I guess I just don't see that one has an ability to know enough about a stranger's situation to determine if their actions are acceptable or not. And more importantly, who exactly determines what the standards of acceptability are?
I think it's the usual standard of not being wasteful. Don't take more food than you can eat, so to speak. We are a very wasteful society and we're all guilty of taking more than we need in almost everything, every day. Some things are just a lot more obvious than others.
A generalization is certainly unfair in many cases, but again, if you genuinely need a big truck or SUV, then it doesn't apply to you. Fortunately, we now have models like Freestyle and Pilot that appeal to SUV buyers and have many of the advantages of minivans. For those with even more modest needs of size and space, a hybrid Highlander gets great city mileage for a 7-passenger vehicle. Even with AWD, it costs less than the full size, truck-based SUVs.
For the original poster, none of these newer, safer models is likely to fit the budget constraints. A 2004 Pacifica crossover SUV is a top contender, though, especially if you find one with optional side curtain airbags. You can find them for close to $10,000. For safety, I'd personally much rather have a Pacifica than any full-size SUV from a few years ago, let alone from 2000 or earlier. In addition to having side curtain airbags available, the 2004 Pacifica has a full set of shoulder belts and head restraints, good crash test ratings, reasonable performance/handling, relatively good fuel economy, low rollover risk and you can get AWD if you need it, too.
A few from a quick search-
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=218602968
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=221449211
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=214186153
For minivans, a 1999-2000 Honda Odyssey or a newer Ford minivan do pretty well for safety and might fit the budget, too.