In addition, recent studies have shown that human drivers are more likely to be involved in an accident in comparison to driverless cars. Cars of Tomorrow-Still Not Flying states; “Google has had a fleet of driverless cars since 2009, and they’ve driven over a half a million miles without a crash. Human drivers get in an accident about every half a million miles on average in the United States, so either the Google cars are due, or they’re going to out-drive humans yet again.” This explains that in recent humans are more accident prone and get into accidents more frequently. Not to mention the fact that amongst humans driverless cars could ultimately end up saving lives. Fischer who was interviewed at the New York International Auto Show tells CNN Money Watch, that by looking towards new crash mitigation technology it will worn the driver if an accident is about to occur.
In “America’s Key to Freedom” Carol Domblewski states that” They had mobility any time they wanted, not just when a train schedule said they had it.” Working citizens are able to get in the car and drive to their job at whatever time they need to be there from wherever they live. There is no thought of what time the train will come or how long it will take to get to the train. The people can sleep better when they don’t have to get up three hours before work, therefore getting to work more healthy and
Another article states, “But what if drunk and stoned college kids never had to drive? The driverless car could unsettle these public policy debates by removing an important trump card in arguments against individual liberty and individual responsibility.” Driverless cars are not the only solution because humanity already has an option now which would be ubers, security shuttles, or even designated drivers. Not to mention that people will be out of work because driving provides a lot of job—cab drivers, truck drivers, delivery drivers. Technology would have left hundreds to thousands of people out of work and increased the unemployment rate substantially. Furthermore, people will be willingly giving up their privacy for these driverless cars.
One day in the news I observed a collision with a car and a JAywalker. The JAywalker died and the driver got their licence taken away. they got it taken away because the driver was drunk and driving. If the JAywalker used the light instead of just walking there was a chance of them living to this day. People also believe that littering will not do any harm to anyone or anything well they are wrong.
Although many disagreed with the road because of the loss of homes and natural habitat, more people supported the road. The cold war played a big role to the majority of the population because of the fear of being wiped out by a nuclear weapon. The people who were scared wanted safer and larger roads so they could easily escape. Large businesses also supported the road so that they could make more money. Car companies also would benefit from better roads as the people would want cars to drive.
"A car is freedom on four wheels," as Zane argues in his article "Cars represent America Freedom." Public transportation takes away your freedom. You will feel more likely limited to do what you can usually do while driving your personal vehicle. For example, you cannot listen to the radio or music loud through speakers in a bus, but you can if you are riding a personal automobile. Moreover, you feel more relaxed riding a car than a bus.
Tomorrow, maybe, completely autonomous cars will steer themselves across mountain ranges and through downtowns. Across the world, hundreds of millions or even perhaps billions of people will be safer than ever, more prosperous than ever, and more efficient than ever. Despite, some people will say self-driving cars will foster an environment of less safety, rather than more. They say hackers may be able gain control of cars from the outside. However, this is not true because the sensors on a car can and will be programmed to automatically detect and shut down malicious invaders, through reasons which I actually will explain later.
Using a cell phone while driving has become increasingly common on our roads today. “Driving while yakking may seem harmless to you,” argues Easterbrook, “but try telling that to the loved ones of the hundreds or even thousands who die each year in totally avoidable phone-related accidents” (A-3). He proposes that there are more methods of catching people carrying out distracted driving. He poses the question, “If automated cameras can issue speeding tickets, why can’t they issue tickets to the owners of cars photographed with a driver using a phone” (A3)? Other potential dangers can even come from the cars themselves
When the Minimum Legal Drinking Age changed to 21 years old in 1976, there was a decrease in fatal car accidents which saved approximately 21,887 lives (Alcohol Policy MD). Many lives were saved because there were less young drinkers and less people driving under the influence of alcohol. If it were possible to save lives, why wouldn’t you want to do that? An argument is made that if teenagers are allowed the responsibility to drive when they are 16 years old why can’t they drink at an earlier age? This is simply because Alcohol can put people in danger.