Jeep Garage  - Jeep Forum banner

Do too many safety features make us lazy?

Tags
features
5K views 37 replies 26 participants last post by  lstowell 
#1 ·
This has come up as a side topic in a few threads I have read recently. Do people think that "safety features" such as Adaptive Cruise Control, Forward Collision Mitigation and Lane Departure Warning really make us safer? Is it possible that these features make us more likely to pay LESS attention to operating the vehicle?

https://youtu.be/-fAGGlVhRUk

https://www.wired.com/2011/07/active-safety-systems-could-create-passive-drivers/

I have been a professional driver for over 25 years and have logged over 2 million safe miles with no tickets or accidents. (I have seen some crazy things). While I don't consider myself an expert on anything but my own opinion, I definitely have a few:

1. If you need a vehicle's assistance to keep from inadvertently crossing into another lane, you should not be driving. If you're too tired or too drunk or too busy texting, you are just putting other people's lives at risk, not just your own.

2. If you are too lazy to use the gas and brake pedals and are depending on ACC to "drive" you through an urban area with stop lights, you should not be driving. Again, you are putting others at risk by depending on a system that is not designed for that type of environment.

3. If you think that texting or reading you email is acceptable now because your car will stop you in an emergency, you should not be driving.

I continue to be amazed at the complete lack of attention that many people exhibit while operating a vehicle. Far too many think of driving as secondary to whatever else is distracting them at the time. So let's put down the phones, GPS's, makeup, electric razors, maps, laptops, newspapers, books, and start PAYING ATTENTION to the road and other drivers. I'm not against a good safety feature or two, just the complacency that it may breed.

Rant over.
 
See less See more
#22 · (Edited)
^^This^^

That said, I do like having every tech tool at my disposal but understand it must be used in context only as a drivers aid. There is a "gee whiz" factor with having them but I never can blindly trust any of them. I am not wired that way and years of racing and a life time of riding motorcycles has me believeing everyone is out to kill me regardless if I am on 2 or 4 wheels.

I have other pure analog vehicles that keep it all in perspective for me.
 
#3 ·
Having been driving for over 60 years, I would definitely state that the idiots are no better today than they were 60 decades ago.

In part I agree that the safety nannies have a tendency to make marginal and middling drivers much too complacent--this was actually reasonably proven with the advent of air bags and decent restraint systems. Drivers simply assumed that they would not be killed for not paying attention, so following distances on the average got worse, risky driving became more common, etc. etc. This of course was prior to Takata who implemented Brock Yates famous suggestion for driver safety even if not intended. [Brock suggested getting rid of air bags and putting a shotgun at the
bottom of the steering column aimed at the driver... on the presumption that drivers might begin demanding better seat belts, brakes, steering, tires, etc. if they realized that even tapping another vehicle would reduce the gene pool immediately]

Having said that and agreeing with the basic premise of the OP, I would submit that there are a number of people who should not ever never no never be allowed to control any motor vehicle bigger than a motorized roller skate.
 
#6 ·
I have to say that I agree and also disagree at the same time. Yes, these systems will probably make certain drivers more lazy. But you can't argue that they make the vehicles safer. Also, the ultimate goal for automakers is full automation, so these systems are essentially beta tests to get them to that. I love my ACC and blind spot, FCW, etc. But you're right, they don't take the place of responsible driving.
 
#7 ·
No, I don't think that these feature "make" us lazy...but for folks who are inclined to be lazy, they offer an opportunity to do so.

Personally, I wouldn't be without these features and have benefitted from them, but I don't let them keep me from driving aware and carefully.
 
#8 ·
I do worry that this will happen. Look at the idiocy from people with the Model S. I'm sure other vehicles have owners doing it too but that is the most high profile.

I was also considering a Subaru Legacy before buying the GC (odd comparison, I know!) and that is loaded with the nannies and while it fascinated me, I worried I'd become too dependent on that crap. At the same time I'd be reluctant to turn it all off as if I then got in a wreck, I'd feel like a giant turd.
 
#11 ·
I have no use for the ACC but I do like the BSD, FCW, Park Sense and rear camera aids. And they're strictly aids to me... so I keep that in proper perspective. I'm not about to give up on the driving skills I've honed in the 40+ years of driving I've done.
 
