02-20-2008, 04:15 AM
Not a big deal to me one way or another, but I'm curious: is this bill a response to a perceived threat, or an actual threat, to blind people? Are hybrid or EV owners somehow not looking out for blind pedestrians? Do blind pedestrians no longer have the right-of-way? How many blind people were involved in auto vs. pedestrian accidents last year? Of those, how many involved hybrid or EV autos? Were hybrid or EV autos disproportionately represented in auto vs. pedestrian accidents involving blind people?
It's easy to imagine a blind person not being able to hear a hybrid or EV, creating an imagined threat. It's not so easy to compile statistics showing that there is an actual threat based on actual injuries. I guess we could start adding safety requirements on auto manufacturers (who pass the costs along to consumers) based on imagined threats, but that's not usually how it's done.
In terms of numbers of people injured, maimed, and killed, cell phone use by drivers is WAY more dangerous than silent vehicles, but we haven't really done much to prevent cell phone users from yakking away while driving.
Aloha! ;-)
It's easy to imagine a blind person not being able to hear a hybrid or EV, creating an imagined threat. It's not so easy to compile statistics showing that there is an actual threat based on actual injuries. I guess we could start adding safety requirements on auto manufacturers (who pass the costs along to consumers) based on imagined threats, but that's not usually how it's done.
In terms of numbers of people injured, maimed, and killed, cell phone use by drivers is WAY more dangerous than silent vehicles, but we haven't really done much to prevent cell phone users from yakking away while driving.
Aloha! ;-)
Aloha! ;-)