5 ms·

>Honestly, I suspect that 99% of drivers don't actually enjoy driving and will adopt self-driving cars as soon as they are inexpensively available I guess I am

>Honestly, I suspect that 99% of drivers don't actually enjoy driving and will adopt self-driving cars as soon as they are inexpensively available I guess I am the 1%, then. Driving is one of the few activities where I can really clear my head. I support the goals of the Human Driving Association. I also disagree that it is too early, as many people already see it as inevitable that self-driving will be illegal.

msla 7y ago
OK, what happens when a member of the Human Driving Association impacts a member of the I'm A Goddamned Pedestrian Stop Fucking Killing Me Association? My idea is simple: If, in an era when self-driving cars are the norm, you choose to drive and you hit someone, that's it. It's First Degree/Premeditated Homicide if you killed them, or the highest possible degree of Aggravated Assault if you didn't. You did something deliberately contrary to the norm, which was significantly more dangerous to everyone else, and, as a direct result, you caused them death or permanent damage. You can't rely on the excuse of needing to drive yourself, as you can now, so the penalties go up proportionately.
- xur17 7y ago
  I feel like the penalty should be similar to the penalty given for accidentally shooting someone with a firearm when hunting and killing them. Any idea what the penalty is for that?
  - msla 7y ago
    https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2017/03/what-are-the-criminal-penalties-for-accidentally-shooting-someone.html https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2017/03/what-are-the-crimi... > When a person unintentionally kills another, whether or not a gun was used, they can be charged with manslaughter, which is a felony. Manslaughter is frequently referred to as criminally negligent homicide, as that name more closely mirrors the elements of a manslaughter charge. To be found guilty of manslaughter, a person has to die as a result of a defendant's inherently dangerous actions or actions taken with reckless disregard. > Typical penalties for a manslaughter conviction include at least one year in jail, and can be much worse if the conduct that led to the death merit such. For example, a repeat drunk driver that causes a death is likely to face a harsher sentence than a recently victimized elderly man who, instinctively, accidentally shoots someone they believe to be a robber. And I say the penalties should be worse because cars would be less obviously dangerous than guns in an era when most cars are self-driving. In short, a gun is a gun, and people know what guns are. If someone is waving a firearm around, well, most people who have competent faculties know that that's dangerous. In the era I'm foreseeing, which I think is the era most of us in this thread are foreseeing, a car is no longer as inherently dangerous as they are now, unless someone has made the conscious choice to make it that dangerous again by driving it manually. I also support greatly increased penalties for DUI, but that's going a bit afield.
- wutbrodo 7y ago
  Yea, there's really no arguments being made on this thread that don't apply just as directly to illegal street racing today, yet I'd be shocked if more than a minuscule fraction of the people in a Tiff on this thread would have the self-awareness and intellectual honesty to defend the right of street racers to kill innocent bystanders
naravara 7y ago
>Driving is one of the few activities where I can really clear my head. Why not just take a walk?
- romwell 7y ago
  > I really like X and want to keep doing it >> When not do something entirely different altogether? Gotta love HN. For the sake of being Captain Obvious: people who like moving at fast speeds probably won't get the same enjoyment out of moving at slow speeds. As far as clearing the head goes, I heard from many people that they get into a kind of flow state while their hands have something to do while experiencing the effect of this activity. For some, it's playing the piano, listening to the sound, and getting lost in the thought. For others, it's operating a vehicle and seeing the lights whiz by. Different strokes for different folks, you know.
- hitpointdrew 7y ago
  That is like saying "Hey I know you really love playing Tennis. That you enjoy the game, and how you feel when you play, and after the match. But we are going to outlaw Tennis, why don't you just go play Basketball instead? Mmmkay?"
  - hannasanarion 7y ago
    How many people are killed every year by inattentive or incompetent tennis players who think they're hot stuff?
    - hitpointdrew 7y ago
      If John Mcenroe comes out of retirement, it could be a lot.
    - charliesharding 7y ago
      Would you want alcohol to be banned because it causes harm as well? It's about losing personal liberty - people will dig in their heels.
reidjs 7y ago
Then go to a regulated track and drive to your heart's content? I don't like the idea of people just 'clearing their heads' while driving a 2 ton box at 65 miles per hour.
- hitpointdrew 7y ago
  >go to a regulated track and drive Ugh, what a stupid comment. Yeah sure, let me not only have 1 car, but now 2 cars, a trailer to legally transport the manual car. Then go on a boring as hell, flat, circle. This is not at all the same as say driving around a mountainous region, or along the coast. You can go fuck yourself with your regulated "track".
  - icebraining 7y ago
    Not "getting" driving for enjoyment is not the same as stupidity, and you (the supporters of the association's goals) will have to convince a lot of people who don't get it. This is not a good approach.
  - hannasanarion 7y ago
    > Ugh, what a stupid comment. Yeah sure, let me not only have 1 carriage, but now a motorcar and a trailer to legally transport the horses and carriage. Then go on a boring as hell, flat, circle. This is not at all the same as say galloping around a mountainous region, or along the coast. You can go fuck yourself with your regulated "track".
    - hitpointdrew 7y ago
      Did you have point?
      - hannasanarion 7y ago
        Yeah. Horses aren't extinct, and neither are horse enthusiasts.
    - CompanionCuuube 7y ago
resoluteteeth 7y ago
If we reach a point where manual driving is clearly unsafe compared to self-driving cars, do you really think that manual driving should continue to be legal simply so that you can "clear your head"? Anyway, barring a constitutional amendment, you can't pass a law now that will prevent a law banning manual driving from being passed in the future, so I think it's sort of a moot point.
ahartmetz 7y ago
Or driving can just be plain fun in itself. I enjoy driving unless it's more than ~3x (there and back) per week. I mean we control machines here, right? Cars are pretty interesting machines to control. I live in a big city so I don't need a car. I got one that is fun rather than useful. Small, light, quick to accelerate and around corners. The exact opposite of an SUV (what the hell is wrong with people...).