#16 ·
I just got a 2017 Trail Hawk with none of those distractive driver features! The blind spot monitoring was more of a nuance than a helpful feature, it kept distracting me while on the highway and brake assist scared the crap out of me. These were on a dealer loner vehicle!
 
#18 · (Edited)
On the other hand, the Blind Sport feature has likely saved my life several times on I-95 between home and DC when high-speed weaving vehicles suddenly cut me off from moving between lanes...these were situations that were nearly impossible to "see" visually because of the speed involved.

It's good to have choices over whether to use these features or not. :)

-------

In a more general sense, I switched "cars" with my spouse for this trip and her Subaru Outback Limited with EyeSight was a pleasure on the way down yesterday. Rock solid. (And I can't complain about the 33+ MPG I got, too)
 
  • Like
Reactions: chucksc
#19 ·
Driving is exponentially more dangerous today than 10-20 years ago...These features could make the difference between accident/injury or not. As Jim said above, we have driven 10's of thousands of miles vacationing in our JGC and the ACC, blind spot, and even the FCW, have made a difference at any given moment. Would never own any future vehicle without them.....
 
#21 ·
I have the rear back up camera and I laugh at myself constantly because I never look at it. Mirrors and turning my head all the time.

Can all these safety features be turned off? I'm looking at some 17 GCs that have them, and if they can't be turned off, I don't think I want them. I agree that they're good in some ways but I'm over the amount of tech in cars lol.
 
#25 ·
At this point, my driving habits have become second nature. I believe that these features can serve as a fail safe, filling in minor errors that even diligent drivers may make at times. The driver training I've received is a US adaptation of ROSPA advanced driving in the UK. I wish it was more popular in the states because it is very difficult to have it arranged here.

The systems available in vehicles today are innovative, and I think many drivers don't put much thought into their commute. So in that sense, I welcome the vehicle behind me being equipped with a collision warning system, or lane guidance. The game changer for me would be a heads up display that enhances situational awareness. But as cars continue to advance, I believe there will come a time where I simply can't perform better than the machine itself.

I think that many drivers don't pay attention as a given. And most drivers don't have ACC or blind spot detection. So if those drivers are going to be on the road, I welcome the technology that might stop the texting driver's car from drifting into the path of an oncoming semi truck. Driving courses are considered a punishment here.


Sent from my iPhone using JeepGarage
 
#27 ·
I'm not sure if Lane Sense is really a safety but more helps on Fatigue.

If you are dosing off at the wheel, it's not gonna help you. Even though it's often advertised that way.
It might help in a distraction scenario. And perhaps remind you to not let yourself get distracted.

The Collision thing I think has no impact at all on being lazy. Mine has never actively braked. And only warned a hand full of times (and usually overly conservative). I think one thing that is overlooked that it also not only brakes it will boost your braking if you are not braking enough. I think in panic situations it's easy to misjudge how dam hard you need to hit the brakes. But I sure wish it had rear camera so it could help judge if your gonna get rammed in the rear for braking hard.

The Rear Cross Path just simply makes you a better driver, more eyes looking in all directions.

The Blind Side Warning not sure on that one if it's helped me. But it makes me make sure I always put on the blinker :) So in that sense less lazy.

I think the rear park sense might have saved me a dent once. I really wish Front was Off in reverse and rear was off in Drive. But it's staying on, even though it can be annoying at times.

ACC I try to only use on the highway. Because if used off highway (randomly) I might forget I don't have it on. So it's always on, on the highway and always off, off the highway. I tend to drive closer to speed limit with ACC (I set it for like 5-10mph over PSL) :) Hard to say if it makes you lazy.
 
#28 ·
I find stop and go driving to be the most annoying kind of driving. The ACC works well in very slow speed stop and go. If the traffic has a strong slinky effect where the speeds vary quite a bit, I find the ACC dangerous. Its functions lag, so it accelerates slowly, then hard and brakes late and hard. That's a driving style that invites a rear end collision. Also, the system can't scan ahead. I think it's important to get ahead of the car, by scanning several car lengths ahead, so I can see what I will need to do before the car in front of me changes speed. I want to be able to anticipate my inputs to the car. ACC can't do that. It's always behind the traffic, reacting only to what is is right in front of the car, sort of the way my wife drives.
 
