this post was submitted on 03 May 2026
697 points (99.2% liked)

Funny: Home of the Haha

9208 readers
354 users here now

Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.

Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.


Other Communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

For the record, this is all stuff you should be able to do dependably without a camera too. Not to belittle the convenience of course, but I'd worry about developing a reliance on it.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Ultimately stats show that kids under 5 (and especially around 2-3) get squashed at a much higher rate than kids that are tall enough to be seen out the back window. Rear view cameras are a tool and I highly recommend using that tool as an added tool in your toolbox.

For these two scenarios (1.short kids and 2. can't see shit when backing out of a park), the alternative is to drive back slowly and hope.

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I also wonder to what extent this is a particular issue with larger vehicles. Most of my parking maneuvers are performed with a Mk5 Golf, a very small car where I have near-complete visibility from the driver's seat, and the practicality of that size was part of the appeal for me.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 1 points 3 days ago

I find the issue is when you are parked between two large vehicles!