Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Driverless cars can definitely be a positive invention, but it could also be a very negative thing for many reasons. My position on driverless cars is that I am against it. In the article, it clearly states several times that if the road conditions were complicated, then the driver would have to take over. The article also says that the driver would often get bored because they're waiting for their turn to take over the wheel. Lastly, the article states that if the car were to have a mishap, the crash would be the driver's fault. The driverless car would not be the one at fault in a complicated situation.

Firstly, in the article, it clearly states that if the road conditions were complicated, then the driver would have to take over.

One of the reasons that I would be against driverless cars is because I would not want to have to take over if the road conditions are odd. The term 'driverless car' is supposed to mean that it would be completely possible for the car to drive without a person in the car. If they are trying to make these cars smart and driverless, then they should make the cars smart enough that there is no need for a driver in the car.

Secondly, the article also says that the driver would often get bored because they're waiting for their turn to take over the wheel. This is just a personal opinion, but I would prefer to be driving myself because of the aspect of boredom. I do not enjoy being bored, so if I'm bored, I might fal asleep. We don't want sleeping drivers on the road, so this would not be a good idea. The car is supposed to notify the driver when the road conditions are complicated, but that feature won't do any good if the driver is not alert. This means that the whole purpose would be defeated, and there would be more collisions in the road.

Lastly, the article states that if the car were to have a mishap, the crash would be the driver's fault. The driverless car would not be the one at fault in a complicated situation. This means that even if I wasn't the one at fault, I would still be the one to blame because I was in the driverless car. I am against driverless cars because if the car has a mishap, then it's my fault, and I don't want to take the blame for it. If my car gets into a crash, I want it to actually be my fault and not the driverless car's fault.

The article says that the driver would be taking most of the blame for most of the situations, so in the end, would it even be a 'driverless' car? I do not believe that the driver should have to take the fall for something that they didn't do. This means that I am against self-driving cars, and I would prefer if they were off of the roads.

Score: 4