Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Protecting "our" children...

According to yesterday's New York Times Article U.S. Rule Set for Cameras at Cars' Rear, tragically, two children are killed and fifty injured every week by [mainly] family members backing their automobiles... Therefore, in a move loving parents would surely endorse, the government is about to mandate rear-viewing cameras in every new automobile beginning 2014...

Clearly this would be an [albeit rare] example of the good in government regulation, right? I mean the free market doesn't require anything of anybody. We can't expect automakers, of their own accord, to protect our children... We therefore must force the issue, as we have with car seats, airbags, seatbelt laws and [possibly] sugar consumption (read Food for Thought) to protect children from their parents' poor decisions...

Funny thing is, according to the article, 45% of all 2012 models come with rear cameras standard, and 23% as an option... I.e., the marketplace (i.e., consumer, as opposed to government, demand) has indeed motivated manufacturers to produce a safer product...

Now there's no question that new cars, with or without rear cameras, are safer than old ones... And of course more mandated safety measures make for a more expensive product (not to mention how constant mandating perpetuates the existence of myriad taxpayer-funded regulatory bodies)... And a more expensive product (and ultimately higher taxes) makes for a consumer who's more likely to hang onto her old car longer... Which, ironically, makes for a more dangerous roadway experience for the nation's children (note I didn't say the parents' children) than would've been without the new reg (ala Milton Friedman)...

Alright, I know, many of you aren't with me on this one, not yet anyway... Here's another angle... Think about the $3 billion (well, let's say better than $1 billion [45% already have them]) a year that'll flow to the makers of the rear camera, all the result of government regulating how you and I spend our money... Would you agree then thatthe more avenues from which Uncle Sam can forcibly direct your spending, the more special interests (and yes, corporate America is a special interest) will work to inspire (think $$$$) politicians to act in your their best interest?

And please don't get me wrong, I'm all for us protecting our children... That is you protecting yours and me protecting mine...

2 comments:

  1. My suspicion is that rear cameras will have minimal impact on the types of accidents they are legislated to avoid. A lot of these types of accidents are due to just plain carelessness and rear camera or not probably will happen anyway. Also it is possible that people will become dependent on these cameras and stop using look and listen methods. And of course it will happen that you are standing in front of the judge pleading that your rear camera didn't see the child or it wasn't working.

    Just another example of the zombieing of the populace by an everknowing government.

    ReplyDelete
  2. My new (well year old ) SUV has a built in camera, I personally could not see a child run behind the car in a parking lot behind it, in fact we put one in our pickup ourselves to see behind it. And we have no small children at our house. I agree the Government shouldn't tell us everything to do, but since in todays world the parents are irresponsible for their children, I could not live with myself if I ever hit one. So I think it is a good thing!

    ReplyDelete