Can’t you make this same argument for normal driving, or practically anything?
“The splattered biker wasn’t innocent because he knew riding his bike in the bike lane was a dangerous situation, akin to strapping a bomb to his chest”
People who believe (because they’ve been lead to believe) that driverless cars are safe still have a right to live without injury. Being credulous or fooled doesn’t remove your rights.
Same for people who belive (because they have been lead to believe) that driverful cars are safe (despite being the lead cause of death for people between 5-29) still have a right to live without injury.
No humans harmed in this picture, this is a best case scenario.
except police gets out and starts firing at by standers for setting up this trap
wait that is a self driving car my bad
Isn’t the last panel supposed to be a self-driving car? Possibly with a passenger?
So at least no innocent human.
Bruh
What? It’s their explicit decision and risk to get into the car. Including acknowledging all the risk for themselves and others.
That’s a bit victim blame-y
That’s like strapping a bomb to yourself, exploding and then being the victim because you didn’t know you’re in a deadly situation.
You did know. If you didn’t, you shouldn’t be allowed to do previously said thing.
Can’t you make this same argument for normal driving, or practically anything?
“The splattered biker wasn’t innocent because he knew riding his bike in the bike lane was a dangerous situation, akin to strapping a bomb to his chest”
People who believe (because they’ve been lead to believe) that driverless cars are safe still have a right to live without injury. Being credulous or fooled doesn’t remove your rights.
Same for people who belive (because they have been lead to believe) that driverful cars are safe (despite being the lead cause of death for people between 5-29) still have a right to live without injury.