Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The article I read had very insightful information. It showed both positive and negative effects to driverless cars. With that being said, I have decided to go against completely driverless cars.

To be clear, I am not against cars that help humans with driving, but I am against cars that drive themselves without any human skills. Cars have made a lot of technological improvements over the years, but I don't think that cars will be driving themselves completely for a while. Although technology has advanced extremely in cars considering that they can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, they also require human skills and intuition to help drive them. I also don't think that driverless cars will be cheap enough to supply the worlds growing population. Are driverless cars really necessary in cities like New York or San Fransisco? Where most of the cities population takes the subway or other forms of public transportation. Finally, there is the law aspect. The article mentioned who or what would be at fault if there was an accident, but what if a driverless car ran a car driven by a human off of a cliff. Would the person that was ran off the road be at fault? The driverless car is a computer and some people think that therefore it is never wrong about it's decisions, that the car would perfectly weight out the situation and make a decision based on which driver had a better opportunity to live.

The idea of a world with driverless cars seems great, but I don't think the world we live in is ready for it. I am not against computers and softwares helping humans with driving cars, but at this time I am against cars completely driving themselves. Technologically, economically, and lawfully I don't think driverless cars will be around for another thirty to fifty years.

Score: 3