Driverless cars trials begin

[LONDONER]

http://www.motoring.co.uk/car-news/drive...e-uk_65807

While the technology is advancing fast it is not expected that this type of vehicle will be on the general market for at least ten years.

Someone has stated that it doesn't mean that if you're blind drunk you can get in to a driverless car and tell it to take you home but that raises a point. If a drunk were found in a driverless car could he/she be prosecuted for drink driving?

[Iceblink]

"According to respondents to a survey conducted by insurance company Rias, many motorists aren’t that keen, with only 20 per cent of drivers aged 40 or more in the West Midland and south west prepared to consider using a driverless car."

That is what people say in a poll. Technology usually works its way into your life without you putting too much thought into it. If it is something that takes off, it will slowly move to where that is all that is available to buy and I imagine, at least at first, many of the cars will have the ability to allow you to drive and to have the choice of letting it be driverless when you want.

[Wiggedjay]

My view is that the technology needs to be proven before allowing people who are drunk to be alone in a driverless car, however the day will come when the technology will reach a point when simply voice commands will get a person home....it'll be better than me relying on my homing instincts to get me home when blind drunk.

[Butterfingers]

In answer to the question, it would depend on what the law says at the time, if it's been amended in such fashion to allow a drunk to ride in a driverless car then there is no worry, but as the law stands now I think that a
person in a car alone who is drunk would be considered the driver even if the car did the driving, so the drunk would be in violation of the law.

[Bowyn Aerrow]

California has been debating the legalities of the driverless car, drunks and many other issues. It was the first state to pass laws to allow driverless cars on the road (So Google and others could test them).

yes the 40+ crowd is against the technology because they are old. I bet younger folk are all gung ho about the idea and they are the ones that actually matter as they will be the ones to carry the market and vote into law the new laws that will mandate driverless cars for all. Just like previous generations voted other crap in while the older generation of that that time kicked and screamed and made such a fuss.

[Cuddly]

If every car/truck was driverless, I would be all for it. However, if some/the majority are manually driving, I'm not sure if I'd be comfortable being driverless.

Maybe it becomes a thing like stick-shift vs automated-shift. I've heard that cars are mostly auto in the US, is that true?

[TwisttheLeaf]

I think I'm just too much of a control freak for driverless cars. It just all around feels like a very bad idea to me. Driverless cars is just one step too close to letting machines make my decisions for me. Technology should open you up to the opportunity of more options, education, and experiences, not take these things from you IMO.

[LJay]

Cuddly, many cars in the US are indeed atomatic transmissions. I have a manual Honda and the service garage forgot to change the fluid in the clutch because they were so unused to doing so. Or that is what the rep said. It is interesting driving the manual in traffic because most drivers just floor the gas and go. They have no concept that some of us may need time to shift gears.

As for driverless cars, they will eventually catch on. I think they would be great for partying and a night on the town. And imagine granny being able to get about without the rest of us having to worry about her driving.

[Rareboy]

I'd line up for one.