If the regulators really knew what's best, wouldn't they push to reduce the overall frame size of vehicles, rather than allowing monster SUVs to take over the highways all over these United States?
I just watched a video where they lined up about a dozen small children sitting in front of an SUV, and the driver could not see any of them through the windshield.
If visibility is a problem, then personal cars are too large. It seems like a simple fix. Or we could throw wads of technology at the wall and see what sticks?
If regulators knew what was best, I honestly think they would stop acting as though that can define what is best for hundreds of millions of people with a shortlist of laws.
Life is complicated. Our country is diverse in population, culture, environment, etc. What's good for some of not good for all.
The fact that there are multiple competing ideas of how to best design a car for safety is case in point. Larger frames and door reinforcement makes sense for intrusion protection, but the oposite makes sense to favor visibility. Which approach is considered so good as to make a legal requirement, and what options aren't included in that choice?
I'd be happy to see our government heavily fund unbiased research and public education. In this example, learn what different car designs do for safety and tell the public. Allows us to make our own decisions, empowered with a better understanding of what our options are.
I just watched a video where they lined up about a dozen small children sitting in front of an SUV, and the driver could not see any of them through the windshield.
If visibility is a problem, then personal cars are too large. It seems like a simple fix. Or we could throw wads of technology at the wall and see what sticks?