The Rear Camera Mandate

[Neanderthal]

It's unfortunate that we the people don't get to delay implementing lawful orders the way our servants do.

Last summer we got a letter from the state, saying if we didn't pay 50 bucks in back income taxes, our wages could be garnished, our bank accounts attached, a lien put on our house.

OH! We'd never gotten the first letter. Neither letter was delivery-confirmed, and in fact we could also have not gotten the second letter and have had the State come down on us for something we were unaware of, and which our tax preparer had apparently missed.

Yet a law is passed and signed, an agency is ordered to issue guidelines, and here we are, years later...

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - In the private hell of a mother's grief, the sounds come back to Judy Neiman. Her SUV door slamming. The slight bump as she backed up in the bank parking lot. The emergency room doctor's sobs as he said her 9-year-old daughter Sydnee, who previously had survived four open heart surgeries, would not make it this time after being backed over by her Mother's hulking SUV.

"They have to do something, because I've read about it happening to other people. I read about it and I said, 'I would die if it happens to me,'" Neiman says. "Then it did happen to me."
There is, in fact, a law in place that calls for new manufacturing requirements to improve the visibility behind passenger vehicles to help prevent such fatal backing crashes, which the government estimates kill some 228 people every year - 110 of them children age 10 and under - and injures another 17,000.

Congress passed the measure with strong bipartisan backing, and Republican President George W. Bush signed it in 2008.

But almost five years later, the standards have yet to be mandated because of delays by the U.S. Department of Transportation, which faced a Feb. 28, 2011, deadline to issue the new guidelines for car manufacturers. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has pushed back that deadline three times - promising in February that the rules would be issued by year's end.

While no one doubts that cameras could help reduce deaths, they aren't regarded as a perfect solution either. One recent study by a researcher at Oregon State University found that only one in five drivers used a rearview camera when it was available, but 88 percent of those who did avoided striking a child-sized decoy.

http://autos.aol.com/article/back-up...6pLid%3D249738

[F14CRAZY]

I'm happy my vehicles are without such systems, though I feel more strongly about TPMS's

[91 s-10baja]

I actually agree with John McElroy on this one.... sensors over cameras, see why: (ffwd to 1m22s)

[Bejeweled]

These things happen when cars and truck windows are the size of port holes. Once upon a time you could rest your arm on the window sill and get a farmers tan. Nowadays you need a periscope, radar, backup cameras and a host of other junk, because driving is an exercise in deep sea diving.

[unkillsam]

This is all just more of the same, American's not willing to own up to their own mistakes. Oh, I backed over my own child? Must be the auto-manufactures fault. Best idea, make the government protect me. I swear I am so tired of this Nanny State that it seems America is becoming addicted to. What happened to personal responsibility?

The only time I ever backed into anything was when I was 16 driving a 1994 Dodge Neon. There was nothing wrong with the visibility of the car, it was quite small. Quite the opposite, I was not paying attention.

How are these cameras going to help the idiots that don't wear seatbelts, text while driving, and blast the radio so loud they cannot hear what is going on around them.

Every time I step into the car, I visually check what is around my vehicle before I get in it, and use all 3 mirrors while backing up. As "bad" as the visibility is in my Camaro, gee I still have not backed into anything. Give me a Tahoe please!!! The visibility is much better.

[VS Ute 5Litre]

I actually agree with John McElroy on this one.... sensors over cameras, see why: (ffwd to 1m22s)

It's been proven that sensors don't see kids . Why not use both?

[91 s-10baja]

It's been proven that sensors don't see kids . Why not use both?

did you watch the clip? He made a good point of becoming too 'aclimated' to the camera, people tend to ignore them. I certainly don't use the one in my mothers Equinox, I would rather turn around and look myself. Why do we NEED mandates? They make drivers stoopid, lazy and reliant. Just my opinion

[PHAT-JAY]

I say we need the both..TPMS, and rearview cameras...

[VS Ute 5Litre]

did you watch the clip? He made a good point of becoming too 'aclimated' to the camera, people tend to ignore them. I certainly don't use the one in my mothers Equinox, I would rather turn around and look myself. Why do we NEED mandates? They make drivers stoopid, lazy and reliant. Just my opinion

I watched it

I don't see problem as manufacturers are adding screens regardless of mandates and cameras are a further nickel and dime add on

If it saves one kid it's worth it

[91 s-10baja]

I watched it

I don't see problem as manufacturers are adding screens regardless of mandates and cameras are a further nickel and dime add on

If it saves one kid it's worth it

I am not against saving children, I am against the goverments trigger happy way of picking what they think is the correct solution. Cameras that you possibly will eventually ignore is not the answer. Ultra sonic sensors that dont need to be cleaned, to work, and a way to NOT disable them is a far more reasonable approach. AND is less expensive.

[germeezy1]

Back up camera/ sensor systems are invaluable especially considering the small DLO's, and rear windows of many vehicles today.

[DoomsDave]

This is all just more of the same, American's not willing to own up to their own mistakes. Oh, I backed over my own child? Must be the auto-manufactures fault. Best idea, make the government protect me. I swear I am so tired of this Nanny State that it seems America is becoming addicted to. What happened to personal responsibility?

Where does it say that mother is not accepting personal responsibility for this? It simply states that she recognizes a problem and points out that we have cheap, readily available technology to help avoid it. What's wrong with adding technology to vehicles that will help save lives?

How are these cameras going to help the idiots that don't wear seatbelts, text while driving, and blast the radio so loud they cannot hear what is going on around them.

There are already laws on the books for all these issues. Why would you think that cameras would or should have any effect on this things?

Every time I step into the car, I visually check what is around my vehicle before I get in it, and use all 3 mirrors while backing up. As "bad" as the visibility is in my Camaro, gee I still have not backed into anything.

So, do you assume that all other drivers on the road are as attentive as you? Are you comfortable letting your kids walk around while other drivers are not so attentive? Why not have technology that will help protect your kids from people who are not as perfect drivers as you?

[91 s-10baja]

So, do you assume that all other drivers on the road are as attentive as you? Are you comfortable letting your kids walk around while other drivers are not so attentive? Why not have technology that will help protect your kids from people who are not as perfect drivers as you?

so, admittedly, these 'mandates' are for inattentive drivers. THEY are the problem. May as well devise airbags in all our kids clothing. Or in the rear bumpers, they alerady do in hoods. Government Motors. Now an actual government division.

[Smaart Aas Saabr]

So, do you assume that all other drivers on the road are as attentive as you? Are you comfortable letting your kids walk around while other drivers are not so attentive? Why not have technology that will help protect your kids from people who are not as perfect drivers as you?

Why are your kids walking around in parking lots behind moving vehicles? Kids should know already to stay the hell away from running vehicles in the parking lot, and secondly should be under your supervision anyway.

It is like the woman in the story, ran over her daughter in the bank parking lot. Uh, why the girl was not buckled in the seat of the car?! It is like worst case, she killed the kid in road accident, but in best-case, child abandonment...

I am not against saving children, I am against the goverments trigger happy way of picking what they think is the correct solution. Cameras that you possibly will eventually ignore is not the answer. Ultra sonic sensors that dont need to be cleaned, to work, and a way to NOT disable them is a far more reasonable approach. AND is less expensive.

But you need to disable them... otherwise they can start beeping like crazy and be annoying. Consider trailer towing or whatever.

[VS Ute 5Litre]

Most kids are not runover in parking lots but in their own parents driveways