Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,755 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Estimated cost $2-$4 billion to save 146 people. For full effect let us see the zeros: $2,000,000,000 to $4,000,000,000 to save at most 146 people. That is over $20,000,000 per person! That far exceeds the estimated present value of most peoples income. A human is not worth $20,000,000. This has to stop! But no...we need it for the children!

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which published the proposed rule today, said an average of 292 people die each year from back-over accidents, which primarily kill children and the elderly. To equip a new-vehicle fleet of 16.6 million produced in a year would cost from $1.9 billion to $2.7 billion, the agency said in the proposal. It called the cost “substantial,†and said the measure might reduce back-over deaths and injuries by almost half.
“There is no more tragic accident than for a parent or caregiver to back out of a garage or driveway and kill or injure an undetected child playing behind the vehicle,†Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a statement. “The changes we are proposing today will help drivers see into those blind zones directly behind vehicles to make sure it is safe to back up.â€
Can we get a list of Congress members who own stock in Gentex?
Gentex rose $4.06, or 18 percent, to $26.89 at 4 p.m.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-...cars-by-2014-to-stem-back-over-accidents.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,286 Posts
AEKDB said:
Estimated cost $2-$4 billion to save 146 people. For full effect let us see the zeros: $2,000,000,000 to $4,000,000,000 to save at most 146 people. That is over $20,000,000 per person! That far exceeds the estimated present value of most peoples income. A human is not worth $20,000,000. This has to stop! But no...we need it for the children!

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which published the proposed rule today, said an average of 292 people die each year from back-over accidents, which primarily kill children and the elderly. To equip a new-vehicle fleet of 16.6 million produced in a year would cost from $1.9 billion to $2.7 billion, the agency said in the proposal. It called the cost “substantial,†and said the measure might reduce back-over deaths and injuries by almost half.
[quote:1rdbk67u]“There is no more tragic accident than for a parent or caregiver to back out of a garage or driveway and kill or injure an undetected child playing behind the vehicle,†Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a statement. “The changes we are proposing today will help drivers see into those blind zones directly behind vehicles to make sure it is safe to back up.â€
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-...cars-by-2014-to-stem-back-over-accidents.html[/quote:1rdbk67u]
so..... why dont they come up with a cure for stupid, instead of spending all this money?
 

·
Clueless
Joined
·
3,707 Posts
Eh a Federal mandate to stop this is ridiculous. Maybe they should just help the stupid people get these systems installed. Then leave the responsible drivers alone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,992 Posts
Well....there goes the bumper industry. No more dinged up bumpers from trying to hitch a trailer....
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,316 Posts
This is what we get when we believe the stupid line: "If it saves just one life, it's worth it."
Sorry, it's not.

P.S. We could save 10X more lives if we just made all people wear helmets and four-point restraint systems instead of regular seat belts.
But THAT is not worth it either!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,992 Posts
mpc said:
So, when the camera records a police officer and you happen to be in a state that requires two party consent, what happens?
All the backup cameras I have seen do not record. It only activates when the car in Reverse, and feeds live streaming video to a small screen in the cab, generally in the rear view mirror.
 

·
Seasteading Aficionado
Joined
·
44,896 Posts
We have the government that we deserve. When enough of us stand up against this sort of ridiculousness, it will end. Until then, this is what we get and deserve. Man, this is getting absurd. Our federal government is out of control.
 

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
11,855 Posts
EJR914 said:
We have the government that we deserve. When enough of us stand up against this sort of ridiculousness, it will end. Until then, this is what we get and deserve. Man, this is getting absurd. Our federal government is out of control.
This may sound silly, but if this isn't stopped, salt will be labeled as either a medicine or a restricted supplement, and you'll either need a prescription, or you will need to show a ration card to buy any. It's for our own health you know, and the government really cares about us. :puke:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,679 Posts
What do you lawyers think in regards to the legality/constitutionality of rules that have the weight of law that does not go through the legislative process? There are many organizations that seem to have power backed by government muscle that pass rules this way. I think the NHTSA is part of the DOT but some of these are not even government entities (e.g. OSHA).

