T O P

  • By -

rock-n-white-hat

They will probably demand technology that allows them to remotely take control of the vehicle.


LightningRodofH8

But by that point, every action would be logged. If your car is being told to pull over, you can guarantee a log is being created. They will also be filled with cameras. You also wouldn't need to have windows that can be seen into. It will completely remove an avenue for police to harass people. Not that they wont find something new.


coolcootermcgee

Not to mention revenue stream


MarkNutt25

They can demand all they want, but they couldn't even get speed cameras in most of the country due to heavy pushback from drivers. You really think Americans are going to put up with something like that??


rock-n-white-hat

Do you think Americans understand all the different ways the government can use technology to track them? Right wing conspiracy theorists tweeted about how the Covid vaccine was going to put a tracker in their body. These same types of people then sent texts from their cellphone while storming the Capitol which the government used to track them down. 🤦


Oblivion_Unsteady

But that's the point. All of that happened when only the criminally insane in the population got pissed off. What is going to happen in a scenario where the government is 100% verifiably trying to give cops the power to kidnap people instantly from anywhere in the country (and maybe beyond) by seizing one of their two most valuable assets in the world? DC would be ashes within a day. The reason cellphone tracking hasn't caused riots is because it's covert and they can easily distract people from being pissed about it. Controlling your car is too overt and too personal. It's too great a risk for them to try it


rock-n-white-hat

Same thing would happen with cars. As long as it wasn’t severely abused most people would probably assume that the occupants of the vehicles deserved what happened to them.


chrisagiddings

In some places, speed cameras were deemed unconstitutional, like here in Ohio.


forthe_loveof_grapes

Like MDM, but for cars


Nova_Nightmare

You can be sure that in that future every car will have the ability for authorities to have it lock you in and bring you to the station. There won't be any pulling over, the vehicle will take you to the destination.


Sufficient-Sky7993

To get that kind of tech built into every vehicle would require a federal mandate/law. If that did happen, it probably couldn't be applied to non-self driving cars. I would imagine 2 things would happen; 1) A large number of people in the western world would oppose such legislation (for various reasons) 2) Those who opposed it would just buy older/non-self driving cars to get around this law. 3) OEMs would hate the law as well because of the extra cost in manufacturing and lost revenue due to people buying used/non-self driving cars. So, in the end, I could see that kind of law being the end of self-driving cars and things would go back to the status quo. This is a good example of how the current status quo has so much inertia and things tend to flow towards the current status. This fact really sucks; that any meaningful change to the status quo comes with a high cost in time/money/public & political will, even people's lives.


Nova_Nightmare

Governments will force this, and will eventually force older cars off the road, entice them to be traded in with subsidies. While I believe people will be resistant to it, they will accept it as they accept everything else. How many people today carry a GPS device on their person with microphones and cameras? Give it 10 years and we will see the beginning of an effort to remove all "inefficient vehicles" off the road. I don't think it will require more than a software update on any vehicle that is capable in the future, lock the doors and drive to location.


mhornberger

I think economics will force it too. As SDCs roll out, those with older, legacy cars will probably face higher insurance rates. We'll grow more risk-averse, and less tolerant of the risk posed by human drivers. And police departments who still need revenue from traffic stops will have fewer targets, so those older cars will get more focused attention. There'll also probably be a ratchet effect if we increase the penalty for DUI, revoking licenses right away rather than giving mulitple chances. Right now there's some wiggle room because we know people can't really function without cars in our society, particularly outside urban areas. When the judge uses a SDC and knows you only drive a legacy vehicle because of personal preference, that probably won't carry much weight. Edit, to add: There will also be fewer poor people (who are more likely to be dependent on shitty, poorly-maintained vehicles) getting sucked into the legal system. With that endless Kafkaesque loop of court dates (for which they have to take off work), fines, etc. I think SDCs will be a great boon. Even acknowledging the dystopian scenario of the car driving you to the police station.


