this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2025
69 points (98.6% liked)

politics

26475 readers
2254 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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 29 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the only life a republican values (other than their own) is that of a fetus, and even that is temporary.

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago

And only if the fetus ain't miscegenated...

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Profit over people. The Republican mantra.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] muffedtrims@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Darkaga@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Honestly the Canyonaro doesn't even seem that big anymore.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

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

The average cost isn't the problem; the base cost is.

There are good arguments for limiting vehicle size and weight for safety reasons, but that's a separate issue.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yep, that $2 sensor is really driving up costs.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 1 points 19 hours ago

And running the wiring with the rear lights wiring is sooooooo expensive to install.

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Compact cars are all in the low $20,000 range, so I don't know what affordability problem they're talking about for vehicles. Oh, that's right, many Americans have an insatiable desire for mobile fortresses that cost $100,000. Well, I'm sure not having ABS or rear cameras on those will turn out well for everyone else and shave off $500.

And I've never been inconvenienced by an alert that I had stuff in the back seat after a trip to the grocery store. It keeps forgetful parents from leaving their kids in hot cars, especially in the aforementioned parking lot tanks.

[–] Zephorah@discuss.online 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I basic light truck ran $19k in 19. A sedan, $14k.

Wages haven’t gone up.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Buddy my whole car was $500 and I have an insatiable desire to keep it that way. Less components not more across the board please. I don't know what kind of bougie-ass bubble you're living in where a cheap car is $20k, but I sure hope it pops while we've still got a planet

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'm talking about new compact car prices, not used car prices, because the article is talking about attempting to bring down new car prices by removing safety features.

Car prices have always been around that much, adjusted for inflation.

collapsed inline mediaPopular car prices over time

[–] Trigger2_2000@sh.itjust.works 2 points 19 hours ago

OMFG, these things (I can't call them people) are monsters [get rid of rear-seat reminders]!

[–] londos@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

Let R's own making seatbelts optional.

[–] dgdft@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

I’ll say it: Ditching ABS is horrifically stupid, but mandating backup cameras and backseat alarms is equally stupid in the opposite direction.

E: The article is talking about full-auto emergency braking and not ABS. I never thought I’d say these words, but I’m with Ted Cruz on this one.

[–] jfrnz@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (26 children)

Mandating backup cameras is not stupid. There’s a legitimate blind spot that has caused numerous child deaths. It’s okay for a car to cost a little more if it means it’s less likely to kill someone.

No comment on backseat alarms.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Are the backseat alarms smart enough to only alert when there's something back there yet? Otherwise it seems like it's just an annoyance or something that people will start to mentally filter out.

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

They seem to use weight to determine if a person is in a seat so they will mistake anything considered a significant enough weight as a person. Doesn't keep you from turning the car off or anything just dings and puts an alert up on the screen.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Thanks, the few times I've been in a car with that feature it seemed to just go off no matter what and was super annoying.

[–] faythofdragons@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ugh, I hope it's better than the last car I drove, couldn't set groceries on the seat or it'd trigger the seatbelt alarm.

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

Seatbelt alarm seems to need more weight than the backseat check alarm.

[–] faythofdragons@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That sounds absolutely ridiculous. What's the point of needing less weight to set off backseat alarms? A gallon of water is only like 4kg and that's enough to set off seatbelt alarms.

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Fucked if I know. All I know is groceries haven't set off the seatbelt alarm while car/boosterseats set off the check backset alarm.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 11 minutes ago

In my car I haven't figured out what sets it off, it happens all the the with nothing in the backseat.

I appreciate the intent, but at least in my car the false positive rate is so high I could imagine ignoring it

[–] watson387@sopuli.xyz 1 points 23 hours ago

If I open the back doors of my car before I get in the driver's seat and drive it then I'll get the notification when I shut the car off.

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] evenglow@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Not just Ted. Legacy auto too. You should see what Chinese EVs have been doing to Euro NCAP lately.

NHTSA last year required automatic braking systems in new cars starting in 2029; automakers have tried to block the rule from taking effect, arguing NHTSA’s standards are impractical and could cause rear-end collisions by braking before drivers expect. The agency said this year that it was considering extending the deadline.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 2 points 1 day ago

Nope, it’s screaming metal deathtrap or the feature that beeps if someone is detected picking their nose and can only be reset by the vendor.

We need ranked choice voting so badly.

load more comments
view more: next ›