[DaiusPitar]

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

It is only when mandated by law, that they introduce the essential safety features etc.

I think that might be the crux of the entire argument. This discussion on safety features over luxury is one after my own heart for personal reasons.

Realistically we cannot expect manufacturers to step up their game on this accord beyond a point.

In economic terms, safety features are a public good. While generally appreciated by all, not insisted upon at the individual level when required to pay separately for them. Market competition in any industry is a race to the bottom as a general rule as far as public goods are concerned. And that is the justification for regulation to provide for public goods. Hence, the regulation driven approach to the introduction of safety features in cars in other markets. An OT example is fortification of milk with vitamin D in sunlight deprived countries.

While the ball then rests with the GoI, the moot question is whether we can do anything as concerned citizens to lobby for compulsory safety features in a country with among the highest road fatalities? Case in point, Ralph Nader' advocacy with his book "Unsafe at any speed" was the proverbial snowball that launched an avalanche in changing American approach to vehicle safety.

Any thoughts people...?