msla 7y ago

OK, what happens when a member of the Human Driving Association impacts a member of the I'm A Goddamned Pedestrian Stop Fucking Killing Me Association? My idea is simple: If, in an era when self-driving cars are the norm, you choose to drive and you hit someone, that's it. It's First Degree/Premeditated Homicide if you killed them, or the highest possible degree of Aggravated Assault if you didn't. You did something deliberately contrary to the norm, which was significantly more dangerous to everyone else, and, as a direct result, you caused them death or permanent damage. You can't rely on the excuse of needing to drive yourself, as you can now, so the penalties go up proportionately.

xur17 7y ago
I feel like the penalty should be similar to the penalty given for accidentally shooting someone with a firearm when hunting and killing them. Any idea what the penalty is for that?
- msla 7y ago
  https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2017/03/what-are-the-criminal-penalties-for-accidentally-shooting-someone.html https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2017/03/what-are-the-crimi... > When a person unintentionally kills another, whether or not a gun was used, they can be charged with manslaughter, which is a felony. Manslaughter is frequently referred to as criminally negligent homicide, as that name more closely mirrors the elements of a manslaughter charge. To be found guilty of manslaughter, a person has to die as a result of a defendant's inherently dangerous actions or actions taken with reckless disregard. > Typical penalties for a manslaughter conviction include at least one year in jail, and can be much worse if the conduct that led to the death merit such. For example, a repeat drunk driver that causes a death is likely to face a harsher sentence than a recently victimized elderly man who, instinctively, accidentally shoots someone they believe to be a robber. And I say the penalties should be worse because cars would be less obviously dangerous than guns in an era when most cars are self-driving. In short, a gun is a gun, and people know what guns are. If someone is waving a firearm around, well, most people who have competent faculties know that that's dangerous. In the era I'm foreseeing, which I think is the era most of us in this thread are foreseeing, a car is no longer as inherently dangerous as they are now, unless someone has made the conscious choice to make it that dangerous again by driving it manually. I also support greatly increased penalties for DUI, but that's going a bit afield.
wutbrodo 7y ago
Yea, there's really no arguments being made on this thread that don't apply just as directly to illegal street racing today, yet I'd be shocked if more than a minuscule fraction of the people in a Tiff on this thread would have the self-awareness and intellectual honesty to defend the right of street racers to kill innocent bystanders

naravara 7y ago

>Driving is one of the few activities where I can really clear my head. Why not just take a walk?

romwell 7y ago
> I really like X and want to keep doing it >> When not do something entirely different altogether? Gotta love HN. For the sake of being Captain Obvious: people who like moving at fast speeds probably won't get the same enjoyment out of moving at slow speeds. As far as clearing the head goes, I heard from many people that they get into a kind of flow state while their hands have something to do while experiencing the effect of this activity. For some, it's playing the piano, listening to the sound, and getting lost in the thought. For others, it's operating a vehicle and seeing the lights whiz by. Different strokes for different folks, you know.
hitpointdrew 7y ago
That is like saying "Hey I know you really love playing Tennis. That you enjoy the game, and how you feel when you play, and after the match. But we are going to outlaw Tennis, why don't you just go play Basketball instead? Mmmkay?"
- hannasanarion 7y ago
  How many people are killed every year by inattentive or incompetent tennis players who think they're hot stuff?
  - hitpointdrew 7y ago
    If John Mcenroe comes out of retirement, it could be a lot.
  - charliesharding 7y ago
    Would you want alcohol to be banned because it causes harm as well? It's about losing personal liberty - people will dig in their heels.

reidjs 7y ago

Then go to a regulated track and drive to your heart's content? I don't like the idea of people just 'clearing their heads' while driving a 2 ton box at 65 miles per hour.

hitpointdrew 7y ago
>go to a regulated track and drive Ugh, what a stupid comment. Yeah sure, let me not only have 1 car, but now 2 cars, a trailer to legally transport the manual car. Then go on a boring as hell, flat, circle. This is not at all the same as say driving around a mountainous region, or along the coast. You can go fuck yourself with your regulated "track".
- icebraining 7y ago
  Not "getting" driving for enjoyment is not the same as stupidity, and you (the supporters of the association's goals) will have to convince a lot of people who don't get it. This is not a good approach.
- hannasanarion 7y ago
  > Ugh, what a stupid comment. Yeah sure, let me not only have 1 carriage, but now a motorcar and a trailer to legally transport the horses and carriage. Then go on a boring as hell, flat, circle. This is not at all the same as say galloping around a mountainous region, or along the coast. You can go fuck yourself with your regulated "track".
  - hitpointdrew 7y ago
    Did you have point?
    - hannasanarion 7y ago
      Yeah. Horses aren't extinct, and neither are horse enthusiasts.
  - CompanionCuuube 7y ago

resoluteteeth 7y ago

If we reach a point where manual driving is clearly unsafe compared to self-driving cars, do you really think that manual driving should continue to be legal simply so that you can "clear your head"? Anyway, barring a constitutional amendment, you can't pass a law now that will prevent a law banning manual driving from being passed in the future, so I think it's sort of a moot point.

ahartmetz 7y ago

Or driving can just be plain fun in itself. I enjoy driving unless it's more than ~3x (there and back) per week. I mean we control machines here, right? Cars are pretty interesting machines to control. I live in a big city so I don't need a car. I got one that is fun rather than useful. Small, light, quick to accelerate and around corners. The exact opposite of an SUV (what the hell is wrong with people...).