[Nfbc-info] Driverless Car Regulations Update

David BearSFO at PacBell.NET
Mon Nov 30 03:52:07 UTC 2015

I am not sure I am following you - there is nothing in the current 
legistlation is stopping persons diagnosed with  dementia or 
individuals on the terrorist watch list from accessing 
driver-required vehicles, so why should be there be new rules that 
stops them from doing so?

There might be an argument with children, but if there is no 
requirement for driver license, then why should they be excluded 
too?  I would imagine they might actually be safer being in 
driverless vehicles than trying to get somewhere with public 
transportation or on foot by themselves.  I would further argue that 
persons diagnosed with  dementia would also be safer in driverless 
vehicles, for obvious reasons.

I do, however, agree, and it seems to be the issue at hand, that a 
licensed driver should not be required behind the wheel of a 
driverless, or self driving, vehicle.


At 09:44 PM 11/28/2015, you wrote:
>True, driverless car operators need not be required to possess a driver's
>license, however, there needs to be some standards to prevent children,
>persons diagnosed with  dementia or, yes, individuals on the terrorist watch
>list from accessing driverless vehicles .
>Lisa Irving
>   ----Original Message-----
>From: Nfbc-info [mailto:nfbc-info-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tim Elder
>via Nfbc-info
>Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 1:45 PM
>To: 'NFB of California List'
>Cc: Tim Elder; Bryan Bashin
>Subject: [Nfbc-info] Driverless Car Regulations Update
>Our affiliate ought to keep an eye on the below Driverless Car regulations
>and ensure we are aligning with Google's approach.  There should not be a
>requirement that a licensed driver be behind the wheel.  Now is the time to
>pay attention to this issue.
>. . .
>California's Department of Motor Vehicles in particular has asked for
>federal guidance as it struggles with how to move the cars safely from
>small-scale road tests to broader adoption. In a written statement Monday,
>U.S. Department of Transportation spokeswoman Suzanne Emmerling said that
>with rapid development of the technology, federal policy is being updated.
>"Breathtaking progress has been made," Emmerling wrote. She said
>Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx ordered his department's National
>Highway Traffic Safety Administration to update its 2013 policy "to reflect
>today's technology and his sense of urgency to bring innovation to our roads
>that will make them safer. It's unclear what the new policy will be, but the
>tone of the statement signaled that Foxx is interested in endorsing the
>technology. Language that the agency is revisiting specifies that in states
>where the public can get access to the cars, a licensed driver should be
>behind the wheel. Google has argued that once cars can drive as safely as
>humans, it would be better to remove the steering wheel and pedals so that
>people don't mess up the ride. A Google spokesman had no comment on word of
>the federal review. The California State Transportation Agency has
>interpreted the 2013 federal guidance as urging caution. The federal update
>"reaffirms that the topic is evolving and one worthy of continued discussion
>and public input," spokeswoman Melissa Figueroa said. She said the
>Department of Motor Vehicles is working to publish draft regulations by
>year's end.
>Nfbc-info mailing list
>Nfbc-info at nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>Nfbc-info mailing list
>Nfbc-info at nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>for Nfbc-info:

More information about the NFBC-Info mailing list