Sam turned 16 a couple months ago, and now has his license and may drive whenever he wants. He and his friends love to go out and party. Sam usually picks them all up and drives. One particular night, Sam and his friends were invited to a college party; they loaded up the car and rushed to the party. Sam and his friends are risk takers, so when the college boys dared them to do a keg-stand, they did not back down. Dizzy and disoriented, Sam squinted at the clock and noticed it was 3 AM. He had to get home before his parents realized that he was out past curfew. Sam shouted at his friends to get in the car; he knew he was not sober, but insisted that if he drove slowly they would be okay. The next morning, Sam’s parents woke up to an officer knocking on the front door. Sam’s car had crossed the margins in an area where there was no ditch and rolled the car down a hill. Sam was alive enough after the accident to call 911; all the boys were rushed to the hospital, but doctors did not hold high hopes for all the boys to survive.

Bella had to rush to work Saturday morning because her boss was having a break down and threatened to fire her for no particular reason. Bella left her seven and nine year olds home alone; she did not bother buckling up and started trying to contact the babysitter while driving to work. Speeding like a bullet, Bella finally heard the click of her babysitter’s phone picking up. She let out a sigh of relief, relaxed her muscles, and had a truck slam into the back of her, throwing her threw the front windshield. A later analysis of the incident, and an interview with the half conscious truck driver, found that Bella had been speeding and the truck driver had been speeding right behind her; she had suddenly let up on the gas pedal and the truck did not have enough time to slow down or brake to avoid a collision. Bella was pronounced dead at the scene.

Stacy was in her first accident today. She tried to merge into the right lane of the highway to pass the slow car in front of her. Stacy did not see the tiny, electric car in the blind spot of her oversized truck. She started crossing into the right lane and pushed the tiny car off the road after bumping into it. Thankfully, no one was injured, yet Stacy’s parents are still suspending Stacy’s use of the family vehicle.

Vehicle accidents are a serious problem in America. Chairman of the International Organization for Road Accident Prevention, Bob Joop Goos, states that “more than 90 percent of road accidents are caused by human error… driving recklessly and speeding under the influence of alcohol, changing lanes without signaling, driving on the hard shoulder, and passing through red lights” (qtd. in Olarte 1). In a following statistic, “1.3 million road deaths occur worldwide every year and more than 50 million people are seriously injured. [That is roughly] 3,500 deaths a day or 150 every hour” (Olarte 1). From drunk driving to generally not using proper vehicle communication techniques, vehicle crashes are a devastative problem in the US that takes countless lives. Because it is not a new problem, there are already solutions put in place such as higher fines for those who break the road rules and anti-drunk driving campaigns. However, these are not having the desired effect of fixing the problem permanently. Drastic yet necessary, real solution to the dilemma is driverless cars. Driverless cars will solve the problem of car accidents because they eliminate human error and poor decision making, and they are coming soon.

Autonomous cars will lower the rate of vehicle accidents extremely. It is estimated that driverless cars could reduce the crash rate by 90%, save around 30,000 lives, and prevent millions of injuries. They could also prevent traffic jams and eliminate the need for stop lights (Dolan 1). This theory is based on driverless car’s ability to communicate with each other better than human drivers can. Vehicle-to-vehicle communication works when, “onboard short-range radio devices transmit data—on vehicle speed, direction, braking, and more—between vehicles” (Dolan 2). If vehicles can talk to one another and plan every merger, speed up, or braking moment they will work as a team and never run into each other. As Christopher Dolan states, “[Vehicle to Vehicle] offers forward-collision avoidance, blind spot warnings, and lane assistance features… [as well as a] vehicle to infrastructure system, where vehicles “talk” to communications infrastructure” (2). Driverless cars can communicate with one another to plan out their movements, and talk to specific infrastructures to find information on red lights, curves, stop signs, or construction zones. They can make logical decisions based on data they are “seeing”.

Another issue on the road is road rage. When humans get angry, they tend to make poor decisions. No one enjoys being cut off on the highway, but between a human and a machine the machine is more reasonable with their response. As explained by Gini Graham Scott, “if one driverless car cuts off another on the road, it’s just following the directives from its software, and the other driverless car isn’t going to get mad. Its software will just register the passing car” (2). The number of those involved in accidents due to road rage will logically be eliminated with driverless cars in the future, seeing as how road rage will become eliminated.

Technology had advanced so far in various aspects that now is the time to take all of those separate elements and place them together in a single automotive shell. Here is how driverless cars work in general, “Existing AV technology relies on computer-mapping systems that generate a detailed 3-D map of the environment. When combined with high-resolution maps, radar, and cameras, these systems allow an AV to drive itself while avoiding obstacles and respecting traffic laws” (Dolan 1). Google has been a leader in this race for some time now, and their car works using their own maps and technology. In regards to which company will ultimately win this challenge, Aaron Bragman says, “IHS points to Google’s massive ongoing investment and its ability to draw from adjacent technologies, including everything from robotics and artificial intelligence to detailed global maps, as giving a significant edge over traditional automakers” (1). Not only are regular automotive manufactures trying to solve this problem in America, but also technology leaders are trying. Their hard, constant work is all proof of just how serious this problem is and how serious the overall population is in regards to solving it.

With so many amazing features to driverless cars, it is no wonder that the Department of Transportation is funding projects to analyze these features and build these cars in several states already. Amanda Essex and Zita Toth claim that “sixteen states introduced legislation related to autonomous vehicles in 2015. That’s up from 12 states in 2014, nine states and D.C. in 2013, and six states in 2012” (1). Specific manufacturers like Volvo, Audi, Mercedes, and BMW have well-developed programs towards this project. Not to mention Google and Apple joining the challenge (Dolan 2).  All the companies know that there is a demand for these automobiles to hit the market due to the huge benefits for society they carry.

Society is obviously well on its way to having automatic vehicles hit the road, as can be seen by the rate of semi-automatic trends we have available today. One common feature in today’s automobiles is self-parking. Fairly self-explanatory, this self-parking feature allows the car to, at the push of a button, use sensors to find the parking spot, and using seemingly complex algorithms fit itself into the spot. According to Claudio Rebuzzi at Motorburn, as of today the top self-parking cars available are BMW’s, Lexus LS460, Volkswagen, Toyota Prius, and the Ford Focus. Some park themselves into a tight, straight space like a garage. Others use one swift, fluid movement to slide into a parallel parking spot (1). This technology is super simple to use and prevents hundreds of accidents due to poor attempts to fit into parking spaces, and prevents the hassle and traffic backup behind someone trying to park.

Multiple safety features have been added to automobiles over the years; most recent being a car by GM that will not allow the human to drive unless their seatbelts are buckled. To achieve this, the system uses weight sensors in the seat to determine if a person is sitting in it, and then requires that corresponding belt to be buckled in order for the car to be switched out of park (George 2). This is enforcing the safety concern of buckling seatbelts possibly saving a person’s life in the case of an accident. This is a small precaution, which would still be available in driverless cars to protect the passengers. 

An additional safety feature that is sweeping across the industry is the brand new Teen Driver Mode. It is becoming increasingly popular with parents of young drivers. In a recent article titled “2016 Chevrolet Malibu to get Teen Driver Mode” it explains the new safety system, “it doesn’t just monitor speed and distance, but also the number of stability-control and anti-lock braking events, as well as Forward Collision Alerts and Forward Collision Braking events… the system automatically mutes the sound system until seatbelts are fastened… [and] lowers the maximum speed of the vehicle itself” (2). Strategically, this system was designed for parents to control how their teen drives in order to keep them as safe as possible. Why not take this one step farther and take the same extreme measures when it comes to all drivers alike by using driverless cars. A driverless car would basically do everything that the driver would do plus make accurate decisions based on the gathered information from the same features that are gathering information now. Instead of just recording or limiting how a person drives, why not use this pattern information to drive more efficiently and safely. To further prove this thought, the same article also states that there are more specific features to the Teen Driver Mode, “like the front and rear park assist, blind zone alert, cross traffic alert, forward collision alert, forward collision braking, and front pedestrian braking” (“2016 Chevrolet Malibu” 2). Even with all of these alerts and assists, there is still the middle man of the driver who has ultimate control over the car, how about taking out the middle man and running the vehicle even more efficiently by allowing it to drive itself.

Teen Driver Mode will surely protect some teens on the road and help them drive safer. At the same time, driverless cars could protect them much ore. Let us look at a case example, in the television series Glee season 3, episode 15 the character Quinn Fabray is rushing to a friend’s wedding and is speeding through an intersection while simultaneously texting said friend. Distracted, she passes through the stop sign, and gets side slammed by a truck. If she were in a driverless car, she could have texted the friend without any worry of the road; she would have arrived at the wedding completely unharmed. A self-thinking car would have stopped at the stop sign appropriately, sensed the truck, and even communicated with that truck as to who was going to go through the intersection first. While this is a hypothetical situation, driverless cars could make this happy ending a reality for numerous teenagers. 

A common concern with these self-driving vehicles is that they will have troubles driving safely in poor road conditions. As Daniel Vock points out, “Precipitation makes it harder for driverless cars to know where they are. Their cameras can’t see lines on snow-covered pavement or in the reflections of puddles. Falling precipitation interferes with radar. Piles of snow make finding the curbs and road edges harder” (1). There are some problem areas with these vehicles, but it is because the technology is still fairly new. As time goes on, companies will create new innovations to get around these common problems. As seen by the Ford company, “the Ford team jumped at the chance to test their vehicles in the Michigan winter… Mcity includes elements you wouldn’t expect to find on most test tracks, things like stoplights that broadcast information to vehicles, a railroad crossing, … gravel roads… roundabouts, [and] vandalized traffic signs” (Vock 1). More and more testing will be done to insure these cars can drive just as well, if not better, than a human can. We just have to allow time for the makers to figure out all of this brand new technology.

If driverless car are basically giant, transporting computers, will the not be susceptible to hackers? Truth is: yes, it is possible to hack into driverless cars. As argued in a recent article, “Chris Valasek revealed that they had successfully weaseled their way into the computer systems of Ford’s Escape and Toyota’s Prius… [they took] control of the brakes, steering, acceleration, and even the seat belts of these cars” (“Driverless Cars Will” 2). These cars can be hacked, but not by everyday spyware or viruses; the horrible truth is that only professional hackers will be able to hack into these cars and the majority of America is not on world-renowned hackers’ hit-list. Nearly all citizens are safe in this machinery. Not to suggest that these inventions will be easy to hack into, as time goes on there will be a buildup of firewalls and anti-hacking software to keep everyone perfectly safe inside.

An additional concern with driverless cars for the manufacturing companies is the possibility that no one will want them. Keith Naughton states that “Recent surveys by J.D Power, consulting company EY, the Texas A&M Transportation Institute, Canadian Automobile Association, researcher Kelley Blue Book and auto supplier Robert Bosch LLC all show that half to three-quarters of respondents don’t want anything to do with these models” (2). Bill Gates was told the same thing about computers and Mark Zuckerberg in regards to Facebook. No brand new invention or technology has ever been swept off the shelves. There will be a waiting period, but as society tries the product, and the profound reviews get out, they are sure to catch on. 

The arguments against driverless cars will soon be phased out. Just as they were with drones; at the beginning of the drone timeline, drones had major safety concerns and no laws or ways of regulation. Now, there are laws in place that keep everyone safe both physically and legally. Soon enough, this will be the same story for autonomous vehicles; they will have their own set of laws and rules to follow keeping everyone, from the buyer to the builder, safe.  For years and years now there have been advertisements and campaigns against drinking and driving, there have been fine increases for those caught without seat belts, or speeding, yet none of these solutions have worked to bring the crash rate down. Some believe that we need to push the morals of driving slow and steady onto our society; “The important tool is to reach to their hearts and in their lifestyle and inform young people through the use of social media such as [F]acebook and [T]witter. For young people, traffic is killer number one” (qtd. in Olarte 3). This thought is misled because they are ignoring the fact that teenarges, just as any other person, will do what they want regardless of consequences. Texting and driving, drinking and driving, not using turn signals, speeding, road rage, these are all choices that a driver actively makes; instead of trying to change natural human chemistry, why not get rid of the human all together. With driverless cars, no crashes due to human error would ever occur, and millions of lives could be saved. Driverless cars can and will save many lives in the future. If Sam had owned a driverless car, he and his friends would only be experiencing the pain of a hangover right now, instead of the effects of the crash. A driverless car could have taken the boys home safely by staying in the correct lane and not swerving in and out of the margins. His car would have never rolled because it would have had clear vision, rather than the tunnel vision Sam had as a result of drinking. Bella would also still be alive if driverless cars were in existence. Bella could have called her babysitter with ease while sitting in a safe ride to work. Suddenly slowing her speed, an also speeding truck hit her from behind. With autonomous cars speeding would be a thing of the past, and if a speed change were to happen, the vehicles would have communicated with one another and never even touched together. As for Stacy, her accident never had to happen. Self-driving cars would have communicated with one another to merge safely, and it would have been alerted by an object being in its blind spot.

There are too many positives to self-driving cars that it makes no logical sense not to have them running in our society. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s study done between 2005 and 2007 says that “most crashes were a result of driver error: about 41 percent were recognition errors… 34 percent were decision errors… and 10 percent were performance errors” (Dolan 1). Driverless cars will eliminate the human interface, and thus eliminate human error vehicle accidents. This solution will save many lives and prevent many injuries. As people become more used to the idea, they will reap the rewards. No longer will parents worry about their child driving for the first time, or in poor weather conditions. In a multi-tasking society, a person can do whatever is needed while getting a ride to work; no longer will distracted driving exist. As for poor decision making, or having a few too many to drink, countless innocent lives will be protected. Overall, autonomous vehicles are the sure-fire answer we have been waiting for to keep all of us safe on the roads. We will owe them our lives.