3 ms·
No you're most often breaking traffic laws and increasing a chance of a collision, than the off chance of needing to make such a maneuver to avoid an accident.
by whattheheckheck 1y ago
No you're most often breaking traffic laws and increasing a chance of a collision, than the off chance of needing to make such a maneuver to avoid an accident. The societal cost of collisions is worth more than your freedoms. Or you should pay higher premiums for turning those safety features off.
- bluefirebrand 1y ago> No you're most often breaking traffic laws and increasing a chance of a collision, than the off chance of needing to make such a maneuver to avoid an accident For all you know I need to exit my lane in a hurry to avoid a collision. The car doesn't have the same context that the driver has. It only cares about staying between two painted lines, it might not have any idea about a truck coming straight at me going the other direction > The societal cost of collisions is worth more than your freedoms If a semi is in my lane barrelling toward me I'm not obligated to just accept death so I don't endanger anyone else by accident by swerving to avoid it The fact is that human drivers have a lot more information and awareness than a handful of sensors installed by idiot engineers that think the only bad thing that ever happens when driving is that someone changes lanes without signalling
- elliottkember 1y agoIt vibrates and tries to gently guide you. It will absolutely not overpower you if you are swerving in an emergency. You are talking hypothetical nonsense.