According to an article in the Commercial Appeal, a man and wife were hitching their camper to their truck when the camper started to roll forward. She ran to the front to put the brakes on. The door flew open and hit her, knocking her to the ground. The camper ran over her, crushing her. A tragic accident.
In the comments section, someone comments that if RVs were banned, then this would not have happened. Do you get rid of something because there is an accident? The details in the article are sketchy. In fact, I'm not sure if she was going for the truck brakes or what. However, this probably happened because some step was missed. The wheels should have been chocked at the very least.
Obviously this commenter has a thing against RVs. Another poster mentions that some people think they should be banned because of the environmental damage they cause and all the fuel they use. Overall, if someone full-times in an RV, I think they have a smaller environmental footprint than living in a regular house. An RV can have a very small footprint for the RVer who has solar panels and who boondocks a lot. Most full-time RVers do not drive a lot of miles in a year either. Many commuters burn more fuel in a year than most of the RVers I know. And, in any case, our country is about choice. You vote with your dollars. Slowly, RV manufacturers are moving towards more fuel-efficient RVs and green features. That's because consumers are looking for those features.
Any comments? Jaimie Hall Bruzenak