Insurance Industry: Daytime Running Lights(Lamps UK)?

Question

Does anyone else find it odd that the insurance industry hasn't lobbied Congress for mandatory DRLs.

DRLs have been proven to reduce accidents, thus lowering insurance payouts. DRLs would be in the best interest of the Insurance Companie's bottom line and Americans in general.

Many new cars have the DRLs enabled by default because so many countries already make them mandatory. Why is the USA stuck in the dark ages on this issue?

Answer 1

Yes I agree, circle gets the square.

The US auto industry has limited DRL's on vehicles. Reason: Additional cost to the industry.

In the early 1970's GM actually lobbied against having seat belts in cars.

In the mid 80's the auto manufacturers lobbied to not have the 3rd rear tail light on cars.

The (mostly USA) auto manufactures resisted placing airbags in cars. All of this increases their costs, and reduces profit on their cars.

They are profit motive not safety motive.

Answer 2

It doesn't reduce payouts much, and most insurance companies allow a discount for cars that have the DRLs.  

In the USA, most peope prefer that the government NOT micromanage everything.  It's called, letting the PEOPLE decide.  If you want a car with DRL, buy one.  If not, let it go.

You don't have to legislate EVERYTHING.  If you want everything legislated, move to Cuba.