Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you're ok with old, sick, handicapped, etc. people being put in a potentially life-threatening situation so that GM can market a nice, sleek design?
At least you have your priorities in order.
Why is it only GM people are talking about what about the other automakers are their emergency handles in plain sight, funny I’ve been in many vehicles and I’ve never seen any emergency handles in plain sight but according to you all on here it’s just GM vechiles.
Keep in mind that those don't work on all vehicles. It only shatters windows made of tempered glass, so it does not work on front and back windshields.
It also will not work on a growing number of newer model cars.
Car makers have started to use laminated glass on side windows for security reasons.
Check the sticker located in the corner of each window. It will say whether the glass is tempered or laminated.
Not sure what options are available for those vehicles, though...
Why is it only GM people are talking about what about the other automakers are their emergency handles in plain sight, funny I’ve been in many vehicles and I’ve never seen any emergency handles in plain sight but according to you all on here it’s just GM vechiles.
We're talking about GM because this particular incident happened in a GM. If this old man had been trapped in a burning Pinto, we'd be talking about Ford.
Other makes could very well suffer from the same poor designs. Feel free to provide examples of similar incidents and/or designs.
We're talking about GM because this particular incident happened in a GM. If this old man had been trapped in a burning Pinto, we'd be talking about Ford.
Other makes could very well suffer from the same poor designs. Feel free to provide examples of similar incidents and/or designs.
So to say GM is negligent is not true like i said all automakers are the same, he has no case and if his lawyer thinks he can win in court then he’s crazy. Gm like other automakers have to build their vehicles according to federal regulation, so GM did follow government guidelines. And for your information a Pinto was not required to have emergency handles so you’re analogy is wrong.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) are U.S. federal regulations specifying design, construction, performance, and durability requirements for motor vehicles and regulated Automobile safety-related components, systems, and design features.
Emergency stuff should be more obvious, clearly marked and easy to find. Who has the time to read a manual in case of emergency? Some manuals are pretty voluminous and for many to esoteric.
And seriously - how many car owners read the whole manual anyway. Most people don't read it at all. Perhaps sad, but true.
And even if one has read the manual cover to cover when the car is new, remembering everything one has read at the moment one is in a dire emergency is highly unlikely.
No auto driver or passenger should have to locate and read a manual during a time of emergency.
The only way automakers will change were emergency handles are located is by if they are ordered by the federal government. And because no death has ever been reported you can forget about the automakers changing the location of these emergency handles.
From the story, it sounds like the fob AND the car's electrical system stopped working at the same time. If either were working, he could have unlocked the car. So what exactly happened here? The car is 12+ years old. Improper maintenance? When was the last time anyone changed the battery in that key fob? How old was the car battery? Where was the manual?
This was a perfect storm of factors...elderly person, apparently living alone, possibly inadequate attention to car maintenance, federal regulations focused on keeping doors closed in a crash to prevent ejection of occupants, and a hidden emergency release, quite possibly tucked away in the name of child safety.
So to say GM is negligent is not true like i said all automakers are the same, he has no case and if his lawyer thinks he can win in court then he’s crazy. Gm like other automakers have to build their vehicles according to federal regulation, so GM did follow government guidelines. And for your information a Pinto was not required to have emergency handles so you’re analogy is wrong.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) are U.S. federal regulations specifying design, construction, performance, and durability requirements for motor vehicles and regulated Automobile safety-related components, systems, and design features.
Plenty of companies have paid out for product liability despite meeting regulations. Meeting regulations helps, but it's no guarantee that they won't pay out.
See the Ford Pinto. It met safety regulations at the time. And Ford paid out BIG for that one. Pretty good analogy if I do say so myself
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
