Driverless cars are coming may be good or bad. The passage support mutliple good and bad reasons. I myself am against driveless cars. The passage indicates that, " Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved. Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves."(Driverless, 10). Many cars are being taken in to be a driverless car as you can in the sentence quoted above from the passage.

Even though driverless cars may become popular I am against this because stated in the passage. " The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph." From my own point of view the car can maybe lose control. ( Driverless, 7) People who accept these cars has to realise that the car can be harmful in many ways. " These smart-road systems worked surprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical." ( Driverless, 3) The sentence before states it may require huge upgrade to roads. If the roads take to fix that means the other regular car drivers cars may get damaged. The cars may get damaged because it is a massive road ,for cars that are driverless.

The passage may state a good reason such as, " something not available to drivers trying to text with a cell phone. In the way, the in-car system is actually a safety feature, and safety is a big dream." (Driverless, 8) But what if you are texting and the car alerts you that it needs human access and you are so concentrated on your phone you do not pay attention. Therefore the car keeps using the non-human program and it would be a possibility you may wreck something or someone.

Most driving laws concentrate on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe at all times. I agree with this quote from the passage, " traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only car has a human driver in control at all times." (Law, 9) In some states it is , "illegal even to test computer-driven cars. California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia have led the contry in allowing limited use of semi-autonomous cars." (Law, 9)

Antilock brakes an ddriver assistance still seem a long way from the dream of calling a driverless cab to take you wherever you would like to go. So they are not as driverless as you think. In the passage stated , " The sensors weren't there, the computers weren't there, and the mapping wasn't there. Radar was a device on a hilltop that cost two hundred million dollars. It wasn't something you could just buy at Radio Shack." " So just how driverless will the cars be in the near future?" (Assisting, 6) Now as you can see and read over the cars are not all that driverless but the cars are a very high price. The cars are not worth it.

I supported against because I felt cars should always be human controlled. Just in case of an accident you may can save your life if you are focus on the road. These were good and negative resons stated throughtout but citizens have to realise that would hurt the some profits because the cars are so high in price that no one will buy the product and some car places will lose businesses. Those are my reasons to go against driverless cars.