It appears you want to empower government as the sole arbiter of what constitutes safe practices. In other words, government is charged to provide a risk free environment. I have a more economical and sensible solution.
I think your drivers license should have been suspended for one-year as a result of your accident. That would have more impact on safety than requiring everyone else buy a camera. You could rely on public transportation, which would make many of us feel safer. That puts the hardship on you where it belongs, not on people that are better and more conscientious drivers.
And it appears that you are incapable of engaging in rational discourse. My only point is that vehicle safety is a legitimate legislative prerogative of the federal government's enumerated constitutional authority under the Commerce Clause that was drafted by our founders. Vehicles which are intended not only for sale but also for use in interstate commerce are a legitimate target for regulation by the congress.
Congress made a specific legislative request signed by President Bush to create regulations that would help to prevent accidents in which small children are killed by vehicles backing up. Although these are rare accidents, there was documentation that as many as 200 children are killed every year in these accidents and the installation of a back up camera will prevent most, if not all of these tragedies.
I could argue that you have no problem with toddlers being squished by SUV's but that would be engaging in the kind nonsensical arguments that have been directed towards me.
You may disagree with the solution that the transportation department came up with, but the fact remains that the congress authorized this and this is one example of a legitimate use of regulatory power under the commerce clause of the constitution.
As far as I can determine this bill was passed by both houses on unanimous consent. Nobody is on record as opposing this.