Print 48 comment(s) - last by DT_Reader.. on Dec 18 at 2:24 PM

The rearview camera mandate would make it so every vehicle would have a backup camera for seeing behind the vehicle when in reverse

Source: The Detroit News

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: While Trying to Save Lives, U.S. Goes Broke
By twhittet on 12/14/2012 1:09:56 PM , Rating: 3
So at $50, that's only $2.5million per life - if EVERY person is saved. Is there proof that people will be saved? What %? 10%? 50%? 99%? What if people use backup cameras as a crutch, and it results in more people dying from lazy drivers?

The ESC (electronic stability control) mandate that went in this year I highly agreed with - as the statistics were very convincing that lives would be saved. I am currently less convinced of the need for a backup camera "mandate".

By Etsp on 12/17/2012 10:32:13 AM , Rating: 2
While saving lives seems to be the most advertised benefit, I think there would also be a reduction in insurance claims as a result of this. My understanding is that most accidents don't involve pedestrians.

You would calculate that it costs us $2.5 million per life saved (in a world that this works perfectly in), but there are other economic benefits to this. Fewer impacts with inanimate objects when backing up (a MUCH more common occurrence) will probably save a significant chunk of that overall cost, if not cover it completely.

"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki