Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
I am strongly against having the technology of driveless cars just for the reasonable fact that it is very hazardous and you will not learn the skill to have fun and driving on your own. Also it isn't a good aspect upon life because we as people want to feel 100% safe, and to trust technology is not a good idea. What will happen if the car disfunctions and dosen't stop on time in an accident?

As it states in the article, "why would anyone want a driveless car and still need a driver," because the manufactures of this driveless car company knows that it is not a 100% guarantee that the car will stop on time or keep you save from accidents. Even though it wouldn't be one as of driving on your own, because you can't help the faults of other drivers on the road, there still would be more accidents with a driveless car than it would be on our own, because you have full control of what you want to do with it. And this where the big question falls in, "If technology fails and someone is injured who fault is it the driver or the manufactuer?" It would be the maunfactuers because they say even with a driveless car the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation rquires for them to get into an accident.

Even if the google car announces for them to be prepared and when to take action, don't you think instead it should prepare itself to disregard getting into an accident. Before they even though about selling these cars and having people ride in them, they should've did a better investment and more use of technological differences to actually help citizens out. They could've even had the installation for the car to teach student learners how to drive with a person to test them in the car, because this technology of a driveless car is just not good enough. The manufactures also didn't even have a thought to actually care for other citizens out there driving the car because if they did they would've had to car do everything needed to precaution itself from hazardous situations.

In conclusion, this is why i strongly disagree for the manufacturing of driveless cars because it could tend to be very hazardous and it's not good to belive in technology will save you. Also if it's a driveless car why should you still have to have somebody in the car and have them still steer and take over in dangerous situations? Just think, who are you to blame for getting into that one accident, will the company pay for your damages and utilities you have to handle on the car? It's not worth spending thousands of dollars on a unreliable investment.

Score: 4