In the generation of 2016, many things are updated. Chordless phones are more of an antique than a necessity. People no longer write letters, but rather send a quick email or text. Cars are becoming, and will continue to become, more and more updated as the years progress. As handy as it is to have a car with bluetooth and heated seats, is it a benefit to the lives of 2016 to have a car with no driver? Due to all the challenges the government will face and many of technical difficulties this world faces today, the obvious answer is no.

It is always nice to be able to do less. Sitting back and relaxing is something everyone enjoys. However, when a woman gets into a taxi and imputs her destination, she is entrusting her life in technology. Teenagers like the thrill of roller coasters, until one gets stuck at the peak of the ride. This woman liked the car until the steering wheel got stuck, sending her into a ditch. She liked it before the brakes stopped working because of a wire snapping. Many things could go wrong technilogically, that would make the car ride seem a little bit scary. "If the technology fails..." (paragraph 9). Even the author of "Driverless Cars Are Coming" didn't deny that many things could in fact go wrong technilogically.

Even if this woman did get to her destination safely, many factors had to take roll in making driverless cars possible. For starters, the law would have to be set. "New laws will be needed in order to cover liability in case of an accident." (paragraph 9). It takes 75% of congress to be able to take a law to the president. When it makes its way there, the president can still deny that law; furthermore, it has to go back to the congress and get revoted. Laws put in this position do not normally pass.

"In most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars." (paragraph 9). It would take many months or even years to be able to pass this law, considering they have all this information about driverless cars and only a few places are allowed to even test them. Questions are raised such as "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver or the manufacturer?" (paragraph 9). Too much time is put into trying to pass the law, and in a society that is looking for ways to save time, it isn't worth the effort.

Furthermore, America has other problems to fix. The government does not need to put this country into more debt by spending its time and money on cars that are even less safe for its citizens. When smarter roads became too high of costs to be practical, people turned to developing smarter cars. "In the late 1950's, General Motors created a concept car that could run on a special test track....something that was simply too expensive to be practical." (Paragraph 3). For 76 years people have been putting time, money, and energy into making these cars more practical. Cars aren't a neccessity to everyone. Certain religions (such as the Amish) are without cars. Mackinac Island runs by horse and buggy. True, that isn't efficient for this huge country, but being billions of dollars in debt, that time and money could be used to help America pay what it owes. In the mean time, Americans can put up with what they have been using for many years.

In the generation of 2016, many things are updated. Phones don't have chords anymore. Americans don't send letters by mail as much as they used to. The citizens of this countru have been very efficient on many things. They have learned how to save time and money; furthermor, they have encorperated those ideas into everyday life. However, one item America doesn't need, due to limited safety; the time it takes for laws to pass; and the debt this country is in, is driverless cars.