Replies

At some point, extra information from lights become either an added distraction or superfluous. The studies that showed that third rear brake lights reduce rear-end collisions 50% were only applicable when no one else had them and they were a novelty. They sure didn't stop me from being rear-ended because an on-ramp traffic light in Madison, Wisconsin was malfunctioning and the driver behind me assumed I was moving because the light wasn't red.

I think there is a hard floor to how few traffic accidents occur using human agents driving, and we are close to it. Most accidents now are NOT the result of lack of information conveying features, but of people texting while driving, driving recklessly, under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or just plain not paying attention.

To me a bigger problem might even be a new generation trusting GPS and car electronics more than their own eyesight.

Much of this article was spent detailing the expense of car accidents. We should also consider the expense of added required features, and the marginal utility of each added feature. First there was the driver's side airbag at $600 or whatever in cost. That wasn't good enough, so now cars come with 10 or 11 airbags, in case someone is in the back seat, or the General Lee flies in on top of you at a diagonal.

End result, the cheapest new cars cost $20K out the door. You can make a 1968 Dodge Dart (I'll spot you lap belts and dual chamber master brake cylinders and padded dashes required by then)could haul six people, room for gear, and keep up with highway traffic safely with proper maintenance for 10K or less. Multiply that by a few million, and we are talking big money (some extra spent at the gas pump as the slant-six car got about 20 MPG highway).

How about we lay off of more mandatory computers, traction controls, ABS brakes, even more air bags, governors, rear view cameras, mandatory high belt lines, etc. and let people buy the cars they want? The insurance companies can wield some influence, but only where there is a real return on the added "feature".

Well green lights are a cheap easy elegant retrofit on top of everything else. Perhaps your diminishing returns argument has merit if one regards incorporating those new lights into legislation etc but keep in mind most of the world does not have all the latest hightech wizardry. cheap scooters, old vehicles, non american. Also, I submit that there is at least equal benefit to knowing when a vehicle has lit brake indicators whether viewing from the front or rear. no one would suggest turn indicator visible from all sides are necessary, so why insist front brake lights are bad? Is this simply a matter of never really looking deeply into the subject, or am I missing something more obvious from your argument?