QOTD: Can You Blame Self-Driving for Crashes?

by Tim Healey

Published: September 4th, 2024

This afternoon's story about a woman accused of killing two people while intoxicated behind the wheel of a Ford with BlueCruise is downright dystopian.

The woman's defense is essentially that the car caused the crash, not the driver, since an autonomous system was activated.

Matt did a nice job laying it all out, including the philosophical and legal questions at hand. Since it's a natural story for a QOTD, I wanted to piggyback off of that.

If you're a lawyer, feel free to weigh in on the legal implications and questions.

I am very much not a lawyer, but I can at least think through the philosophical questions. The main one being -- is the driver at fault if he or she activates an autonomous driving system and it fails?

Personally, I would say yes, especially given the state of the tech today. Once again, I must remind you that there are no truly self-driving cars on the road today. True self-driving would be Level 5 autonomy, and nothing on the market is at that level.

So, if a human is supposed to be paying attention and ready to intervene when the system fails, then he or she is still responsible, in my view. And, of course, should not be intoxicated behind the wheel.

It will get thornier if the industry ever achieves Level 5 autonomy, though. That's a tougher call.

So, what say you? Sound off below.

[Image: Ford Motor Company]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

#QOTD #QuestionOfTheDay #Ford #AutonomousDriving #BlueCruise #Philosophy #selfdrivingcars #SelfDriving #DrunkDriving #CarCrime #CrimePunishment

Tim Healey

Tim Healey grew up around the auto-parts business and has always had a love for cars — his parents joke his first word was “‘Vette”. Despite this, he wanted to pursue a career in sports writing but he ended up falling semi-accidentally into the automotive-journalism industry, first at Consumer Guide Automotive and later at Web2Carz.com. He also worked as an industry analyst at Mintel Group and freelanced for About.com, CarFax, Vehix.com, High Gear Media, Torque News, FutureCar.com, Cars.com, among others, and of course Vertical Scope sites such as AutoGuide.com, Off-Road.com, and HybridCars.com. He’s an urbanite and as such, doesn’t need a daily driver, but if he had one, it would be compact, sporty, and have a manual transmission.

More by Tim Healey

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 42 comments

Ash78 on Sep 06, 2024
I don't think it'll hold up to scrutiny, the drunk driver is still the "decider" as W once declared himself. But I do hope this opens up a discussion on precedent around how, ultimately, a Level 4-5 FSD vehicle has to be coded with cost/benefit decisions that might come down to protecting occupants vs pedestrians, for example. Someone had to make THAT decision, even if one day it ends up being a "machine learned" decision. Then it gets even hairier because who is accountable for AI decisions once they're making their own decisions? Do humans even have accountability after the fact if they weren't part of the specific decision?

Like Reply
Jmanb52 on Sep 09, 2024
In this case clearly a driver responsbile for the accident. Lawyer just trying to add confusion to jude and or jury to think about it. I was on a jury once for an auto accident and one of the attorneys tried a few stunts to shift blame. Same thing is happening here. The companies pushing autonamous want to deal with fleet markets like the autonamous taxi companies rather than individual consumers. In my opinion I think they belvie that would be more predictable sales. Car gets to xyz milage time to replace. In my opinion they could never sell a full autonamous car to an individual because of a back and forth legal battles between owner and maker when there is a crash. They need to foget about all these take over driver aids. It is just causing more issues than it could prevent.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Namesakeone It should be a name that evoques the wild west, that emphasizes the go-anywhere nature of how an SUV should be used. Something like a wild animal, maybe something like a horse. I've got it! How about . . . Mustang! Oh, wait. They already did that, didn't they?
Slavuta There Used to be Pontiac Trans Sport.... That "Trans Sport" part has a totally new meaning these days
210delray You need to change the headline -- it's a 2025 model.
Jeff How about Aspire for a new subcompact crossover from Ford because it aspires to be bigger and its buyers would aspire for a better vehicle if they could afford it.
Jeff Carlos Travares wants to cut costs by 1/3. I don't see Chrysler or Dodge surviving too much longer especially since they are being literally starved for product. The success of the new Charger could extend Dodge a few more years but a failure might be a quick end to Dodge. I could see Stellantis moving more manufacturing for Jeep and Ram to Mexico which I believe will eventually be the only surviving brands of the old Chrysler. As for the Durango if it continues it will not be for too many more years it is an outdated product that I doubt will be redesigned especially when Jeep has a comparable product. Stellantis needs to address the high dealer inventory level by giving better incentives and low interest rates to clear excessive inventory.