these theorists spew. Some college professors (who we'd expect to know better, yet continue to vote liberal) tend to put forth some of the most daft set of beliefs imaginable. The problem is that many of their young and naive students view them as mesiahs. These professors' standing in society, along with their young following, mean that their postulates contain just enough truth to lend credibility to the bullshit.

But to suspect that a particular group of people might be against an idea because it could create competition for their business isn't that far fetched at all. In fact it's logical. We've seen this happen before and we will again. R-CALF, a U.S.-based livestock organization has been using the BSE excuse to try to ban cattle imports from Canada. Stephane Dion wants to tax the oil industry "to distribute the wealth to all Canadians." But after seeing the devastating results of Trudeau's National Energy Program can you blame Albertans for being a tad cynical? I can't.

Now then, If you were a car dealer, and not in a position to make money on an influx of RHD vehicles fron Japan, but you knew there was a remote possibility that this could become a much more popular option for Canadian buyers, would you want it to stop? I think so, in fact, you've already stated that you want them gone. You gave your reason as being safety related and whether I agree with you or not, it's a logical point of view.

But I still have to consider the possibility of ulterior motives based on my considerable knowledge of human nature, and on the fact that you've clearly stated you have good friends in the car sales business.

True, I'm sure there are many dealers that couldn't give a rat's *** one way or the other about the influx of RHD cars. It's small potatoes to them and they're not losing any sleep over it. But if it ever does become a problem for them I could certainly see a few of the more militant among them joining forces with others who want these cars gone and putting their two cents' worth in. And I have certainly considered the possibility that there may be those in that business that don't want it to get even that far if they can help it.

I'm scared for you Brett i thought it was just a tin foil hat but I am begining to think you might have some coat hangers proped out of yours as well.

Uh, the tin foil is so those bastards can't read my mind. But the coat hangers acted as a lightening rod and therefore had to go. Thanks for your concern, but there's no need to be scared for me--- I have it all under control, and my phaser's set on 'kill.'

 

I dont usually point out when someone is right, but you, my friend, are 100% correct.

The ban wont happen. Moving the year from 15 to 25 years will make no difference. I think the damage is done.

 

Here's where you're wrong.

A car dealer is just that. Someone who has access to the wholesale of cars for the purpose of re-sellign at a profit.

IF RHD cars could be imported at such low mileage and such pristene condition with such rock bottom prices, dealers would be STOCKED TO THE HILT with these cars. Its not rocket science...its business.

Lets do a hypothetical scenario....importing cars becomes a huge huge trend in car sales. So big in fact that used cars sales of domestic vehicles plummet. Used car dealers nation wide face bankruptcy from the grim fist of the "diamond in the rough" Japanese market. They decide to take action.

Do they:

a) lobby to the gov't to have said vehicles banned from the roads across the nation?
b) do nothing and let their wives/children starve?
c) play pictionary and toss lemons at midgets
d) use their assets and buying power to become "the" place to go to buy already imported/registered/saftied cars from Japan and other countries?

seriously......

It won't even get that far, this is way out of proportion stop grasping at straws.

Sure. The few you speak of will be the yuppies you see on the news whining. The other 98% will have already used their business savvy to harness this supposedly "all powerful" import market.

Good quesiton. Perhaps they already have but are fearing the worst from these apparent huge saftey risks. Anyone here in BC own a RHD? do you pay a higher premium then any typical LHD car you own or have owned?

 

I just thought I'd mention since the dealership debate is heating up;

Canyon Creek Toyota (calgary) actively Imports and sells RHD vehicles. It appears that they turn over quite a few. Most are obviously Toyota. But since most dealerships are individually owned, its the owners choice/preference weither to stock them or not.

I can also think of a few other dealers that do a few RHD Imports. The volume is hardly noticable since Out of Province Inspection can be costly.


On a similar note, Im seeing ALOT of US market cars being brought up. Usually in 'beat to death' condition. However, I've seen a few gems here and there.

 

I agree with points just made and the conversation I posted about earlier confirmed what's being said.

 

Ok, this actually makes sense. TC (and all of us) should be concerned about the boy racer types getting their hands on cars that are fast and, in the hands of someone too impatient to carefully overtake other vehicles, present yet another potential hazard. But banning the cars? Let's ban the drivers in question instead.

As for the stance on dealers not wanting their sales hurt by competition from importers, I knew that a few in the dealer network were active in this, but I was unaware of the extent of their involvement. And you're right--- Even the new car dealers would be more likely to take an "if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em" approach and get in on the action. (It would however, be interesting to see the response of domestic manufacturers if this were to take off on a grand scale. Hopefully they have no power to enforce an order that their dealer network be forbidden to engage in this practice). I stand corrected.

 

My whole point in posting this topic was that the idea of raising the age on importing non-Canadian certified cars (targeting, but not limited to RHD Japanese vehicles), is that this is potentially another example of government nannying and meddling that will take away choice - choice that also happens to allow for getting a used vehicle from Japan in good condition for a good price - choice that our expensive domestic new-and-used car market doesn't necessarily offer. I'm not particularly interested in a RHD Japanese car - but I know a good number of people here on the forum would be, and that's why I thought it should be a topic of interest.

Beyond that, I just disapprove of government agencies such as ICBC and BC Highways lobbying the federal Department of transportation to make changes that limit choice and restrict the market for all Canadians. The CBC news story I cited noted this was because of assumptions on the safety of RHD vehicles - something I'm sure they know because it is precisely their business to know. If these vehicles are being involved in a disportionate number of LH turn or two-lane highway passing accidents, it seems certain to me that they know, and could tell us to 3 decimal places just how much more (or less) these vehicles are likely to be involved in such accidents than equivalent North American models. That no such numbers appear to have been offered suggests a different agenda is at work - and a further reason to resist the nannying efforts. Like the street racing bill, this could be made out to be a public safety issue, regardless of whether it is in fact or will make any real difference, other than to limit choice. And I mention the street racing bill, not because I approve of street racing - I certainly don't, and I in fact take my car to the track every couple of weeks on average in the summer months to fill my "need for speed" and organize a good number of track events. But I do think the street racing bill was a useless bit of legislation that left street racing undefined (and therefore will allow lawyers and judges to make law in the courts), and that does nothing because existing penalties outweigh what it offers - if they were ever applied. Street racing is a miniscule problem (compared with other auto safety issues, like impaired driving, or even unsafely maintained vehicles), but that didn't prevent the government wasting its time on it - nor should we assume that it will prevent the government acting to limit choice even if it is in absence of any evidence of an actual problem.

 

^^^^^
Agreed. This post definitely struck a nerve--- The BC political scene is full of crackpots who really do have tin foil on their heads. Theirs is an ultra-left, intolerant, socialist and totalitarian mindset that makes garden-variety liberals look like neocons.

This was one of the reasons we moved away from Vancouver in 2000. At that time Translink, the Greater Vancouver Regional District transit authority, had been endowed with the power to impose a $0.02 per liter "transit levy" on all fuel purchased at the pumps in their jurisdiction, a move equivalent to handing an AK47 to a spoiled-brat two-year-old. This was a feeble attempt to blackmail people into parking their cars and taking transit instead. To make matters worse, their transit system was (and remains to this day) woefully inadequate and over-priced.

BC is a province where the elected officials cater to the shrill socialist enviro-**** movement like their political lives depend on it. The sad thing is, in that region their political lives DO depend on it. All the more reason for normal, rational individuals with a germ of common sense to leave that province in droves.