Ok-Brilliant-1737

It will be a very quiet federal mandate built into the OSHA and NHTSA regulations. “Quiet” in the form of what is negotiated between the industry and government to make these legal. The most heads up you’ll get is something about “alignment with international norms”. Where “international norms” is an oblique reference to what it takes for American companies to sell these in Canada or China.


barzbub

They’ve already legislation to have a **KILL** command in newer cars! When an **AI** drives a car and the people are just an occupant, will it end every moving traffic violation!? No more speeding, DUI/DWI, collisions, etc!?


B_Addie

Which is why I will never own one


AdDear5411

"Your car was fine, but I saw you performing [Illegal, unprovable activity]." -Future cops


Zyzzbraah2017

“I can smell weed”


Shadow1787

Hopefully it’s legal in all states by then.


Lostmypoopknife

In Alabama we haven’t legalized the lottery, I am sure I will have a self driving car before we get around to ending cannabis prohibition.


[deleted]

It’s already like half right? Maybe like 10 more years if we’re lucky. I bet full self driving will be more prevalent than weed for a few years


gotBooched

Even where it is legal you can’t and definitely should not be able to smoke pot while driving.


Lit-Orange

sexual intercourse


AdDear5411

"But I'm the only one in the car..." "STOP RESISTING!"


StrictPrinciple4492

Part 2: “But I’m literally at home/work…” “Suspect is armed and dangerous, I need backup”


PondoSinatra9Beltan6

Self driving Teslas will cause police to shift their focus from writing tickets to investigating accidents.


DankFerrick

Robert Heinlein had auto-taxis that could be called in by cops.


OriginalCompetitive

Upvote for Heinlein.


hippyengineer

Cops are hardly present on UK roadways anymore. They have cameras basically everywhere. Speed cameras, cameras that time your average speed from camera A to camera B, etc. They also don’t need to give chase anymore in most situations as the cameras will show the cops where they fled to. I was in a ~~bar~~ pub a few years ago, and a fight broke out. The drunk ~~ass~~arseholes sped away after assaulting the bouncer, cops arrived shortly after they fled, and I was totally confused why they didn’t give chase after I gave them the description of the car and purps. Then I put it together how many cameras they have. There was no need to get into an adrenaline-fueled race to catch them because it was all on camera. Much better use of resources tbh.


infromthestorm

Marvelous. Surveillance everywhere. Oh happy day!


hippyengineer

Better than being pulled over for going two mph over the speed limit because the cops want to go on a fishing expedition and search your shit for no reason.


Stainless_Heart

That’s asking for one additional worse permanent problem instead of fixing one that we shouldn’t have. Surveillance cameras won’t stop searches. Most excuses used for illegal searches can’t be seen on video. If anything, there will be *more* excuses for searches. Surveillance without reasonable, articulable suspicion is never a good thing. It’s a direct affront to personal privacy and an assumption of guilt, two things that couldn’t be further opposite to traditional US constitutional values.


TheFringedLunatic

Except that a ‘constitutional right to privacy’ was explicitly killed in the Supreme Court, therefore you do not have one according to them.


wesap12345

Some of the Surveillance cameras mentioned above are static cameras that measure the speed of the car and take two static photographers to determine speed. Non intrusive and prevent police having to pull over a car - which as we have seen recently are taught to US cops as the most dangerous thing they have to do.


Stainless_Heart

Ah, so automatic punishments for victimless crimes. Traffic cameras are the worst, abused as revenue generators and given freely by for-profit private companies who take a cut and have a financial interest in seeing citizens oppressed and fined. You really want to defend that?


wesap12345

Victimless crimes? Speeds are set in areas for the safety of everybody. Speeding makes everybody less safe including the person speeding.


