Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Given all the facts about driverless cars, I still think driverless cars should not be a future technology. They are too costly, mostly require the driver to maintain contact with the wheel and in the case of an accident, who would be the cause of it?

"Driverless cars" is a broad term. Mostly because all the current driverless cars require the driver to maintain contact with the steering wheel and stay alert at all times. Not only that but the cars can only "handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph," which is not that fast. This is why the term :Driverless Cars" should be renamed to "Assisted Driving Cars."

Another thing to consider is the cost of all this. One fact is that "in the late 1950's, General Motors created a concept car that would run on a special test track." Even though the roads worked and did what they were supposed to, having to upgrade every road to have that feature was unquestionably exspensive. So that never happened and everyone decided it was time to move away from the roads and go into the cars themselves, via making them driverless.

Last but not least is the accidents. Accidents happen every now and then, but even though the cars are banned in most states and they have only driven "more than half a million miles without a crash," a crash would most likely happen if the cars were sold commercially. But in the case of an accident, who would take the blame? The Driver or the Manufacturer? I believe it would be the driverless car fault.

In conclusion, I wouldn't want cars to be on the road driverless, because the money,time and resources needed to do that.

Score: 3