To me, it seems to totally circumvent the legislative process and checks and balances intended by the constitution. What do yall think?
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,316 Posts
samman23 said:
What do you lawyers think in regards to the legality/constitutionality of rules that have the weight of law that does not go through the legislative process? There are many organizations that seem to have power backed by government muscle that pass rules this way. I think the NHTSA is part of the DOT but some of these are not even government entities (e.g. OSHA).

To me, it seems to totally circumvent the legislative process and checks and balances intended by the constitution. What do yall think?
I think that this mandatory-rear-camera thing is totally new, and therefore agencies should not be able to regulate it without enabling legislation from Congress.
And if Congress passes "enabling legislation" that is too broad, giving them the power to do whatever they want as long as it has to do with vehicle safety and crash reduction, that should be struck down by the courts.

BUT, Congress cannot and should not deal with the details of the law, and how to enforce it. Congress should pass the main framework and substance of the law, but then delegate to a federal agency the task of working up all the details.
For example, I think Congress should vote on a law requiring cameras in cars. Let Congress hear expert testimony from the car industry, consumer advocates, privacy advocates, and the camera manufacturers. The law Congress passes should be short. One or two pages, max. Just put the main points down on paper. One of the main points should be that the cameras do not record, save, store, or transmit any data, except to the display screen for the driver to view.

Then say that the agency has authority to flesh-out the details, like:
1-- What kind of cameras are good enough quality to satisfy this law, and which kind are not suitable? What if the view is not wide-angle? What if the camera can't see anything in dimly-lit conditions?
2-- Where should the display screen be placed so the driver can see it, but it is not distracting? If the screen is also used to display other data, will it automatically switch to camera view whenever the vehicle is backing up?
3-- Should the camera only come on when the vehicle's transmission is put in "reverse" or anytime the vehicle's wheels are rolling backward, which might occur in "neutral" or even "drive" if there's a steep hill?

Let Congress endorse the concept in general of burdening the American people with this largely unwanted technology that has a huge potential for abuse (federally-mandated surveillance cameras in all our cars ???, both facing out and facing in? Big Brother types would love that). THen let the agency come up with all the many rules and regulations and procedures and policies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,842 Posts
How ridiculous!

When I learned how to drive I was taught to always look behind the car by physically turning and looking before you started moving.

What's so hard about that?? :?
 

·
Under Scrutiny
Joined
·
19,386 Posts
This sort of thing is nothing new.

From 2007
Last week, the NHTSA announced its final rules that will require electronic stability control on all light duty vehicles by September, 2011. For once, a new regulation on cars from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has been welcomed by car-makers instead of drawing complaints. This probably has something to do with the fact that pretty much every automaker is already planning to make stability control standard equipment, and can cheer itself on in advertisements for being ahead of the curve.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,016 Posts
Glocker said:
How ridiculous!

When I learned how to drive I was taught to always look behind the car by physically turning and looking before you started moving.

What's so hard about that?? :?
In an area where small (read short) children are present it is not sufficient. I like the approach that most utility companies have taken with their drivers where they place an orange cone behind their parked vehicle and physically walk to the back of their vehicle and remove it before backing up.

I don't carry an orange traffic cone, but because I live in a neighborhood where small children are present I always check the back of my vehicle by walking back there, not depending on my rear view or side mirrors before getting in and backing up.

An extra 5 seconds to avoid tragedy is well worth it, even for a poor kid who maybe has limited lifetime earning potential as one of our posters has suggested in the past should be the metric.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,966 Posts
Problem with the backup cameras is the drivers will become fixated with the screen image that they see. They won't even bother checking either side of the vehicle and will end up hitting something else anways. How is it automobiles have been around for so long without backup cameras, and it is just now getting "unsafe" to not have them.....
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top