Arguments Against Driverless Drivers

Self-driving cars would elevate the already serious effects of terrorists. Driverless cars would make it possible for the car to be loaded with explosives and used as a moving bomb or to automatically drive and cause a serious crash because they could be hacked and are not human controlled (Goodman). Safety is always a major concern with cars, whether they are driverless or not. Driverless cars would not be efficient because they could do more harm than help.
Driverless cars would be a disadvantage to the safety of almost everyone who can drive or will drive in the future. Paul Goodman says, “As drivers become more and more used to not driving, their proficiency and experience will diminish. Should they then need to drive under certain circumstances, there may be problems” (Goodman). Without the necessity to drive most people won't want to so they will become out of practice and hurt
It is proven that human error is one of the main causes of car crashes (Keating). Although this is, true ethical problems could arise against which a car might struggle to deal with. If the car needed to make a choice between plowing into a group of children in the road or swerving off a bridge and killing all its passengers, what should it do? There are people who would purposely get behind the wheel to drive even though they are drunk or high and could cause harm to others and getting these people off the roads could save many lives (Haskins and Whitt). Although it could save some people it could seriously harm others. Should they need to take control of the driverless car or try to save themselves they wouldn't be able to and they could hurt themselves and many others? Driverless cars do not have the passion that humans have to keep other humans safe and therefore they would not be able to manage chauffeur people