🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1995Jul7.092836.18718@zippy.dct.ac.uk>,
Colin Johnson <colinj@iris.maths.napier.ac.uk> wrote:
>: Has anyone actually looked into the legal aspects of this?  I'm no lawyer,
>: but it seems quite likely to me that if the car is pulled over for any
>: reason,
>: the "driver" will end up in jail (at least for a day or two) and the vehicle
>: may be seized.  And while CMU would probably be able to get it back
>: eventually,
>: it could take months (not to mention the unpleasantness for the driver).

>:    Robert

>I wonder about this . . . one reasonable defence would be that there
>was someone sitting in the driving seat, driving the car, but that 
>the car had such sophisticaed assistance systems that the driver
>need never actually touch any controls.

>At what point does the car take over the driving function?? Cars can 
>do a lot of things to help the driver, such as automatic transmission.
>Is there a particular set of actions which legally defines "driving"
>---e.g. steering, acceleration control, et cetera. Or is the car allowed
>to do as many functions as it is capable of. At what point does
>"assistance" become "control"??


All very interesting...but my point is that leaving the resolution of these
issues in the hands of the surprised cop who stops the car is not a wonderful
idea.  If I were that cop, I would be likely to impound the car indefinitely,
and let a judge sort it out.  (Probably the "driver" will be let go, as he's
probably legally just a passenger!)

And, of course, if Navlab is involved in an accident, CMU's liability could
be huge.  (Is it insured?  Inspected?  I doubt it...which means that it's
not legal to drive it on the street.)

   Robert