#30 · (Edited)
If the traffic has a strong slinky effect where the speeds vary quite a bit, I find the ACC dangerous. Its functions lag, so it accelerates slowly, then hard and brakes late and hard. That's a driving style that invites a rear end collision. Also, the system can't scan ahead. I think it's important to get ahead of the car, by scanning several car lengths ahead, so I can see what I will need to do before the car in front of me changes speed. I want to be able to anticipate my inputs to the car. ACC can't do that. It's always behind the traffic, reacting only to what is is right in front of the car, sort of the way my wife drives.
I think more and more drivers are performing just this way.
I have a theory...
Lack of athletics/sports, and especially team competition.
In essence, a lack of training in keen observation, multiple objects in motion and anticipation.
 
#29 · (Edited)
For most of the people on the road, I think it is great technology and hope it becomes standard equipment across the entire auto industry.
Personally, I have large reservations...
Sometimes on well worn roads I want t ride the center/shoulder -line (when there is no traffic) to ride a smooth portion of pavement, I don't want the vehicle to fight me.
If I'm parking in a tight spot I want to concentrate and sure as heck don't want bells and whistles distracting me.
There are times when throttle is a better means to avoid an accident rather than standing on the brakes... often times it will involve swerving over the line, and, again, I sure don't want the vehicle to fight me on either of these.
I like stability control and ABS... except when on gravel roads and wanting to play... otherwise I find them to be good safety items, and have had 2 occasions to use them... once in my Wrangler, once in my F150. I consider myself pretty capable driver, but on both occasions have wondered afterwards... was that really "my" skill? (Wrangler, lifted on 35's, driving 72mph and aggressively swerving to miss an accident unfolding straight in front of me -2 vehicles going for the same opening in fast moving traffic-, F150, 2:30am, country road, crest in the road, black dog in the hollow after the crest in the middle of my lane... both required counter steer to correct for the skid, but, both were so easily "caught"... I have to wonder... me? or vehicle?)

Other comments in this thread/on this board... and please, this is not personal, simply case in point to OP.
"does ACC notify me if my speed has decreased?"...
"need a review camera when I hit the brakes hard..."
I guess speedometers and 3 rear facing mirrors are already being forgotten?

So, to that end, yes, technology is making us dependent, which I believe will eventually make us lazy... or possibly is already doing so.
 
#31 ·
In our state, there is no longer a requirement for attending formal driver training classes if you are at least 16 years old. We had a semester of driver's ed in high school with 9 weeks of classroom learning and then behind the wheel training first in a large parking lot at the hockey arena and then driving around town with a driving instructor.
 
#32 ·
I think the concern here is valid, but not necessarily for us. Instead for the kids who have not started drivers training yet. Those kids who will never learn to parallel park without the button, or to match speed on the highway.

That said, the same thing was said of power saws in woodworking when they first came out: people will forget how to hand saw and lose technique and skill. And it is true to some extent, but some people keep the skills, and the technology opens new doors....


Sent from my iPad using JeepGarage
 
#33 ·
You have not tried the parallel park, have you. It is nearly useless.

And to be honest I'm pretty crappy at parallel parking myself because I do it so rarely I get rusty.
 
#35 ·
all the tech advances, lazy, not lazy, etc aside .... if you ever stop to think about it, the fact that our public roads work as well as they do is pretty astounding. Millions of drivers piloting tons of steel, hazmat, freight trains criss crossing the paths, new drivers to 100 yr olds ... yet for the most part it all works.

it would however be nice if the "rules of the road" were emphasized and there was routine driver training required - i know here in washington state 'left lane/passing only' on the interstate is a fantasy (just as it was in southern california). The cops seem not to care, but they sure do about speeding ... yet I'd contend the people travelling at/below the speed limit in the fast/passing lane is a much more dangerous thing (and creates road rage/aggressive driving). The next tech should be like that one car commercial where the guy pushes a button and the slow driver ahead of him is automatically forced to change lanes :D

driving is a skill and a talent, training and practice can make it better but some people will always suck at it .... maybe another tech gadget for the future: you have to "earn" the right to have a totally driver controlled vehicle .... if you can't pass the tests your car is restricted from the fast/passing lane, must have ACC and collision avoidance, GPS senses speed and automatically cuts cell/texting capabilities while limiting stereo volume .... :D:D:D
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top