Driverless cars may seem like a cool new innovation that take the stress away from driving. The truth is that while there are many positive things about driverless cars there are still many complications with introducing them into society. Without a driver, the mechanics could malfunction and cause a safetly threat to other drivers and pedestrians. Many states also have laws against even testing driverless cars. Even thought the car can do the basic driving by itself, the human passangers still need to take control for more complicated road conditions. The production and use of driverless cars is negative to society because they pose a safety threat, force laws to change, and they still require human control.

Saftey is always a concern when dealing with any type of motor vehicle and driverless cars increase the risk of safety because they do not have human control. Every state has road laws that every driver is meant to follow. Traffic laws assume that, "the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times"("Driverless Cars Are Coming"). This evidence states how the laws believe that a car is only safe when there is a human controlling it. These laws are meant to promote safety and since they state a human needs to be in control for a vehicle to be safe, then driverless cars are not the best thing for safety. This is negative because when there is a larger safety risk, more people may be fatally injured and the general public will feel unsafe. the use of driverless cars on the road would require the laws to be modified and allow their use.

Another way that driverless cars are negative to society is that they would force the laws to change to accommadate them. All over the country there are laws in place that prohibit the use of driverless cars. According the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming", "in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars". Since driveress cars are illegal in most states, in order for them to be used on the roads all of the laws relevant to this topic would need to be changed or adjusted. Changing the laws is negative because changing the already safe laws could cause the general public to be unsafe and the process for changing the laws is a hastle. It needs to be sent in and approved by many government branches and could be rejected by any one, causing the process to repeat. Not only is it a hastle and burden, it is also takes a lot of time. Even if the laws are changed the cars still require human involvement

Driverless cars may seem more convenient but in reality they require human interaction in any tough traffic situation. As a result this is negative because it is not improving the convenience for drivers. Some say that driverless cars are more convenient, but in fact they can only perform the easy aspects of driving without the aid from the human driver. Driverless cars "can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires human skills"("Driverless Cars Are Coming"). This evidence shows how involved humans have to be in a "driverless" car. An invention that seems convenient actually requires the driver to be more alert so they know when they need to step in to control the car in difficult situations. This is negative because waiting for difficult road conditions can cause a driver to be more stressed and anxious than they would be if they were normally driving a car. Since the driver needs to more alert and the fact that driverless cars are not that convenient at all there is no reason for them to be on the roads.

In conclusion, driverless cars should not be produced and driven on the roads becasue they pose a saftely threat to the general public, they require the laws to change and they still need human interaction and therefore are not a convenience. Considering this, is it really worth all the risk and hastle just for something "cool" to be on the road? Would it still be cool if these vehicles endangered you or a family member?