this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2025
74 points (98.7% liked)

politics

26475 readers
2108 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This post uses a gift link with a view count limit. If it runs out, there is an archived copy of the article

The safety features are worth millions of crashes prevented and thousands of lives saved, making them remarkably cost-effective.

Capping the luxury features and size of passenger vehicles would do a lot more to bring down costs than removing safety features.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] snooggums@piefed.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Back up cameras are also important for sedans, hatchback, and anything else where you can't see something 24 inches tall right behind the rear bumper. They are a benefit for every enclosed vehicle, just like airbags and abs.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today -2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

They also put a distracting video monitor in front of the driver 100% of the time, not just the 0.2% while backing. Manufacturers have moved a lot of controls to that screen, rather than leaving them on tactile buttons and switches that could be operated without taking eyes off the road.

How many collisions have been caused by distractions from the these screens?

[–] jfrnz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This isn’t the fault of regulators. They would have done this regardless of backup camera regulation.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 0 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Unless they only permitted that screen to show a rear view. They could have prohibited any other use, or prohibited non-tactile controls that required ocular attention while driving. They could have required that touchscreen controls be disabled while driving. But they didn't.

They mandated the distracting screen, and probably killed more people than they saved.

[–] jfrnz@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago

The law doesn’t mandate a touch screen, nor that it be on while driving. And why should it? The goal is to address the blind spot, not to tell automakers how to build head units.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

They would have done the screens without the backup cameras.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today -1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Not if those distracting screens were prohibited.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 2 points 19 hours ago

They could ban the screens and keep the camera with a small screen that only displays the rear camera when in reverse and nothing else.