I feel that google or people and who ever else is making these cars should not put them on the market. I think this because if someone were to get into an accident who is to blame? Should we blame the car? The car company? The driver? No one will be able to asnswer these questions because driverless cars are dangerous. There are to many drunk drivers and people falling asleep at the wheel now a days to have a computer powered car. I feel that if they put these cars on the market we would have twice as much accidents then we did before. Alot of people now a days text and drive so add not contoling the vechicle and what do u got? 3 times the accidents! These driverless cars are becoming popular but we need to look at all the diffrent things that can happen when someone is controling the vechicle. For one drunk drivers. Alot of people drink behind the wheel and thats already dangerous enough. Another reason driverless cars are a bad idea is the fact that people text and drive way to often. 8/10 people text and drive and that could really put someone at risk. Yes i know there cars arent truley driverless and have driven half a million miles without an acident,but thats not the point. The point is why would we want a machine to cause more deaths and injuries then they already do? Yes they have antilock brakes and speed sensors,but how do we know they will be 100% effective? We don't. Driverless cars can steer,accelerate,and brake themselves,but what if they dont? What if the engine locks? What if the brakes malfunction, or the car speeds up too quickly? Who is too blame? If its almost "driverless" then how is the driver responsible? How many people are going to get injured or killed do to these malfuctions? If car companys are so conserned on saftey,then why would they want a computer powered car? Why wouldnt they just make the car more safe and efficant? Although GM has developed driver seats that vibrate when the car is in danger of hitting an object, how do we know that the car wouldnt stop for a living thing? Or human being? What if the car turns to neutral at the speed of at least 25 mph and you cant brake because its computer operated? Lets think about this. If someone is in need of a medical emergency and you dont have time to wait for an ambulance,would u put that person "safely" strapped in a driverless car; GPS set to the nearest hospital? Why or why not? Would u be willing to take that ride if it was a life or death situation? These driverless cars seem legit but look at the real textbook situations. They move by themsleves,brake,turn,sensor, and give you alerts if your about to hit an object. Thats right they accelerate, brake,turn ALL BY THEMSELVES.So i feel that we should not have driverless cars for these reasons. They could and can cause many more injuries and deaths than an human being can because they dont think,they just do what there motherboards tell them to do,and you know what that is? Drive. They might be programed to stop, accelerate, and turn, but who says they will when there supposed to? The car company? You? The car? All this can be avoided if we dont have driverless cars; and that's why we shouldnt have driverless cars.