Feds Propose Backup Camera Mandate By 2014

Not quite sure that I quite see the need to make it "mandatory". But it should at least be a built-in option on every vehicle. The cost is pretty negligible, especially in such large volumes. I for one would love to have camera views to help cover all my blind spots.

Oh, so it's too much trouble now to turn your head and look at what you are doing?

The problem with this idea is that you don't get the field of view and depth perception that normal vision provides. So, you can't see what is laterally coming at you if you are heads down facing forward watching some dinky little screen.

Then again, it is probably going to be a godsend for those drivers that like to fill the back shelf of their cars with a collection of three generations of family stuffed animals.

It seems pretty logical that giving drives some vision in the blind spots - proper depth perception or not - is better than none at all.

It's worth noting that in many SUVs it is simply impossible to see objects under 3 feet tall which are directly behind, no matter how the very excellent driver might try to crane his neck. Roughly child-high, if you'll pardon that emotional example.

And sure, that lack of depth perception may cause some initial trouble for those drivers stupid enough to rely exclusively on an unfamilar camera view to maneuver their way around something, change lanes, etc. There mayl be a brief learning curve that the auto body shops and insurance industry will greatly enjoy. But I think that as with most technology people will quickly learn how to best utilize it. At least this one comes at a very moderate cost to implement.

Sadly, I think what's going to happen is that some people are going to put their blinders on (pardon the pun) and try to frame this exclusively as a "nanny state" argument.

Well, let's take that argument one bit at a time.

1. If people want those cameras, let them buy them. Why impose something on people that they may not want it nor need it?

2. You wrote, "It's worth noting that in many SUVs it is simply impossible to see objects under 3 feet tall which are directly behind..." Okay, they would be a candidate, but why should every car require a camera? What about a Miata, Smartcar, or a Honda Civic (and the countless others)? Only 50% of new vehicles are SUVs or light trucks. Light trucks provide excellent rear vision given their size, so only a portion of the 50% might really benefit.

Both of our cars in our family are small cars. Visibility out the back is excellent and it simply is not a problem.

Forcing small cars to add a camera also requires a monitor, so some small cars lack real-estate to add them.

3. If the camera screen is in the front of the car, how can you also look out the back with your eyes? If you use the monitor you can't have your head turned backwards, too! Using the camera implies being unable to utilize your peripheral vision.

Furthermore, backing out of a parking space or a driveway mandates that the driver be looking rearward to watch for approaching cross traffic.

4. This is a nanny-state proposal. Not all cars suffer from the blind SUV problem. Adding cameras will add another $300 to the end price for everyone and not everyone will need them. If you must make a law, the SUVs that are the offenders should be mandated first.

However, this is clearly another case where government decides that people are too stupid to take care of themselves, so government steps in and make everything nice and safe. That way people don't have to use their brains nor do they even have to act responsible - because all your responsibilities are slowly being taken away.

I can't describe how ill all of this is making me.

Soon, everything will be so safe, that none of us will be required to make decisions at all.

Soon, everything will be so safe, that none of us will be required to make decisions at all.

Yes and no, case in point the person who followed their vehicle GPS blindly and drove knowingly on to a train track. There are others (wrong way down one-way street, etc).

Before complete computer control removes the driver there will still be plenty of danger on the roads to go around.

It doesn't really matter what they come up with........they'll never be able to eliminate stupid.

As soon as they mandate backup cameras with an in dash screen, someone will come up with a way to play DVD's through the screen.

My Ford Taurus has sonic sensors mounted in the rear bumper. They detect objects as low as the curb in a parking lot when I am backing up, and cover an angular region of almost 180 degrees around the back of the car. They're much cheaper than cameras and the auditory warning works no matter which direction I'm looking. They are an option, and I like them so much I'll pay to have them again next time I buy a new car.

I think it would be great if all automakers offered them as options, but it shouldn't be yet another government regulation.

I really hate to admit I knee jerk to anything, but after listening to Ray LaHood respond in an interview on National Public Radio I have a tendency to simply dismiss whatever this man says as junk. I have no idea how he has made it to where he is, but it is not by his intellectual prowess.

Let's look at the mission statement of the Department of Transportation...

The Department's mission is "to develop and coordinate policies that will provide an efficient and economical national transportation system, with due regard for need, the environment, and the national defense."

Someone PLEASE explain to me how mandating backup cameras fits into the mission statement!!

This thread is sort of like a traffic accident. I really did not want to become involved, but I just have to look.

From todays Fastlane Blog:

"Today's proposal was mandated by The Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act of 2007, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bush. This law directs the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to issue a standard improving the ability of drivers to detect pedestrians in the area immediately behind their vehicles, minimizing the likelihood of a vehicle striking a pedestrian while reversing."

Thanks for pointing that out.

As I said, I tend to knee jerk anymore when I hear Ray LaHood in the same paragraph. Gotta do what the boss says right?

As a broader question... Is it right for the government to enact laws just because it has some kind of positive impact? As with all things there is no such thing as a free lunch and we as engineers understand incremental costs and points of diminishing returns. It seems to me that our legislators fail to grasp these concepts.

That mission statement sounds very similar to the one used many decades ago to develop our modern highways and interstate systems.

Some how I don't see how back up cameras will help with defence or most of anything in regards to the economics, environment or transportation system in general. They could have just as well listed combats cancer, Global Warming, and sequesters carbon and been no further off on anything.

Excellent! Lets mandate a forward camera also, we can eliminate the pesky windshield, reducing drag, increasing mpg, and driving can be just like a play station game. What fun.

Glad to see the government working so hard on job creation.........wonder where the cameras will be made.

What a bunch of milquetoast do nothings.

Or you can take the bus.

Yeah -- buses already have them!

Maybe they'll be required on motorcycles too.

They oughta mount paintball guns on the rear of vehicles. Just squirt a few blobs, and whoever doesn't get out of the way deserves their Darwin Award.

oh please , PLEASE DO ! (paintball guns)

I've been wanting one for years, to use on all o' them pesky tailgaters trying so hard to drive right up my tailpipe..........

I've towed trailers that were further back behind me than some people just following me. ;-)

In Oz, Most if not all incidents of people backing over "little people", occur at the family home, the drivers being one of the parents of said child. Invairably because they didn't do a quick walk around the vehicle.

Children can be very mobile and even with rear viewing cameras can put themselves in harms way before the parent driver can react.

Part of this problem (at least in Oz) is the fact that the driveway is used as a play area due to the lack of space in the back yards. The children are led to believe it is a safe area, compounded by parents leaving their OH&S risk assesment abilities at the kerb, which leads to these sorts of incidents.

As the OP says "Paying attention" is all it needs.

Like ABS, Air bags, and traction stability control, the rear view camera is a nice tertiary marketing tool not a primary safety item.

Nothing can replace a drivers responsibility.

It seems to to be a camera to check before I look over my shoulder to drive in reverse. just clears the blind spot. I think it would be cool if there was a monitor you could see when you looked over shoulder too. I have 8 cats so I always check the car before I move it.

WAIT!!

There could be some placed in the "c" pillars too so you see in those blind spots. NO Wait they could replace all the glass with wrap around monitors and drive by wire, autopilot... its all good 'til it breaks