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.
Cars can't be a cocoon of invincibility, but at the same time there is a reasonable expectation of safety - i.e., that it won't suddenly accelerate at WOT without your input.
Cars can't be a cocoon of invincibility, but at the same time there is a reasonable expectation of safety - i.e., that it won't suddenly accelerate at WOT without your input.
Agreed, but, do you expect that any entity, government or whatever, can ensure that such a thing will never happen?
I certainly expect the company building and selling the damn thing to ensure that such a thing will never happen; and to take responsibility for, find, and fix the problem if and when it does happen. And if they won't, then it's entirely appropriate for the government to step in and boot 'em in the backside until they change their mind.
I certainly expect the company building and selling the damn thing to ensure that such a thing will never happen; and to take responsibility for, find, and fix the problem if and when it does happen. And if they won't, then it's entirely appropriate for the government to step in and boot 'em in the backside until they change their mind.
I certainly expect the company building and selling the damn thing to ensure that such a thing will never happen; and to take responsibility for, find, and fix the problem if and when it does happen. And if they won't, then it's entirely appropriate for the government to step in and boot 'em in the backside until they change their mind.
So, you do not think that Toyota is trying to find the problem and fix it?
Anyway, this thread is not about Toyota, but the CONCEPT that in any man made thing problems will occur, and what limits do folks think there are on ensuring that they won't. Engineering, economic and even political limits on keeping people safe.
Caveat Emptor.
I suppose my view is a bit different from others, since I assess risk/benefit as a matter of course in my job. I assume something will go wrong, and I plan for it.
To make a car that is ABSOLUTELY safe, at all times, under any circumstance is not possible. But, it seems some folks expect that...
So, you do not think that Toyota is trying to find the problem and fix it?
They are now that the problem has become so obvious that the government would no longer allow them to ignore it.
And no, it's not "caveat emptor" out there in the world of commerce. Even though there is no such thing as an "absolutely safe" car or "absolutely safe" anything else, there are still reasonable expectations of safety, merchantability, and fitness for specified use. It's not an either/or scenario of "caveat emptor" or "everything is absolutely safe." There has long been an expectation that there will be a balanced allocation of resources to make products reasonably safe, and that expectation constantly evolves as experience, knowledge, technology, and resource availability changes. Since you do risk/benefit analysis for a living, I should think you would be aware of this.
I expect that a car designed by engineers who live in Michigan will start every time when it is 30-below, and that every component will work when it is cold and covered with ice and snow
We do rely on unbiased crash test studies as part of our decision matrix when it comes to buying a car, and won't give a second look at vehicles that don't do well in the studies. And hey, one of the big researchers in that area is the federal NHTSA.
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.