Reason,
Can people walk backwards? Yes
Do people have eyes in the back of their head? No
Do people have blind spots? Yes.
Who you going to sue now?
Using you "reasoning", nothing is safe. What a bunch of shit.
Reason, your logic is flawed. This is not a safety item as you have been claiming. It is a convenience item. Here is the quote:
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">"It's a convenience; it's not a substitute for proper reversing procedures," Bazemore said. "Drivers should always turn around and look."
Reason,
Can people walk backwards? Yes
Do people have eyes in the back of their head? No
Do people have blind spots? Yes.
Who you going to sue now?
Using you "reasoning", nothing is safe. What a bunch of shit.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Edited because this dumb post is beyond words.Originally posted by travelinman:
Reason,
Can people walk backwards? Yes
Do people have eyes in the back of their head? No
Do people have blind spots? Yes.
Who you going to sue now?
Using you "reasoning", nothing is safe. What a bunch of shit.
<font color="#a52a2a" size="1">[ December 10, 2004 07:52 AM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ok...Bazemore is an Infiniti spokesman.Originally posted by Gunslinger:
Reason, your logic is flawed. This is not a safety item as you have been claiming. It is a convenience item. Here is the quote:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">"It's a convenience; it's not a substitute for proper reversing procedures," Bazemore said. "Drivers should always turn around and look."
It's spin for, "We're selling this device because it's very difficult to see when backing our vehicle."
Funny thing here, is that I'm the only one on here who is not making some final judgment. Even the attorney on here who simply doesn't have the facts is making a guess at final judgment. Then we've got others making some harsh assessment about the parents without even knowing what happened.
No one here knows the circumstances behind the incident. No one here admits to knowing what driving an Infiniti SUV is like. Most importantly, no one here knows any death or injury statistics regarding these types of vehicles resulting from back ups.
Yet we've got trav talking about having eyes in the back of your head, others calling the parent's negligent - even though they don't even know what happened on the way to the accident - and yet others saying there's nothing wrong with the design of the vehicle, even though they aren't even familiar with the car.
Excuse me, but you're providing mind numblingly shallow analysis.
<font color="#a52a2a" size="1">[ December 10, 2004 07:47 AM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why do you believe this? Why do you believe that if there were a camera or a sensor that emitted a sound, the parent would still have run over the child?But, because I believe this accident would have occurred anyway
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That and 50 cents doesn't even buy you a cup of coffee.I do believe the devices Reason speaks of will be standard on cars one day in the future. But, because I believe this accident would have occurred anyway, I will agree with Gae and issue my verdict in favor of the Defendant.
Reason,
whether there was a sensor on the SUV, or even if there was a voice system that would say "Hey dumbass, you're about to back over your child" it doesn't matter.
The ultimate responsibility for the life of that child until they are 18 lies with the parents. There are no other excuses. Whether little johnny is hard to keep up with doesn't matter. It is the JOB as parents to keep tabs on the little critter.
It is truly sad that these people lost their child but lets put the blame where the blame should lie: On the PARENTS!!
Every car has a blind spot. Every one of them.
You are correct, I don't know all of the facts but the song plays the same. Parents have kids. Parents are responsible for kids. In everything they do and everywhere they go. End of story.
I'm sorry for their loss but this isn't Infiniti's problem.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That's right, you don't know all the facts. You got that part extremely right. You don't have all the information. You are making an assessment based on ignorance. You simply don't know. You don't.You are correct, I don't know all of the facts but the song plays the same
And no, the song doesn't play the same.
Not if after making reasonable efforts to view behind you and you still can't reasonably see obstacles, then there's a problem.
I've thought the same thing about the Hummer. The thing is huge and looks like it's awkward and has difficult lines of vision. If it results in significantly higher numbers of accidents and deaths, YES, I hold the designers, the manufacturers liable.
There's a simple reality in this world. Obstacles end up being behind cars, whether they be children, telephone poles, cars, people in wheelchairs... WHATEVER...
A car should be designed that if you make reasonable efforts to view what's behind you before you back up and you STILL cannot see, then I can see some liability for the car manufacturer.
I see this problem with SUV's and car manufacturers aren't about to tarnish one of the bright spots in their product line. They are putting average joes without commercial licenses into mass-produced commercial-sized vehicles and saying drive away like it's your Ford Taurus.
NO!
Comfort and appearance for the driver should not be at the expense of the lives and safety of others.
<font color="#a52a2a" size="1">[ December 10, 2004 10:32 AM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>
I repeat the question. Why not just do away with rear windows all together? And rear view mirrors?
And if the car manufacturer wants to put spikes at the back of the car to prevent toddler splatter due to the "negligence" of the parents, then why not?
Obviously, there is no responsiblity whatsover for the car manufacturer to design any safety into the vehicle for those backing up, and for those who happen to be behind these monster SUV's, any fault for being hit is yours.
I just love your logic folks. It's truly mind boggling.
[img]graemlins/sure.gif[/img]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It might matter to the 150-200 dumbass toddlers who the article said lost their lives after being run over.Hey dumbass, you're about to back over your child" it doesn't matter.
<font color="#a52a2a" size="1">[ December 10, 2004 10:22 AM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks