My position on driveless cars is it shouldn't go past a point where a human driver can not take control of the car. Technology can be faulty and if a human can't take control of the car some dangerous consequences will happen. Also if a driver can take control of the car, if an accident occurs they will be responsible. Then the business that created the car will not be liable. Finally the cost will be a major problem, a mass majority of people will most likely not be able to afford this vechicle. Which can be a marketing problem, when introduced to the mass public.

Time has shown that technology does have flaws, some very dangerous ones. Now imagine these flaws happen when you're on the highway surrounded by other cars. A consequence paid for these techonological errors could be death. If the car glitches out, a human driver will be needed to take control and keep the sitaution in control. Cars already have faults, and technology also can have significant errors. Would you put your life in the hands in some possibly faulty piece of technology? This is why human drivers need to be able to have control of the car if needed.

Responsibilty for accident is a subject that's in the air about these vechicles. If the human driver has overall control of the vechicle, the possibility of an accident would be in thier hands. This will pull out some major possibilties of a manufacturer being taken to court over the car. If full control of a car is given to the hands of technology, the manufacturer will most likely be sued on multiple occasions if an accident occurs. If the overall power of the car is given to the person in the driver seat, the final verdict of an accident will fall onto them.

Cost is also a mojaor factor. When introduced to the masses who will be able to afford this car? The price of a driverless vechicle would be very expensive and most likely not affordable to the evryday middle class people. What's the point of making this car if not it's gonna have a huge market? If the car is partially driverless it most likely be less expensive to make and would be more cost effective to the masses.

There is no need for a completely driverless car. It would cause a landslide of problems. If technology is faulty it could cause injury or death. If its completly driverless, the manufacturer would be responsible for accidents. Finally the cost would be way too high for the average person in this economy. These are allsignificant reasons there should not be a driverless car.