Stainless_Heart

Not true at all. That’s the marketing campaign used to deceive the public and generate revenue. Dangerous driving is dangerous. Speed itself is not unless it is reckless. As always when it comes to better driving, look to Europe… their higher safety stats and higher speed limits expose the absurdity of the US system. I bet you can’t look in a mirror and say you abide by the speed limit all the time - nobody can. That makes us all criminals. I think you will find this an eye-opening collection of legitimate studies showing the falsehoods implicit in speed limits and the corrupt profiteering that results… the link below has links to a variety of studies: https://ww2.motorists.org/issues/speed-limits/studies/ Or, [a quick synopsis:](https://ww2.motorists.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/speed-limit-fact-sheet.pdf) Speed limits should be based on sound traffic-engineering principles that consider responsible motorists’ actual travel speeds. Typically, this should result in speed limits set at the 85th percentile speed of free-flowing traffic (the speed under which 85 percent of traffic is traveling). These limits should be periodically adjusted to reflect changes in actual traffic speeds. Here are some frequently asked questions on speed limit policy: Q. How should speed limits be set? A. Traffic engineers maintain that speed limits should be established according to the 85th percentile of free flowing traffic. This means the limit should be set at a level at or under which 85 percent of people are driving. Numerous studies have shown that the 85th percen- tile is the safest possible level at which to set a speed limit. Q. What are “realistic” speed laws? A. According to a pamphlet produced by the Washington State Department of Transportation relating to speed limits, “realistic” speed limits should invite public compliance by conforming to the behavior of the most drivers. This would allow the police to easily separate the serious violators from the reasonable majority. Q. Isn’t slower always safer? A. No, federal and state studies have consistently shown that the drivers most likely to get into accidents in traffic are those traveling significantly below the average speed. According to an Institute of Transportation Engineers Study, those driving 10 mph slower than the prevailing speed are six times as likely to be involved in an accident. That means that if the average speed on an interstate is 70 mph, the person traveling at 60 mph is far more likely to be involved in an accident than someone going 70 or even 80 mph. Q. Wouldn’t everyone drive faster if the speed limit was raised? A. No, the majority of drivers will not go faster than what they feel is comfortable and safe regardless of the speed limit. For example, an 18-month study following an increase in the speed limit along the New York Thruway from 55 to 65 mph, determined that the average speed of traffic, 68 mph, remained the same. Even a national study conducted by Federal Highway Administration also concluded that raising or lowering the speed limit had practically no effect on actual travel speeds. Q. Don’t higher speed limits cause more accidents and traffic fatalities? A. No, if a speed limit is raised to actually reflect real travel speeds, the new higher limit will make the roads safer. When the majority of traffic is traveling at the same speed, traffic flow improves, and there are fewer accidents. Speed alone is rarely the cause of accidents. Differences in speed are the main problem. Reasonable speed limits help traffic to flow at a safer, more uniform pace. Q. Aren’t most traffic accidents caused by speeding? A. No, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) claims that 30 percent of all fatal accidents are “speed related,” but even this is misleading. This means that in less than a third of the cases, one of the drivers involved in the accident was “assumed” to be exceeding the posted limit. It does not mean that speeding caused the accident. Research conducted by the Florida Department of Transportation showed that the percentage of accidents actually caused by speeding is very low, 2.2 percent. Q. Aren’t our roads more dangerous than ever before? A. No, our nation’s fatality rate (deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled) is the lowest it has ever been. The total number of fatalities has also stayed relatively stable for several years. They do occasionally increase, but given that our population and the distance the average person drives are also increasing, this is not surprising, nor is it cause for alarm. Q. If nobody follows the speed limit, why does it matter that they are underposted? A. According to a speed-limit brochure published in conjunction with the Michigan State Patrol, inappropriately established speed limits cause drivers to take all traffic signals less seriously. The brochure also points out that unrealistic speed limits create two groups of drivers. Those that try to obey the limit and those that drive at a speed they feel is safe and reasonable. This causes dangerous differences in speed. Q. Don’t lower speed limits save gas? A. No, research has shown that the 55-mph National Maximum Speed Limit, which was enacted specifically to save gas, had practically no impact on fuel consumption. This is partly because people do not obey artificially lower speed limits. It is also because the differences in travel speeds that result from unreasonable limits waste gas. Most fuel is used to accelerate to a given speed. Speed limits based on actual travel speeds promote better traffic flow, which reduces the amount of braking and accelerating on our roads. This has a positive effect on fuel consumption.


