Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 125

Thread: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

  1. #51
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Increasing popularity of SUVs, which are vehicles with larger blindspots.
    You're asking children to "be more aware of their surroundings" too, you know. Kids do dumbass stuff like chase after a ball or suddenly decide they're a snake and lie down on the sidewalk. No, we can't "just be careful." Nobody is always careful. It's impossible, we're human beings.

    I can get one of these cameras for like a hundred bucks at Best Buy. Installed. Manufacturers buying them in bulk will add maybe 50 bucks to the price of the car. Those manufacturers who don't already do this standard anyway.
    So go do it. Nobody is stopping you.

    The fact that you like something does not mean it should be mandatory for everyone.

    It's a reasonable precaution and is inexpensive. Are you up in arms about your airbag and seatbelts also?
    As discussed earlier, there are a couple of orders of magnitude of difference in terms of the impact of rearview cameras v. seatbelts.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  2. #52
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    It's a reasonable precaution and is inexpensive. Are you up in arms about your airbag and seatbelts also?
    Actually I am yes. Airbags have been known to kill people and/or not deploy properly so six to one half dozen to the other in my book. As for seatbelts they can kill people also, they can also do more damage to a person than a person without a seatbelt on. I'm also against electric windows in cars.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  3. #53
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,377

    Re: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    This is no different than requiring cars to have seatbelts or air bags.
    You're right. It's the same level of over-regulation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  4. #54
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,377

    Re: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    The cameras cost like $150 installed, and the requirement will only be fore *new* vehicles. Also, a cop has no way of knowing if your camera works or not and there's no proposal to make this a ticketable offense. The tax revenue will be... whatever the sales tax is on the camera. Bought in bulk and installed by manufacturers, you're probably talking $50 added to the price of the car. $100 tops.
    If it's required by law, on cars built after a certain date, it will be a ticketable offense, if it doesn't work; just like red turn signals, shoulder harnesses, license plate lamps, catalitic converters and ABS brakes.


    The camera provides you with a vantage point that rearview mirrors are incapable of, especially on larger vehicles like SUV's and trucks. No, I didn't assume people would look at the camera 100% of the time. Assuming any person will take any action 100% of the time is going to end poorly.

    Yes, this will make a difference, and it's not an unreasonable demand.
    But, is it worth the intrusion into our lives and our billfolds? I'm thinking, probably not.

    A more better solution, IMO, would be to only issue operator's licenses to those folks who possess the ability to be safe drivers. Being observant enough to know exactly what's behind your vehicle when you are backing up, would be one of the determining factors. Hell, that would save untold thousands of lives.
    Last edited by apdst; 12-05-10 at 09:30 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #55
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

    Quote Originally Posted by mike2810 View Post
    Young children have always been small
    yes cars are safer today
    born in the 50's.
    So what has changed from the 50/60's to now if we are having more kids runned over when people are backing? The topic is not about all traffic deaths, but backing accidents and mandating new techology to reduce running over kids. My point is the rear camera is ok, However, if people would pay attention, take care of their kids, we would not have these sad accidental deaths. Yes,more people live in city type environments. All the more reason to be aware of your surroundings. Heck, get out of the vehicle and make sure you know where the kids are or everything is clear before moving the vehicle.
    I'm not sure that there ARE more kids run over from people backing up now than there were in the 1950s. Nothing I've seen indicates that that's the case. The difference is that now we have the technology to cheaply and easily prevent it, and we didn't in the 1950s.

    Dismissing it as "just pay attention to your surroundings" overlooks two things: A) The victim is not the person who failed to pay attention, and B) It's easy to trivialize it if you just dismiss it as the actions of a few irresponsible people, but honestly who checks behind their car every time they back up?
    Last edited by Kandahar; 12-05-10 at 10:04 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  6. #56
    Sage
    mike2810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    arizona
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    15,011

    Re: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Increasing popularity of SUVs, which are vehicles with larger blindspots.
    You're asking children to "be more aware of their surroundings" too, you know. Kids do dumbass stuff like chase after a ball or suddenly decide they're a snake and lie down on the sidewalk. No, we can't "just be careful." Nobody is always careful. It's impossible, we're human beings.

    I can get one of these cameras for like a hundred bucks at Best Buy. Installed. Manufacturers buying them in bulk will add maybe 50 bucks to the price of the car. Those manufacturers who don't already do this standard anyway.

