On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 01:03:42 +0000, (Roger Hayter)
wrote:

snip


My point is the use of a 'bigger vehicle' as a means of making you or
your family safer is only relevant when you collide with a similar
size vehicle (when it just evens the odds) or when you are hit by a
bigger vehicle (when it improves your odds).

It's not 'right' to use someone else's family as part of your crumple
zone. ;-(

The point I am making is that if you drive at a sensible speed it will
only ever be the other person responsible for the collision.

And the point I was making it matters little who was 'responsible' for
a collision if it was a conscious decision by one party to make their
family safer by increasing the risk to others?

I suspect
most tank owners don't drive at 30mph round blind bends.

I hope you understood 'tank' = 'overlarge vehicle bought because it's
'safer' than a smaller one', not an actual tank?

Cheers, T i m