text: Another reason why the driverless car is not a car that should be made is because with a driverless car there is no one technically to blame for an acident because the car was not driven by anyone but itself. In paragraph nine the article says "If technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver of the manufacturer?" this shows the car is only made to drive not to protect what is beyond. The manufacturer should be more invested on how to change the fact that it will not be one- hundred percent and change how safe the car actually is. An example that brought attention was in paragraph ten when the author of the article said "Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percebt of the time" still shows how the car is not truly a driverless car which means that the car name itself is false advertising. That wilol also lead to lawsuits becasue it is not what the consumer/buyer was looking for when they heard the name "driverless car".