Simply put vehicles are at the point where we need a rule that says "The doors can be unlocked and open if the battery is dead" Full stop, no ifs, ands, or buts.
This bans new cars from having clamshell bodywork like that found on classics like the Jaguar E-type and Ford GT40. I suspect it also results in many cars having narrower truck/hatch openings than they would have if they could put mandated lights on the trunk lid or rear hatch.
It's not hard to imagine the partially legitimate reason that on occasion, someone will drive with the trunk open, but do we really need a law about it?
No, it's a much more serious and likely reason -- people stopping on a highway at night, getting out, and opening their trunk for some reason (like a spare tire, fluids, etc)?-- then their lights (and the reflectors in the lamp housings) are pointed at the sky.
Headlights get out of alignment sometimes. I posit that likelihood goes up if the lights are themselves mounted on a hood/door/whatever that can also go out of alignment.
That particular blood was probably people stopped at night with the trunk open to access a spare tire or tools. And then there was more blood because sometimes those people forget to leave their lights on, or their lights don't function because the battery has died, so we got more regulation requiring ugly reflectors.
And so on.
This has become a mantra, but it's not always true. Automatic shoulder belts, for example were a terrible idea, and 5 MPH bumpers were more about repair costs than reducing injuries.
Automatic shoulder belts being annoying is irrelevant. The dozen-ish explosive, expanding gas sacks in my car are kinda frightening. Both originated with a regulation requiring passive restraint systems to reduce collision injury/death.
People stopped at night with the trunk open to access a spare tire or tools, ok. How did that get them killed?
You are driving on a road with only a single lane in each direction, and there is no verge or hard shoulder.
All you can see is the short area in front of you that your headlights illuminate, and they are dipped as normal so as not to dazzle oncoming drivers. You can see cars ahead of you quite easily because they have two red lamps on their rear, at their left and right extremities. You can see them even when you can't see the road between you and them. You can judge their relative speed from a long distance away.
Imagine a car has broken down. Remember they're in the same lane as you. You can see their red lamps and hazard lights, and you can judge they're not moving, well before you reach them. You slow down and go around them safely.
Imagine a second car has broken down. This car has an electrical fault and no lights, but has rear reflectors, just like roadsigns, which even your dipped headlights reflect quite well, and give you time to react. You manage to go around them safely.
Imagine a third car has broken down. The lights and reflectors are on the trunk hatch. It's opened and pointed at the sky. You're not in the sky. All you see ahead of you is blackness. The car body is only illuminated by your headlights once it's too late. You slam straight into the stopped, dark car. The person who was looking in the trunk is crushed to death.
I’m not being obtuse! I’m genuinely concerned that my understanding of car safety features is correct here.
Reflectors tend to be positioned around the bumper.
For example:
- https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/9PQAAOSwlbdkueA8/s-l1600.jpg
- https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/PxQAAOSwDSthH35W/s-l1200.jpg
That is around the seven minute mark of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32u6KPTALxg
If you want to do that stuff, do it with a performance test or criteria, not with stupid whack-a-mole rules. And don't think that weasel wording the test to the same effect is any better. If you want to do this the not stupid way you need to actually do the hard work and figure out what the over-arching general case performance characteristics need to be.
With better styling cues and design that make it obvious how to use the Tesla handles (and all the degrees of copycats) it wouldn't be an issue. But that isn't the kind of sleek sext angular bullshit modern car designers like so it never got made and here we are.
Bureaucracies have many fathers, the society we have is the result of conflict and incentives.
You wind up with smaller gaps with the qualitative and rules based approach than you do with the whack-a-mole list.
>then government agencies get in trouble (isn't it your job to stop this kind of thing?), so government agencies issue strict rules.
Government agencies tend to grow in scope and resources when they screw up. Even when punished, it's not like they go bankrupt and everyone is out of a job.
>Bureaucracies have many fathers, the society we have is the result of conflict and incentives.
And ideology. You can incentivize the Taliban all you want they won't send their girls to school. I postulate that the failure of american regulatory to systems to regulate without sucking is driven in large part by what goes on in the heads of the subset of people who spec out, create and operate said systems.
As commonly said by the libertarian at heart, right up until the point their loved one gets injured or killed, then they are at the forefront of regulation.
> But that isn't the kind of sleek sext angular bullshit modern car designers like
Who likes safety and security? These features commonly make every day use more difficult. Who needs unblocked fire exits, that takes up too much room in the building. Who needs a common interface for a safety critical device, that removes the 'cool' factor.