Okay so we should do either everything or nothing, no solutions can exist between extremes. Got it 🙄

The law doesn’t mandate a touch screen, nor that it be on while driving. And why should it? The goal is to address the blind spot, not to tell automakers how to build head units.

Because it’s hard enough to get regulation passed, and telemetry is completely unrelated to backup cameras.

Put yourself in the shoes of one of the far-too-many Americans that have accidentally killed a child because they could not see them, regardless of whether they were driving an F-250 or a Fiat 500. This is a safety problem we faced and addressed with regulation. This is a good thing. The second-order effects are not the fault of the regulators trying to make cars safer, that falls squarely on the auto companies who would have done that regardless of regulation.

This isn’t the fault of regulators. They would have done this regardless of backup camera regulation.

The mandate isn’t that cars have infotainment screens, it’s that they have backup cameras. The choice to use the infotainment screen is the automakers, not the regulators. Early backup cameras had the screen embedded behind the rearview mirror, which was a much safer solution IMO. But cost cutting killed that because it was a second screen.

Mandating backup cameras is not stupid. There’s a legitimate blind spot that has caused numerous child deaths. It’s okay for a car to cost a little more if it means it’s less likely to kill someone.

No comment on backseat alarms.