• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

NHTSA to require backup cameras on all vehicles

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
JulesMaximus said:
If your vehicle is so big that you have vast areas behind you that you cannot see when backing you don't think that is an equipment failure? The only human failure was in the design of the vehicle. These people definitely aren't idiots or murderers... I can't even believe you would suggest something so idiotic quite frankly.
Click to expand...

1) they are murders. They killed another human. Maybe if we started treating some of these people as bad people it would be a wake up call to others to pay attention.

2) if you choose to buy a vehicle that's so big that you cannot safely operate, then you can choose to get a back up camera.

3) if you choose not to get a back up cam, and cannot safely back up, dont back up. Get out of the car, walk around it, then back up.

4) Dont get a car you cant see out of
 
michal1980 said:
1) they are murders. They killed another human. Maybe if we started treating some of these people as bad people it would be a wake up call to others to pay attention.

2) if you choose to buy a vehicle that's so big that you cannot safely operate, then you can choose to get a back up camera.

3) if you choose not to get a back up cam, and cannot safely back up, dont back up. Get out of the car, walk around it, then back up.

4) Dont get a car you cant see out of
Click to expand...

You're out of your mind...
 
michal1980 said:
so what you are saying is that its ok to kill kids as long as you back up over them with a car?

got it.
Click to expand...

🙄 I'd like to introduce a couple terms to you that might help you understand this.

Murder: the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

Accident: an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.
 
JulesMaximus said:
🙄 I'd like to introduce a couple terms to you that might help you understand this.

Murder: the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

Accident: an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.
Click to expand...

oh you are getting nit picky

fine.
Involuntary Manslaughter: Definition

Involuntary manslaughter usually refers to an unintentional killing that results from recklessness
 
michal1980 said:
no i'm trying to be reasonable here.

apparently Jules wants to treat killing people by running them over with a car as something akin to spilling wine.
Click to expand...

You really want to prosecute someone for manslaughter who has run over their own kid accidentally killing him/her? I know a lot of people with kids and all of them would be absolutely devastated if something like this happened to them, myself included, and you want to add insult to injury and throw them in jail for it? 😕

That's some cold heartless shit right there. :colbert: I doubt you'll get many people who would agree with you on that, I know I don't.
 
Throckmorton said:
Checking your pressure is actually very difficult. Have you ever actually done it? Pressure gauges are horrible devices. You have to magically get a seal by pure luck, and then the reading is usually completely inaccurate.
Click to expand...

I don't know what gauges you're using, but based on my own experience you're either using ridiculously cheap gauges from a gas station or there's a sizable amount of user error going on.

I use a dial gauge like this. It seals first time, every time, and the result is very accurate.

michal1980 said:
oh you are getting nit picky

fine.
Involuntary Manslaughter: Definition

Involuntary manslaughter usually refers to an unintentional killing that results from recklessness
Click to expand...

You are obviously unfamiliar with the use of "recklessness" as a legal term. The vast majority of the time there is no recklessness, as a matter of law, involved in such cases as we are discussing here. Legal recklessness is something like firing a gun blindly into an occupied building. It is not having a child run into your blind spot after you've already checked to make sure the path was clear.

ZV
 
michal1980 said:
no i'm trying to be reasonable here.

apparently Jules wants to treat killing people by running them over with a car as something akin to spilling wine.
Click to expand...

You are not reasonable at all. Not even a little bit. You're treating this whole situation as black or white: either you're murdering children or spilling wine. There are shades of gray everywhere (terrible novels aside). Stop making everything into absolutes.
 
JCH13 said:
You are not reasonable at all. Not even a little bit. You're treating this whole situation as black or white: either you're murdering children or spilling wine. There are shades of gray everywhere (terrible novels aside). Stop making everything into absolutes.
Click to expand...

go after Jules, and others like him that want to treat the deaths of kids as mere accidents. And dont want people held responsible for their actions because they feel bad afterwards.


But of course its easier to blame everyone else but the driver, or the kid. The only logical fault is with the car, which is why the car must be changed and millions of dollars must be spent to save a single life.
 
JulesMaximus said:
You really want to prosecute someone for manslaughter who has run over their own kid accidentally killing him/her? I know a lot of people with kids and all of them would be absolutely devastated if something like this happened to them, myself included, and you want to add insult to injury and throw them in jail for it? 😕

That's some cold heartless shit right there. :colbert: I doubt you'll get many people who would agree with you on that, I know I don't.
Click to expand...

Reasonable people would agree with me. People ruled by emotionalism wont.

Just because someone is devastated doesn't give them a get out of jail free card.
 
michal1980 said:
go after Jules, and others like him that want to treat the deaths of kids as mere accidents. And dont want people held responsible for their actions because they feel bad afterwards.


But of course its easier to blame everyone else but the driver, or the kid. The only logical fault is with the car, which is why the car must be changed and millions of dollars must be spent to save a single life.
Click to expand...

That's not what anyone is saying. You're flying completely off the handle because you're perceiving everything in black-and-white terms and cannot fathom a situation in which a driver does everything right and yet still winds up backing over someone.

There is some point at which reasonable and prudent personal responsibility ends, and accidents begin. One could do everything in one's power to make sure nothing bad is going to happen, and accidents will still happen. That's why they are called accidents.
 
JulesMaximus said:
In the real world we legislate safety. We've been doing this since the 1950s.

Welcome to the United States of America. Are you planning on staying long?
Click to expand...

Some things totally make sense, and I don't have a problem with them.Seat belts? Makes sense, someone hits you and you don't want to be ejected. Airbags? Yeah, though I think they're getting a little crazy with how many they're stuffing in cars these days 😛 But mandatory TPMS or reverse cameras because some people are too lazy? That's dumb. Nothing was preventing people who wanted TPMS or a reverse camera from getting it as an option on the vehicle. Some of us would rather save a few bucks and just get out the trusty gauge every so often or turn our heads.

Throckmorton said:
Checking your pressure is actually very difficult. Have you ever actually done it? Pressure gauges are horrible devices. You have to magically get a seal by pure luck, and then the reading is usually completely inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Seriously? :|

Yes, I've done it. I just did it two days ago in fact. It is NOT hard. Even my totally mechanically-inept brother can use a tire gauge.

Come on. 🙄
 
Last edited:
SparkyJJO said:
Some things totally make sense, and I don't have a problem with them.Seat belts? Makes sense, someone hits you and you don't want to be ejected. Airbags? Yeah, though I think they're getting a little crazy with how many they're stuffing in cars these days 😛 But mandatory TPMS or reverse cameras because some people are too lazy? That's dumb. Nothing was preventing people who wanted TPMS or a reverse camera from getting it as an option on the vehicle. Some of us would rather save a few bucks and just get out the trusty gauge every so often or turn our heads.
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for the day when my car turns into a cannoli upon impact. :biggrin:
 
Looking out the back window worked great when cars looked like this.

1947_Plymouth_Deluxe_Front_1.jpg


Check it out, this young fellow knows how to properly back a car out of a driveway with kids playing nearby and everything!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=jArQghGJZuM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top