Please support this rule change

This approach quickly suffers a head-on collision with the fact the our gross national resources are finite.

 

this is true, but i think that anything produced in lots of millions, the cost will be reduced. i personally think the cost projected here is bit more than estimated and i cant help but wonder if we are ignoring the possibility that these cameras might benefit us in other ways.

looking at ONLY the deaths of toddlers from backing incidents is a very low percentage event. how about something that happens several thousand times a day? like fender benders. parking lot incidents, etc.

lets put that into the cost equation. now, granted in those events, no one died so i think we should apply much less weight to those incidents...say 5%... so that would be 5 % times a thousand times 365 days a year divided by what now?

 

Hi Dave,

Nothing prevents you from buying a vehicle with a backup camera, should you choose to do so. I am questioning why everyone should be forced to buy the camera, whether or not they perceive value in that feature.

Although my child may be worth an infinite amount to me, I would not presume to think that others would place a similar value on her life.

Our country and its residents do not possess infiinite resources. Cost/benefit tradeoffs are made every day. Hence my question whether or not this is the best use of $30 billion (over ten years.)

 

Patrick; that is why i am grateful that i am not the one who decides these things. as it stands, there are a lot of safety rules now that i think are ridiculous and not cost effective. the problem as i see it; our litigious society has raised the bar ever higher for what it seems to be lesser and lesser events.

this rule i can understand and i am sure it will be simply an option for many years to come. only then can we really evaluate its effective in saving lives and reducing accidents.

 

I honestly didn't mean to mock. I seriously have no idea what your point was and was trying to summarize what I got out of your comment so that you could confirm or advise. I guess confirmation is out, but I'm still lost. Feel free to mock me if it makes it easier to post.

 

Good point.

and... believe it or not, there are some (well one) people on this very forum who will disagree with that stance. No, I can't believe it either, but there it is.

 

I have not read the entire thread, but I could go with rear-view cameras if they could also replace the side mirrors and reduce the wind resistance.

 

Indeed. Every life is beyond worth.

Now that we've got that out of the way, how much money do we have?

 

None. However, we owe:

ref: U.S. National Debt Clock

That said. If/when I ever have children, I will protect them from backup incidents by not purchasing an SUV and keeping them off of my property.

 

Doesn't that make raising them really hard?

 

I'm doing my part by sending a check for $0.56. Freedom isn't free.

Hey...wait a minute, the amount keeps increasing!

 

I have no idea why you might think that. Many of my friends with children do not/will not purchase SUVs and they do just fine? I am disappointed by the narrowness of mind many Americans appear to have about what is required to raise children (which my own parents somehow transcended).

 

Read your original post very carefully and they you'll get FL's joke.

 

I don't think SUVs are the point, or pickups, or RVs. Every car has a huge blind spot back there. Without the backup camera how much could you see below the rear split window?

- D

 

As far as the cost analysis of the backup camera is concerned, I have a camera in my $20 phone. The camera is a small fraction of its cost. The Prius already has a video display, which is cost effective because it allows for a variety of function displays that would otherwise need to be individual: gauges, stereo adjustment knobs, etc. This kind of display is becoming common in many cars, and undoubtedly the cost will come down. Evenually it may not be cost effective to include an instrument cluster, just display everything on a flat panel.

Also, I've heard the suggestion that cameras should be used in place of sideview mirrors, in order to reduce drag. There may be other uses that we haven't even conceived of.

If this legislation had been suggested 40 years ago it would have been totally unreasonable, but eventually, the funtionality might be a side effect of other advances, with no additional cost.

But actually I came into this thread because I hadn't seen anything posted by Bob Wilson in a while, and I did a search to figure out if he was still posting. Does anyone know if he was actually kicked off for starting this thread?

 

no, he wasn't kicked off, he was ticked off!

 

I also want to clarify this rumor is false: Some claim Bob displayed one graph too many and got barred from the Promised Land - not so.

 

^ ROFL!!! :lol::dance::lol::dance:

 

Sorry for the zombie thread/revival . . . . but . . . . . . Ever notice how utility workers put CONES out behind their vehicles? And sometime they put 'em in front of their vehicle too? That forces 'em to LOOK. Their dog would have still been alive ... just like the little boy in the accident story. It only takes mayby 7 or 8 seconds tops, to simply look. I've run over stuff ... deliberately. When you back up, if an item is too big to run over (and for example you "ONLY" think it's a newspaper) ... at SOME point you either brake (correct choice)... or you "guess" it'll be no big deal, and you keep on backing up. Slow down people . . . especially in reverse. Let the car simpy drift. You don't have to use the pedal . . . and GO FAST, in reverse. In fact you better darn well have your foot on the brake when you SLOWLY back up. You cant run over a 3 - 4 - 5 year old if you're moving at a turtle's pace. That said, "she-who-must-be-obeyed" ran into the prius maybe 4 years ago . . . . backing our RX-400h right into it. That means she didn't look. She assumed the driveway was clear. She assumed nothing would be in the rear view mirrors. she assumed nothing would be in view of the backup camera. All that, and she still managed to run into the prius. She doesn't like to be "scolded" ... and hear things like, "that could have been a 3 year old you ran into . . . ran over". Some people will not learn, until it's too late.