Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 151

Thread: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

  1. #31
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    I am not outraged. But if they should mandate that a car have anything it should be speed limiters. Cocksucking douche bag assholes speed all the ****ing time with at least ten-twenty miles over the speed limit.They act as though somehow those are really speed suggestion signs instead of speed limit signs.During non-rush hour traffic they ride up close enough behind your vehicle that if they were any closer then they would owe you dinner and a movie and it doesn't matter if you are doing the speed limit or just going 5 miles over the speed limit.
    Yeah, and they also should put powder limits on ammo. "Cocksucking douche bag assholes" shoot up into the air all the time with ammo that will travel over a mile. Ammo should be limited to an effective lethal range of no more than 100 yards for rifles and 100 feet for handgun for all those dangerous irresponsible assholes. The government let's people get away with too much and really needs to crackdown on people's conduct.

  2. #32
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,569
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

    They definitely need to require backup cameras because new vehicles are way to cheap to buy now. They should require at least $10,000 more in safety equipment in every vehicle, plus continuous GPS to be able to ticket everyone who speeds, drives too slow or does not come to a complete stop at stop signs, plus by tying into computer systems everyone who starts to change lanes or turns without first putting on their turn signal. This should be interim technology until everyone personally can be GPSed with a microchip implanted into the body.

    It is pitiful how little government does to protect us from ourselves given all the technology now to police us for our own sake.

  3. #33
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    The same things were said about seat belts way back when. Then it was air bags etc.
    Well let's see. By 2025 the average MPG for every car sold must be almost 56mpg. For the largest market in the U.S., California, 1 out of every 5 cars sold must be ZERO emissions. The list goes on.

  4. #34
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    U.S. require new cars to have backup cameras - Mar. 31, 2014

    Cue up the right wing outrage. My left wing self thinks this is a great idea. I suspect most of us have backed into something over the course of time.
    One thing I have noticed repeatedly, over the past few years, is that on those occasions when I have had to rent a car while my own car was down for repairs, the car that I rented had terrible visibility to the sides and rear. This has included, in the last several years, a couple of Toyotas a Kia, and most recently, a couple of Fords. On this most recent occasion, having noticed just what the attribute is that causes this poor visibility, I have taken notice that the majority of recent-model sedans all appear to have this same attribute—an aspect of cosmetic styling that results in much higher lower edges on the side and rear windows.

    I don't know what it is, that has caused car manufacturers almost universally to make such a bad choice of cosmetics over safety, but surely this upcoming rear-camera requirement is a reaction to that. Rather than require such a rear camera system, perhaps it would make more sense to impose some basic visibility standards that my 1997 Ford Contour, and every other car that I have ever owned, have all easily met, but which newer cars do not. I can understand such visibility issues on truck/van/SUV-type vehicles, but I see no good reason at all why sedan-type vehicles ought to be so afflicted—no good reason why all modern sedans shouldn't offer visibility at least as good as what my Contour offers.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  5. #35
    Sage

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    12-04-17 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,361

    Re: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    Not the way my wife drives.
    Well then you should have it and I should not. Why remove the option?

  6. #36
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    One thing I have noticed repeatedly, over the past few years, is that on those occasions when I have had to rent a car while my own car was down for repairs, the car that I rented had terrible visibility to the sides and rear. This has included, in the last several years, a couple of Toyotas a Kia, and most recently, a couple of Fords. On this most recent occasion, having noticed just what the attribute is that causes this poor visibility, I have taken notice that the majority of recent-model sedans all appear to have this same attribute—an aspect of cosmetic styling that results in much higher lower edges on the side and rear windows.

    I don't know what it is, that has caused car manufacturers almost universally to make such a bad choice of cosmetics over safety, but surely this upcoming rear-camera requirement is a reaction to that. Rather than require such a rear camera system, perhaps it would make more sense to impose some basic visibility standards that my 1997 Ford Contour, and every other car that I have ever owned, have all easily met, but which newer cars do not. I can understand such visibility issues on truck/van/SUV-type vehicles, but I see no good reason at all why sedan-type vehicles ought to be so afflicted—no good reason why all modern sedans shouldn't offer visibility at least as good as what my Contour offers.
    Styling is certainly one thing. However, I think if you look into it, automakers are being forced to build smaller and smaller cars in order to meet CAFE MPG standards, while still providing ever increasing safety and protection. At some point, roll over protection, and other standards, will begin to dictate what can be legally built and sold in this country, and what it will look like.

  7. #37
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,194

    Re: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    U.S. require new cars to have backup cameras - Mar. 31, 2014

    Cue up the right wing outrage. My left wing self thinks this is a great idea. I suspect most of us have backed into something over the course of time.
    Another piece of electronics/communications equipment on modern cars designed to break down and be exorbitantly expensive to repair.

    Perhaps if they only issued driver's licenses to people who could actually drive, self parking cars, self driving cars, back up cameras, talking dashboards, etc. etc. wouldn't be needed.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  8. #38
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,482

    Re: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    U.S. require new cars to have backup cameras - Mar. 31, 2014

    Cue up the right wing outrage. My left wing self thinks this is a great idea. I suspect most of us have backed into something over the course of time.
    My buddies car has one and it is completely useless. I turn around to look. I would never depend on a limited view to show me where I am going.

  9. #39
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,194

    Re: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    Children and pets are often run over by cars backing up because they can be invisible in rearview mirrors. This requirement will probably save enough lives and prevent enough injuries to be worth the modest extra cost.
    Perhaps if people were more responsible parents and pet owners, there wouldn't be children and pets running around neighbourhoods and driveways unattended.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    08-19-16 @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,243

    Re: U.S. requires new cars to have backup cameras[W:26]

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Right wing outrage?? Really?? Oh, well.

    I have a back-up camera on my Lexus. Comes standard. The new ones (mine is 7 years old) have a wider angle back-up view. It's a good thing to have, in my opinion, although I certainly don't depend on it. But I don't depend on my mirrors either. Always a head swivel.
    Some pretty awesome resolution on those babies too isn't it? I don't mind backup cameras. Don't think they need to be mandated though. One thing I really like (does your Lexus have it Maggie?) is smart cruise. It gauges the speed of the car ahead of you when you have the cruise set and maintains a safe following distance, and if you steer around them or they turn it takes you back to the speed you were set at. Cool stuff. Of course I have none of these cool toys, my truck is 29 years old.

    OK, it wouldn't be a political site if I didn't throw out some partisanship though.

    If all liberals could see what was behind them they might not continue to make the same poor decisions

    snicker snicker

Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •