When Self Driving Cars are the Norm...

[TripleTTT]

When everyone has an auto driving car, does that mean you are not impaired if you stop off and have a few pints on the way home?

I am asking, because, If you are on horse back and stop off and have a few pints on the way home. Get back on your horse. You cannot be charged with impaired driving, as the horse knows how to get home, with or without you! :sHa_shakeshout:

Will this be precedence to cover this inevitable scenario?

[elkdump]

We have self driving cars already,,,

Isn't that little button that says "cruise" like automatic pilot ?

[Okotokian]

There is a debate as to whether the "driver" of a "self-driving car" should even need to have a driver's license. If you don't have to have a license, I assume you could be in any condition you like. If you have to have a license because you need to be able to manually take over control, then I assume all the same DUI rules would apply.

But I bet they will sell way more cars if you can be drunk. ;) LOL

On a similar note, if Ford produces a self-driving car, does that make Ford liable for all accidents caused by the car? Can't be the occupant's fault if Ford has advertised that their car is driven by their systems. If the car goes off the icy road, that's the system's fault for not sensing road conditions, etc. Same thing if it hits a pedestrian or cyclist. I'm sure manufacturers are considering the liability issue.

[elkdump]

The vehicle can be stationary , parked , and if the occupant has the keys to the vehicle and is impaired by alcohol or drugs,,? ? The charge is Care and Control of a motor vehicle while impaired/under the influence ,:oregonian_winesmile

[Big Sky]

There has to be someone who can take control of the vehicle if need be. Google reports that it's vehicles have needed a human to take over in some circumstances.
Google said its cars needed human help 341 times over 682,360 kilometres. That would be the equivalent of about 10 times per year, given the 19,300 kilometres the average U.S. vehicle travels annually.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/self-driving-car-reports-1.3401308

Interestingly, the accident rate for self-driving cars is higher than for human driven cars.
But self-driving cars’ inability to bend or break traffic laws, as human drivers regularly do, could make their driving habits surprising to others on the road, leading to crashes.
http://time.com/4098303/self-driving-cars-accident/

I couldn't find the Calgary Herald article that talked about the inability of driverless cars to interact with human drivers. It gave the example of 4 way stops when two vehicles arrive at almost the same time. The driverless car knows if it was first and just proceeds. Common behavior for human drivers is to inch forward while looking at each other as they decide who goes first.

[Bushrat]

I am asking, because, If you are on horse back and stop off and have a few pints on the way home. Get back on your horse. You cannot be charged with impaired driving, as the horse knows how to get home, with or without you! :sHa_shakeshout:



I believe you can be charged with impaired on a horse if you are operating a horse on a public road. I know someone who was charged and convicted in BC years ago. Not sure about Alberta laws but I think you better check before saddleing up.. The horse may know how to get home but may not necessarily want to go home, it may want to go across a busy 6 lane highway or gallop down the highway at full blast to get to that little filly's pasture.

[Grizzly Adams]

Come on now, self driving cars may work for the Cityots, but away from there, they're still going to require human guidance.

Grizz

[TripleTTT]

There is a debate as to whether the "driver" of a "self-driving car" should even need to have a driver's license. If you don't have to have a license, I assume you could be in any condition you like. If you have to have a license because you need to be able to manually take over control, then I assume all the same DUI rules would apply.

But I bet they will sell way more cars if you can be drunk. ;) LOL

On a similar note, if Ford produces a self-driving car, does that make Ford liable for all accidents caused by the car? Can't be the occupant's fault if Ford has advertised that their car is driven by their systems. If the car goes off the icy road, that's the system's fault for not sensing road conditions, etc. Same thing if it hits a pedestrian or cyclist. I'm sure manufacturers are considering the liability issue.

Some interesting points to ponder!

Thanks!:test: