> This is only a disingenuous framing if you assume that increased passenger safety is coming at the expense of pedestrian safety, drewbug01's point was "vehic

> This is only a disingenuous framing if you assume that increased passenger safety is coming at the expense of pedestrian safety, drewbug01's point was "vehicular safety should include its effects on non-passengers". Pedestrian safety is only one of many such effects, so your re-framing to consider only {passenger + pedestrian} safety seems to miss the point by quite a bit. We know pedestrian safety isn't the only other issue because we can read the list of incidents involving autonomous vehicles from the San Francisco Fire Department. If a car stops on the hose from a fire truck, so it can't be used to put out a fire, the issue isn't one of pedestrian safety. If it drives over the hose and causes thousands of dollars of damage, it still isn't an issue of pedestrian safety. If a car gets in the way of a fire truck with lights flashing, responding to an alarm, than that's not an issue of pedestrian safety. Nor is it an issue of pedestrian safety if it blocks a fire truck from being able to return to its station. > Is there any data that suggest otherwise? There is enough data to know the relevant issues are more than just passenger and pedestrian safety, yes. This article points to it.