US Gov't Moving To Require BackupCams...

motordavid · #1 12-04-2010, 07:30 PM

More gov't at 'work'...gotta love the Regulators.
GL, mD

U.S. to Require Rear-View Video on Cars

By JOSH MITCHELL

WASHINGTON—The Obama administration moved Friday to effectively require all passenger cars and buses to be equipped with rear-view video cameras to help prevent fatalities caused when drivers back over a child hidden in the blind spot behind a vehicle.

The technology, already offered in some models in the U.S., involves a small camera attached to the back of a car that sends a live video feed to a display mounted in the dashboard or rear-view mirror. It is designed to give drivers a broader view as they back out of a parking spot or driveway.

Regulators say they are trying to prevent incidents such as a 2002 crash that killed two-year-old Cameron Gulbransen of New York when his father backed up his car and accidentally drove over the boy in the family driveway. Congress passed legislation in 2008 named after the boy to require the administration to draft new rules on rear-view visibility.
The Transportation Department proposal, which would begin to affect new cars built after September 2012, would expand the required field of view for all cars, pickup trucks, minivans and buses. Regulators said they believe car makers will install rear-mounted video cameras to meet the requirements.

Such technology currently boosts the price of a car by as much as $200. But administration officials said the added cost is justified because the technology could potentially halve the number of deaths and injuries each year attributed to "back over" crashes, currently at about 207 and 15,446, respectively. Such crashes disproportionately affect children and elderly people.

"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 announcing the new rules.

Car makers such as Toyota Motor Corp. and Ford Motor Co. have already begun offering the technology in some models. Ford said Friday that nearly all models under the Ford and Lincoln brands would offer the technology by the end of next year.

The rule could cost the auto industry between $1.9 billion and $2.7 billion a year, according to regulators' estimates, unless auto makers can pass along the expense to consumers. But the industry is reluctant to vigorously oppose a proposal to prevent deadly accidents involving children.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the industry's main trade group, said it was reviewing the proposed rules. "Given that our top priority is keeping people—especially children—safe in and around autos, the Alliance looks forward to working with regulators to ensure that, in the end, we have enhancements that saves lives and improves safety," read a statement by the group, whose members include General Motors Co., Ford, Chrysler Group LLC and Toyota.

The rules would be phased in starting in 2012 and would apply to all cars manufactured after Sept. 1, 2014.

U.S. to Require Rear-View Video on Cars - WSJ.com

Sponsored Links

Naz24 · #2 12-04-2010, 09:19 PM

i love big brother obama--pshhh

this is absolutely ridiculous

consider all of the lower end car manufacturers.. None of them currently have LCD screens in their cars. they will now ALL need to have them. Did mr obama fail to think about the cost of this? Think about the Hyundai Accent, it costs less than 10k new. Do we really think a car that is made to be affordable now needs to have back up cameras? ha! what we should do is start manufacturing those back up cameras in America, along with the LCD screens. It's just another way to give the countries overseas more business.

Storm13 · #3 12-05-2010, 12:31 AM

So rather than take responsibility for buying a vehicle that he doesn't understand, and couldn't control, Mr. Gulbransen blames the auto industry because "we as drivers are not informed about the real danger of driving vehicles with large blind spots.."

Anyone who owns an SUV and thinks it doesn't have a big blind spot is a freaking moron.

Plus as a parent, it turns my stomach that he fails to take responsibility for the fact that he allowed his two year old son outside alone at 10:00 p.m.

amacman · #4 12-05-2010, 12:52 AM

I would prefer to observe properly whilst reversing

not stare at a small lcd screen in front of me .
reverse parking sensors would be more sensible if they really feel the need to legislate .

some people actually manage to reverse big rigs and the like into some very tight awkward spaces , even in the dark .

so why can`t a car driver be a little more observant .

Budget M3 · #5 12-05-2010, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by amacman

I would prefer to observe properly whilst reversing

not stare at a small lcd screen in front of me .

Agree...I have found it useful to actually LOOK in the direction you are driving AND use mirrors to look in the other direction...

amacman · #6 12-05-2010, 01:06 AM

I was having a small rant
the camera and lcd screen are a great safety system .
I think users should understand they are useful for checking first before you actually do proper observation .

JCL · #7 12-05-2010, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Naz24

I love big brother Obama--pshhh

This is absolutely ridiculous

Consider all of the lower end car manufacturers.. None of them currently have LCD screens in their cars. They will now ALL need to have them. Did President Obama fail to think about the cost of this?

What is ridiculous is the lack of critical thinking. Your scorn is misdirected. The accident that prompted this was in 2002. The law requiring that the Department of Transportation draft regulations to address this risk was signed in 2008. And not by Obama.

Quote:

Originally Posted by White House Press Release

President Bush signed the bill on Thursday which is the first new auto safety law passed by Congress since 2005. Below are the press releases:

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_____________________________________
For Immediate Release February 28, 2008

STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY
On Thursday, February 28, 2008, the President signed into law:
H.R. 1216, the “Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act of 2007 or the K.T. Safety Act of 2007,” which requires the Department of Transportation to issue regulations related to power window safety, rearward visibility, and rollaway prevention intended to reduce the incidence of child injury and death occurring inside and near motor vehicles.

Naz24 · #8 12-05-2010, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCL

What is ridiculous is the lack of critical thinking. Your scorn is misdirected. The accident that prompted this was in 2002. The law requiring that the Department of Transportation draft regulations to address this risk was signed in 2008. And not by Obama.

Jcl, you are completely correct. I stand corrected and have no problem admitting it! I should know better and have done my research.

But, I do think that this is going to be a very difficult law for the lower end car companies to follow. It's very unfortunate.

I'm curious. Does anyone know the actual number of "accidents" that are caused bc the lack of back up cams?

JCL · #9 12-05-2010, 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Naz24

Jcl, you are completely correct. I stand corrected and have no problem admitting it! I should know better and have done my research.

But, I do think that this is going to be a very difficult law for the lower end car companies to follow. It's very unfortunate.

I'm curious. Does anyone know the actual number of "accidents" that are caused bc the lack of back up cams?

I don't even live in the US, but the first link said that the law was passed in 2008. The timing just didn't fit with the blaming of your current president.

I don't think it is at all difficult for the car companies. They will implement it, and consumers will pay for it, whether they want a camera or not. Incidentally, the law doesn't require cameras. It requires better visibility. A camera is the most likely way to accomplish that, but more mirrors may work as well.

The actual number of accidents? That isn't much of a research challenge:

Quote:

Originally Posted by motordavid in the very first post in this thread

...the number of deaths and injuries each year attributed to "back over" crashes, currently at about 207 and 15,446...

chilliwilli · #10 12-05-2010, 09:08 AM

More wasteful expenditures, imo. While i feel for those that've lost loved ones...putting the burden on more tech' to do the work will only result in further negligence/slacking off and adding a false sense of security. What will they think of next when a child darts across the rear? You can't child-proof and idiot-proof everything. Hopefully, they also plan on improving drivers ed.

I wonder what the stats were back in the 60's-80's when drivers had to use actual instincts and common sense. I'll be waiting to read the metrics on this "solution".

Considering that Gentex stock has and will continue to reach new highs...can't help but wonder how much "lobbying" Gentex threw at politricktians...Gentex stock anyone?.../sarcasm.

Sponsored Links