YES! I am always on the side of more safety!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just more BS to raise the prices of vehicles to make them unaffordable for the masses.

People will get tired of it all soon and ignore all the regs en masse.

How will it raise prices?

The more “safety equipment” (sensors, electronics, ect) are stuffed into a car, the more expense it is.

Anonymous wrote:Aw, so sad you dolts won’t be able to drive your tanks to the local Whole Foods.

Buy a smaller car. God, Americans are SO STUPID.

Please go back to whatever squalid little country you came here from. Someplace where everyone smells vaguely of foot odor and eats a lot of cabbage.

Anonymous wrote:Just more BS to raise the prices of vehicles to make them unaffordable for the masses.

People will get tired of it all soon and ignore all the regs en masse.

How will it raise prices?

Aw, so sad you dolts won’t be able to drive your tanks to the local Whole Foods.

Buy a smaller car. God, Americans are SO STUPID.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just more BS to raise the prices of vehicles to make them unaffordable for the masses.

People will get tired of it all soon and ignore all the regs en masse.

Automakers can just sell the same cars they do in Europe. The rest of the world has been imposing these standards for years

I read the current generation of Toyota products are styled the way they are from these standards being introduced elsewhere.

Modern front bumper and hood design come from euro ratings. Almost every car sold in the US is sold in Europe too. The cyber truck is not legal in Europe, but I think that's about it for widely manufactured cars

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just more BS to raise the prices of vehicles to make them unaffordable for the masses.

People will get tired of it all soon and ignore all the regs en masse.

Automakers can just sell the same cars they do in Europe. The rest of the world has been imposing these standards for years

I read the current generation of Toyota products are styled the way they are from these standards being introduced elsewhere.

Anonymous wrote:Just more BS to raise the prices of vehicles to make them unaffordable for the masses.

People will get tired of it all soon and ignore all the regs en masse.

Automakers can just sell the same cars they do in Europe. The rest of the world has been imposing these standards for years

Anonymous wrote:Just more BS to raise the prices of vehicles to make them unaffordable for the masses.

People will get tired of it all soon and ignore all the regs en masse.

U.S. drivers are killers.

Is the OP the same person calling the Jeep Wagoneer a crime against humanity?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just more BS to raise the prices of vehicles to make them unaffordable for the masses.

People will get tired of it all soon and ignore all the regs en masse.

The regulatory state will consume everything one day.

But if you get run over crossing the street one day you won’t ever know if your prediction will come to pass.

Maybe try looking both ways, huh?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just more BS to raise the prices of vehicles to make them unaffordable for the masses.

People will get tired of it all soon and ignore all the regs en masse.

The regulatory state will consume everything one day.

But if you get run over crossing the street one day you won’t ever know if your prediction will come to pass.

Anonymous wrote:Just more BS to raise the prices of vehicles to make them unaffordable for the masses.

People will get tired of it all soon and ignore all the regs en masse.

The regulatory state will consume everything one day.

Just more BS to raise the prices of vehicles to make them unaffordable for the masses.

People will get tired of it all soon and ignore all the regs en masse.

I missed this last month but was happy to hear it discussed today on the radio. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is considering requiring new vehicles to pass pedestrian safety thresholds in the same way that it currently requires them to pass driver and passenger safety thresholds. In short, vehicles that posed increased threat to pedestrians (especially threat of head injury) would be less likely to receive approval. This would mostly impact large SUVs and trucks where the front grill of the vehicle is more likely to strike the head of a pedestrian directly. It's still unclear to me if they would take sight lines into account but tall front grills also produce front blind spots that are much larger and tend to be particularly unsafe for children or short adults who may be passing in front of one of these vehicles in a cross walk or parking lot without the driver knowing.

https://apnews.com/article/us-pedestrian-safety-rule-suvs-pickup-trucks-8ab66c3416dcb91484ec502d6e114ad1

As the article mentions, the industry would prefer to avoid these sorts of standards (which may limit their ability to produce these very tall vehicles for which there is a certain amount of consumer demand as this design tends to make drivers feel safer by placing them above other traffic). They would like instead to focus on technology like auto-braking for detected pedestrians.

I agree the technological advancements are really important for pedestrian safety (I recently purchased a Subaru that has much more extensive safety features than any previous car I've owned, including auto-braking, and I really like the additional security this offers me) but my feeling is "why not both?" Also I'd like to see the technology move in a direction of addressing the problem of people looking at their phones while driving. One reason I support these new rules is that so many drivers are inattentive and looking at their phones and if people are going to be doing that then yes I'd like to remove the option for them to drive these huge, tall vehicles that are particularly dangerous to pedestrians.