Joined Nov 2005
quick, like a bunny
Forum Thread
backup cameras mandatory in all new vehicles
March 31, 2014 at
12:13 PM
in
Autos
(4)
Automakers will be required to install backup cameras in most new vehicles by May 2018, a federal agency announced Monday. [cnn.com]
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration finalized a long-awaited rule requiring all new cars, SUVs, and minivans, as well as some new small trucks and buses to carry rear visibility technology.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration finalized a long-awaited rule requiring all new cars, SUVs, and minivans, as well as some new small trucks and buses to carry rear visibility technology.
194 Comments
Your comment cannot be blank.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
How in the hell does a driver take responsibility for the raising of the children that he may or may not hit?
I am, however, proud of your standardly deviant children.
I am, however, proud of your standardly deviant children.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
It's not even necessarily related to playing in the driveway behind a car. Kid walking down the sidewalk, driver backs out at the moment the kid crosses the blindspot, they're screwed. No horrible parenting involved, no idiot kid involved, just bad luck that could be prevented with this safety feature.
Please, stop making arguments to absurdity.
It's also a faulty argument because humans make mistakes. Innocent children should not have to pay for an inadvertent error on the part of their parent or another adult. It's a simple fact, you cannot watch your children 100% of the time, 24x7x365. So you need safety features.
And you're correct, we wouldn't need all this safety crap, but since our driving test is more or less a joke in this country...
Please, present a rational argument for why this safety feature should not be mandatory in the context of improving safety, not on some argument that has no logical basis in fact.
Yes, it is a joke. But that's not the point. Other nations with better testing still require these safety features. Because guess what? The economic losses of death and injury due to preventable accidents from safety features is more expensive than the cost to mandate the features. So screw your "freedoms", they never existed.
Please, present a rational argument for why this safety feature should not be mandatory in the context of improving safety, not on some argument that has no logical basis in fact.
To the second, there is kind of a distinction between a road accident and one that happens at 5mph or less in a parked car situation. Has nothing to do with the value of life. Just a semantic point of where the accidents are happening.
Want to make it a better safety item? Mount the display towards the rear of the vehicle so you can see it when you turn your head to look backwards. Then you can see the path of the car in the display while still being aware of approaching people or cars in your peripheral vision from the sides.
That's the problem with safety items that require the driver to be active to use--the driver is still the weak link and will find a way to screw it up. If there is a problem with backup sensors then make the technology better. My guess is that the technology is already there. If they can make cars that safely drive themselves like the Google car then I'm guessing they have the ability. I don't imagine that car is randomly stopping in the middle of the street due to false readings of something in its path.
As you said, humans make mistakes. Implementing safety items that require the driver to control the major part of its effectiveness isn't really the best answer.
Please, present a rational argument for why this safety feature should not be mandatory in the context of improving safety, not on some argument that has no logical basis in fact.
Navigational devices usually let you know what the speed limit is where you are driving; why not use that information and a governor to keep cars from exceeding the speed limit? Many accidents I see on the news are describes as involving "excessive speed". How many lives could be saved by regulating how fast a car can go in any given area?
But where do you stop? What are the statistics of people injured or killed in drunk driving accidents compared to people getting run over by cars moving in reverse? My guess is those numbers are a lot higher. Why doesn't every car have a breathalyzer hooked up to the ignition by now? The technology has been there for a long time and is already used frequently for people with multiple drinking and driving convictions. Why would this not be a brilliant safety device on every car that should be mandated?
Navigational devices usually let you know what the speed limit is where you are driving; why not use that information and a governor to keep cars from exceeding the speed limit? Many accidents I see on the news are describes as involving "excessive speed". How many lives could be saved by regulating how fast a car can go in any given area?
By the time the cameras are mandatory in 2018 do you really think many cars would not already have them? Several manufacturers are already making them standard equipment on all of their models. All the others would likely follow that trend without the government interfering. Making them mandatory will be more likely to limit what is available to what meets the standards rather than what people actually like and want.
By the time the cameras are mandatory in 2018 do you really think many cars would not already have them? Several manufacturers are already making them standard equipment on all of their models. All the others would likely follow that trend without the government interfering. Making them mandatory will be more likely to limit what is available to what meets the standards rather than what people actually like and want.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
It wouldn't be effective for the person running over the bicycle or garbage can left behind their car but that isn't a safety issue needing to be regulated anyway. It isn't going to help the infant left behind the vehicle in a car seat, but you really can't legislate away stupidity anyway, and can you really count on the person who is that careless to be diligently monitoring their backup camera anyway?
If the main goal was safety they would be looking for the best solution, not just the one that is an easier sell. And it is easier to sell a nifty camera with a cool display than it would be to sell an inexpensive but annoying alarm.