Quicksilver, never did I advocate getting rid of good laws. What bothers me are the bad ones, because they never solve the problem, but do almost always limit our freedoms.

How do I distinguish between a good law and a bad one? I apply the following simple question: Sounds good, but does it solve the problem? If the answer is yes, then the law may have merits. If the answer is no, forget about it.

So a back up camera sounds good, but does it solve the problem of people, mainly kids, being killed by inattentive drivers? The answer is no. I'd rather have the funds being spent on something else. Heck, installing even a simple back-up sensor system would be a more cost efficient solution.

But I guess my main point is that why do the car companies, i.e. in the end we the car buying population, have to fund back-up cameras in every vehicle? Back-up cameras are already available on almost all car models as an option. If you're concerned about backing over kids etc., I am sure the sales rep will gladly add that option when you're buying the vehicle.