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.
30p87@feddit.org 2 days ago
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.
papalonian@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
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”
KitB@feddit.uk 1 day ago
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.
Tja@programming.dev 1 day ago
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.