Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
From the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming," there are many good and bad things about the driveless cars. My position is in this article is that it is not a good idea to have driverless cars because, for example the cars needs to always have someone holding the wheel, many driving laws just want cars where the driver is in control at all times, and new laws would have to be added just in case someone is injured.

The cars that are in now are still not driverless because they still need someone behind the wheel just in case the car has to go through wok zones, accidents, and traffics. In the text it stated, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." This means that the car has to alert the driver to take over in case of any situation they are not programmed to do, so the driver has to remain alert and ready to drive the car whenever it needs to.

Many states still do not accept "driverless" cars because the traffic laws require that there is a human driver behind the wheel at all times. In the article it said, "Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times." This quote means that traffic laws do not accept any cars that are driverless because they want to keep every driver, passenger, and pedestrian safe especially just in case technology goes wrong at the wrong time.

Finally, there would have to be new laws added just in case someone gets hurt driving one of the driverless cars. In the texts it stated, "Still, even if the traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technologly fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-- the driver or the manufacture?" What this is trying to explain is that in case of an accident whos fault is it going to be? Will it be the driver even though he is not supposed to be driving, or the manufacture because he was the one who invented that technology.

In conclusion, there are many things wrong with this idea of a driverless car.For example, still needs a driver behind the wheel at all times, traffic laws require that there has to be an alert driver, and that there would have to be more laws added just in case there is an accident. These were very valid for there not to be driverless cars in the United States.

Score: 4