Feds would require backup cameras by 2014

The Transportation Department proposed rear visibility rules that would, in effect, require backup cameras in all cars and light trucks by the 2014 models. The DOT estimated the systems -- a rear video camera and interior display -- would add about $200 to the cost of a vehicle.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said the changes would "help drivers see into those blind zones directly behind vehicles to make sure it is safe to back up."

The proposed rule would require an area 20 feet to the rear and 10 feet wide to be visible to the driver. It was required by Congress in a 2007 law named for a toddler killed when his father accidentally backed over him in the family's driveway.

Backup accidents kill nearly 300 and injure 18,000 a year, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. It estimates the new rule would save 95 to 112 deaths and 7,000 injuries a year.

Backup cameras are mostly optional today and about 20% of 2010 vehicles have them, the Associated Press reported. The proposed rule, which would become final after a required 60-day public comment period, would have to be met by 10% of 2012 new vehicles up to 10,000 lbs. gross weight, 40% of 2013s and all 2014s.

Automakers have not opposed the idea. Ford Motor announced today that most of its Ford and Lincoln vehicles -- including pickups, vans and SUVs -- would offer a standard or optional rear camera and display in the rear-view mirror or on the dash by the end of next year.

See photos of: Ford Motor Company, Ray LaHood
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/index

I don't know why they just don't require self-driven cars. It seems kind of rediculous that the govt thinks we are able to do things by ourselves, and that a single tragidy means changing the system while countless other issues never get resolved

At least this way if a backup camera fails and a kid gets run over, the driver or victim's family can sue the manufacturer

oaklandopen said:

At least this way if a backup camera fails and a kid gets run over, the driver or victim's family can sue the manufacturer

Click to expand...

Sad but true, first thing I thought as well. Anyway, there are some cars where it is not needed, but for some others is a definite yes. Regardless, I believe the law is easier to implement for all than for some, just imagine the loopholes that it can create if not

Yeah, if you drive a mini cooper and you need a backup camera, it is time to shred your drivers license.

I should have waited to get my ram till 2014, I just installed a backup cam on it lol

But I only use it to guage distances when I'm in parking situations, you can just look at a wide angle camera image and know your surroundings well enough to get you remotely close to where you want to be. That's why its important to actually turn around and look, and turn your head all over to get a sense of surroundings

I don't know how ppl do it, but I certainly can't put it in reverse and only look at the backup cam monitor, and that's the only way you can ensure you aren't going to run over a kid that darts behind you. Forget about backing out of your driveway into the path of an oncoming vehicle cuz you looked directly into your monitor the whole time, at least you wouldn't have hit a kid on a bigwheel

oaklandopen said:

Forget about backing out of your driveway into the path of an oncoming vehicle cuz you looked directly into your monitor the whole time

Click to expand...

And that what I've seen all the time, it is so annoying and dangerous. You can see the drivers backing up carelessly just looking at the monitor in the dashboard just to realize they are on your way 2 minutes later, WTF? You are backing into a street!