Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Driverless cars have been in development since the 1950's, for the goal of eventually making all other forms of civilian ground transport obsolete. No real progress has really come until a couple decades ago, when things like Radar and GPS became readily available for civilians. These cars could bring great benefits, as they would be safe, still have drivers to take the wheel, and they will be here relatively soon.

These cars would be safe. When the car hits bad traffic, or a hard to navigate place, it would notify the driver of such a situation. Googles "driverless" car anounces when one of these scenarios arises. Another one, developed by GM, has "driver's seats that vibrate." These cars could also have "in-car entertainment and information systems that us heads up displays," that could be,"turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over." Of course, the "driverless" cars would also have a human there.

So called "driverless" cars arent 100% driverless. If the systems malfunction, the driver can take the wheel. The cars could have measures to make sure the driver stays at least semi-alert, such as "Flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-up displays." In this case the light would attract the attention of the driver, and the driver would start paying attention.

Automakers are working and developing these cars, and have been for a while. Soon, these driverless cars will be available. Tesla has announced that a "car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time," as early as this year, 2016. Other auto manufacturers "plan to have cars that drive themselves by 2020." These manufacturers include Nisan, Mercedes-Benz, and Audi.

Driverless cars aren't druely driverless, are quite safe, and are going to be available soon. There is no real reason to be against having these cars on the road, or to have all cars be truely driverless in the near future.

Score: 4