Skip to comments.U.S. States Canít Have Own Self-driving Car Rules Under Trump Presidency
Posted on 06/19/2017 1:10:32 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
California and other states would be barred from setting their own rules governing design and testing of self-driving cars, while federal regulators would be blocked from demanding pre-market approval for autonomous vehicle technology, according to a U.S. House Republican proposal reviewed by Reuters on Thursday.
The draft legislation, while far from becoming law, still represents a victory for General Motors Co, Alphabet Inc, Tesla Inc and other automakers and technology companies seeking to persuade Congress and the Trump administration to pre-empt rules under consideration in California, New York and other states that could limit deployment of self-driving vehicles.....
(Excerpt) Read more at news18.com ...
Since regular vehicles have federal standards so should driverless
I vote for maximum chaos, minimum rules!
Two years ago, in Germany, Merkel ordered the head of transportation in the country to start a draft law package to cover everything (insurance, certificates, etc). As far as Germans are concerned....there will be driver-less cars on the road by 2020. Maybe it’s too optimistic.
But this whole thing is dragging out a lot of questions that people weren’t thinking about. For example...if Dad needs his kid delivered to school ten miles away....could he just put the kid in the passenger seat and tell the car to drop the kid off and return home....with no driver in the seat? Could the guy in the driver’s seat have no actual drivers license? If two driver-less cars hit each other...who will be held at fault? If the driver-less cars obey the law and meet safety expectations....accidents should rapidly decrease....so shouldn’t insurance rates drop by 50-percent within a decade of introduction?
Rule #1: No DVs in left hand lane. Otherwise just paint bullseyes all over them.
“But this whole thing is dragging out a lot of questions that people werent thinking about.”
I asked those questions years ago, to friends working on the technology. They just waved them off. They assume, I assume, that Google, et al will have the billions of dollars of clout necessary to smooth out tort law in their favor. I expect the car owner will be held liable, insurance rates will go up to cover it, and that will be that.
A garbage headline
Once it becomes illegal for operator-controlled vehicles to be driven, liability insurance won’t be necessary since Technology is perfect and robocars will never, ever misbehave or make mistakes. Other forms of insurance (theft, comprehensive) will still be necessary, and rates for those products will be forced up to keep the insurance companies profitable.
The technology has a ways to go.
I'm not certain why there is a push to go driverless. What are you supposed to do, if you are not driving? Sit and stare out the window because doing anything else causes motion sickness?
I’m not a fan of self-driving cars. I’m sure they will be safer and more energy-efficient blah, blah blah. I’m also that sure I’m being a Luddite and a big baby but to me this one of those situations where “just because the technology exists doesn’t mean it should be used.”
As stated earlier, they should have all the mandatory requirements of normal vehicles.
If you want to argue about it that’s fine but I don’t have any sane reasons for opposing them...I just oppose them!
It'll be a bit like traveling in the first class car of an early British passenger train in that you won't have to rub shoulders with the masses. Your vehicle will be supplying the power, and your part of the train won't be physically coupled to the rest of it, but you will be part of the train nonetheless. Fedgov and the social engineers can't convince everyone to take mass transit, so this is one way to sell you the idea by the drink before they force you to buy the bottle.
I believe Comrade Sunstein calls it "nudging."
In any event, we will all lose a good deal of autonomy, and someone else will make big money from us in the bargain.
“I’m not certain why there is a push to go driverless.”
Considering the Baby Boomers are aging to the point where driving might no longer be an option, driverless cars could sound interesting. They might provide a few more years of independence for us. (The concept of a driverless car does seem scary, though.)
I had a rental with steering assist and land departure. Stupid vehicle dinged at me for changing lanes without signaling. It also reduced my speed on cruise control when it detected a vehicle in front of me. Made me crazy. No way i get in a vehicle that drives itself
What is probably going to happen is that traditional auto insurance is going to be replaced by a combination of owner-based insurance policies (to cover theft and damage to the vehicle when it is not operating) and manufacturer-based product liability insurance (to cover collisions and malfunctions in the technology). The latter item will impair the introduction of this technology, since manufacturers that are liable for catastrophic failures are likely to incorporate protective measures in these self-driving cars -- like reduced speeds and extended following distances on highways -- that make them very unappealing to prospective owners.
It’s all about control, in spite of what the “it-can’t-happen-here” folks might say. It’s all about keeping tabs on where you go, when you go, and what you do when you get there. And when things get difficult, it’s all about preventing you from doing things that the elites don’t want you to do.
But they never tell you the real reason why things are happening, they will always assure you that your safety and well-being is their only goal, and that if you do nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about.
Tyranny doesn’t always arrive behind ranks of goose-stepping troops. More often it comes in brightly wrapped packages decorated with shiny ribbons and bows, delivered by grinning politicians, and hailed by the sycophantic news media as the doorway to a wonderful new age.
“Five year plans and new deals, wrapped in golden chains...”
There are some issues that require full-country standardization....imagine if a handful of States decided they wanted to drive in the left lane.
Good move by President Trump!
The Globalits are going to be upset about this!
Self Driving Cars are ultimately about population control.
Controlling your movement.
Of course they are not going to initially sell it to the public this way.
It’s about Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030.
They are going tell you cities are the solutions and cars are the problems.
Cities are notorious for crime, disease, high prices and conscription.
No cities are the plague and cars are the solutions.
Bottom line is this. It’s all part of the Eugenics movement to eventually take humans out of the equations and put us in a control grid.
This is why they want to track your money with Apple and Google Pay.
It’s all about control. They want to control your movement, what you buy, how you think and ultimately they want you dead. It’s really disturbing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.