    It's a reasonable precaution and is inexpensive. Are you up in arms about your airbag and seatbelts also?
    Kids have dumbass things since time began.
    I am not arguing against the cost. It imo would be very small compared to the total price of a vehicle.
    Vehicles have had blind spots since they were built. Some are worse than others.
    My point is why always look to the govt for solutions. will adding cameras stop all backup accidents involving kids? I doubt it. Can the accidents be reduced by drivers paying more attention, realizing blind spots, checking outside the vehicle before moving the vehicle? Bet the results would be similar in reducing accidents.
    "I can explain it to you but, I can't understand it for you"

  7. #57
    Sage
    mike2810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    arizona
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    15,011

    Re: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I'm not sure that there ARE more kids run over from people backing up now than there were in the 1950s. Nothing I've seen indicates that that's the case. The difference is that now we have the technology to cheaply and easily prevent it, and we didn't in the 1950s.

    Dismissing it as "just pay attention to your surroundings" overlooks two things: A) The victim is not the person who failed to pay attention, and B) It's easy to trivialize it if you just dismiss it as the actions of a few irresponsible people, but honestly who checks behind their car every time they back up?
    In backing accidents, it is the personal responsibility of the driver.

    and a driver will always look in the video camera? could this lead to not paying attention the the camera blindspots, like the side of the vehicle.

    The whole point is accidents will happen. When drivers payed more attention, when parents/gardians paid more attention, the chances of an accident is reduced without the need for technology. We just as well mandate proximaty radar along with the camara, just to be sure. The technology is available.
    "I can explain it to you but, I can't understand it for you"

  8. #58
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,777

    Re: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    So go do it. Nobody is stopping you.

    The fact that you like something does not mean it should be mandatory for everyone

    As discussed earlier, there are a couple of orders of magnitude of difference in terms of the impact of rearview cameras v. seatbelts.
    Auto safety regulations protect people other than yourself. Especially a piece of equipment like this. Yes, I have a stake in this too.
    It's a small expense, but it's somehow bad because it doesn't save more than some arbitrary number of lives? Where do you draw the line, exactly?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Actually I am yes. Airbags have been known to kill people and/or not deploy properly so six to one half dozen to the other in my book. As for seatbelts they can kill people also, they can also do more damage to a person than a person without a seatbelt on. I'm also against electric windows in cars.
    Airbags have been known to kill people but odds are far, far greater that they save your life. Unless you've got precognitive awareness of the type of accident you'll be in, you're better off with a seatbelt and airbag.
    Electric windows are basically cosmetic and not required by law, as far as I'm aware.


    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    If it's required by law, on cars built after a certain date, it will be a ticketable offense, if it doesn't work; just like red turn signals, shoulder harnesses, license plate lamps, catalitic converters and ABS brakes.
    First, a law still has to be written to specifically make this a traffic violation, and second how the hell is a cop supposed to know if your backup camera is broken?




    But, is it worth the intrusion into our lives and our billfolds? I'm thinking, probably not.

    A more better solution, IMO, would be to only issue operator's licenses to those folks who possess the ability to be safe drivers. Being observant enough to know exactly what's behind your vehicle when you are backing up, would be one of the determining factors. Hell, that would save untold thousands of lives.
    So now you want some "drivers panel" to decide whether or not you're "safe enough."
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  9. #59
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Airbags have been known to kill people but odds are far, far greater that they save your life. Unless you've got precognitive awareness of the type of accident you'll be in, you're better off with a seatbelt and airbag.
    Electric windows are basically cosmetic and not required by law, as far as I'm aware.
    Oh well, if you're going by "odds are" then you won't mind the TSA using full body scanners and doing invasive pat downs right? After all, if 9/11 happened once then the odds are that it will happen again right?

    Yes I know, two totally different things with totally different odds also. But the premise is the same.

    As for the seat belt, I had an instructor that was transporting 3 students to a nursing home to get hands on training for their CNA's. Due to black ice on the road a person ran head on into the van that the instructor was driving. 2 people were wearing seat belts, the other two was not. The ones wearing the seat belts ended up in the hospital for 2 weeks roughly. The ones that were not came back to the Job Corp the same day with minor bruising.

    I told that little bit not to use as an example of statistics but as an example that crap is going to happen regardless of any safety gear used. For this reason it should not be mandatory. It should be up to the individual person. When the government starts making things like this mandatory they will continue to do so every chance that they get. Where does it stop? When does personal responsibility stop being shoved aside?
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #60
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Rear-view cameras on cars could become mandatory

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Auto safety regulations protect people other than yourself. Especially a piece of equipment like this. Yes, I have a stake in this too.
    It's a small expense, but it's somehow bad because it doesn't save more than some arbitrary number of lives? Where do you draw the line, exactly?
    Personally, I draw the line at somewhere greater than 1/100th (at best) of the cost-effectiveness of seatbelts.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... 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
  •