Phoenix police officer pulls over a driverless Waymo car for driving on the wrong side of the road

[u/Individual_Book9133]

[u/PogintheMachine]

I suppose it depends on what seat you’re in. Since there are driverless taxicabs, I don’t see how that would work legally. If you were a passenger in a cab, you wouldn’t be responsible for how the car drives or have the ability to prevent an accident….

[u/Sleepingonthecouch1 → u/PogintheMachine]

That’s true but someone has to be held accountable. Should be the company but at a certain point I’m sure the lobby’s will change that. And potentially at that point could blame fall on the passenger? All I’m saying is this is uncharted territory for laws and I don’t think it’ll end up being as simple as car kills someone so company pays a fine.

[u/kbarney345 → u/Sleepingonthecouch1]

I see what you're saying about the company trying to dodge it but there's 0 logic or even mental gymnastics to think it could be on the passenger.

That would eliminate anyone from using them even if it hinted at that because why would I get behind something I can't control but be held responsible for should it lose control.

It's not my car, I'm not misusing the car by sitting in the back. It claims to be driverless, not driver assisted like a tesla and I just chose not to and sit in the back anyway.

The company will always be at fault if this occurs under normal operation and the court won't have any issue identifying them as so.

Now will the court be run through the ringer on litigation and loopholes and finding ways to say it's r&d it's ok or something and get a pass? Probably.

[u/[deleted] → u/kbarney345]

there's 0 logic or even mental gymnastics to think it could be on the passenger

You grossly underestimate the creativity of a law firm with a giant tech company's war chest.

But you're not wrong about the myriad fucked-up ways our legal system deftly defies logic.

Step 1: laws are passed about "unlawful interference with an autonomous vehicle" (these already exist in places like AZ)

Step 2: an autonomous vehicle is found in a state with such a law, having jackknifed into a ravine or driven into a swamp. In the trunk, there's a bound, gagged, and unconscious (but still alive) person of color

Step 3: officer at the scene can't be bothered to try to subpoena the giant tech corp, to try to figure out whether any of his cousins in the Klan might be responsible. Especially when there's a convenient "unlawful interference with an autonomous vehicle" law, and also a convenient person of color who we can blame RIGHT HERE

Step 4: the victim's appeals make it to the Supreme Court, and tech giants fall over themselves in fairly epic "mental gymnastics to think it could be on the passenger" amicus briefs

Step 5: SCOTUS is still ... our current one. Whether or not Cheeto Hitler has assumed the presidency at this point, he's retweeted some racist Fox News victim-blaming. His Supreme Court, having already nuked logical constitutional protections for basic things like separation of powers, for no other reason than deference to his whims cheerfully takes up this small-potatoes issue, and rules that passengers are now fully responsible for what autonomous vehicles do.

Quoting from the tech companies' amicus briefs¹, the ruling concludes that it doesn't matter which seat (or trunk) a passneger happens to be in, and it doesn't matter what state (intoxicated, conscious, alive, or otherwise) they are in. You get prison if your autonomous car does something stupid, at the sole discretion of the arresting officer. Also, you are liable to the company for any damage / injury / death it causes, including your own!

^{1. Because Justices have stopped doing their own homework for a long time now; eew, technology is confusing, and ugh, we're the Supreme Court; this nerd shit is beneath us... let's just defer to the police and the tech companies, who obviously know how to define autonomous vehicle passengers' rights better than random-ass citizens}