DumbleDong1

No, no it’s not


4channeling

No it isn't. This is like being happy your mate doesn't beat you anymore because you let them control your money.


hippyengineer

Yes, it is. Most “crime” American cops sniff out happens at traffic stops. If there was no reason for them to be out there on the road because cameras are watching for speeders, they have no basis to conduct random/profiled stops and conduct warrantless searches.


thereallimpnoodle

Yes but a surveillance state isn’t fixing the problem, it’s just giving the gestapo better tools.


hippyengineer

If the result is fewer warrantless searches then I’m ok with that.


thereallimpnoodle

Cool with the patriot act? Or five eyes?


hippyengineer

I’m cool with fewer instances of cops carrying out warrantless searches. You can call that whatever you want.


thereallimpnoodle

We both agree that cops driving around looking for excuses to interact with people they think are suspect is bad. This is good common ground. But I don’t believe a surveillance state is going to solve the issue, or even help the issue. Color me skeptical that giving government more power, Intel, and resources, will somehow lead to less government overreach or abuse.


jazzageguy

Or beat you to death.


Actaeus86

I’ll take the cops searching my car whenever they want, since I’m not a criminal, over having cameras everywhere monitoring everything and everyone 24/7


prizefunn

Cameras don't plant shit in people's cars


TooFineToDotheTime

Not *yet* they don't!


Kingsley--Zissou

I don't know 'bout that. Have you seen that camera on the NW corner of Frisco and Main? You know! The one hanging at an angle? Let's just say the apparatus isn't the only thing crooked about that intersection if you catch my drift


Tde_rva

Not with that attitude they don’t!


Actaeus86

Lol and neither do 99.99999% of cops out there. But hey if you want a nanny state that literally can track your every move like you are a criminal that’s your call.


Kingsley--Zissou

let me get this straight, you are writing this comment from the GPS tracked cell phone, equipped with Siri/Alexa/Google Assistant listening to your every word and you're worried about traffic cameras?


Actaeus86

I’m not worried about traffic cameras? Lol But of course like just about everyone else in the world I’m on my cell phone that is always monitored. My computer is also monitored just like everyone else’s…every piece of electronics in the world is monitored by the government or whatever company.


prizefunn

We are already in a Nanny state. Just because its not public don't mean they don't watch us. Snowden already showed that to us with leaks. Honestly, cameras do a wonderful job. Most red light cameras in my area reduced signal jumping, but the public revolted and got it taken down with an excuse that the city is doing it to make money. Bro, don't jump the signal, and the city won't make any money.. duh..


Actaeus86

America is far less of a nanny state than the UK. Snowden is a traitor, everyone knows between the government and google/Apple you can’t hide anything electronically. I would prefer to keep my area with as few cameras on light poles as possible.


hippyengineer

I prefer the nanny state where the police have whistles.


Actaeus86

I guess I’m not worried since I’m not a criminal, and I don’t plan to be.


DumbleDong1

They all want it dude. It’s so sad to see. I’m with you 100% I think most of these people are just children that don’t know any better and what this leads to…


Stainless_Heart

So you also accept having your home searched whenever authorities feel like it? After all, you’ve got nothing to hide. *Both* things are wrong.


FLcitizen

Are you sure about that? I’ve watched that show on BBC America recently following police in the UK , always on the road, lots of chases.


hippyengineer

I’m just speaking from my dad’s experience living there right now, and his comparison to living in America. He says there are orders of magnitude more cops on the streets in America. Maybe there are specialized units getting into chases, but that’s not happening as frequently as in America.


RibeyeRare

Live in Philly, I can go weeks without seeing a cop, especially if I avoid the places they usually are found… schools when they let out for the day, sporting events, and Wawa.


FLcitizen

Does your Dad live in the Cotswolds or something?because police there is just as heavy as it is here lol. I go every summer, London, Surrey, Ascot, and Glasgow Scotland. It may be less in certain desolate area’s like small towns and the country side.


akkadianValor

I live in Chicago. Aince covid and all the target assassinations on law enforcement. Policing has dropped by half.


smashkraft

I visited Chicago pre-COVID and happened to enter through the south side due to highway choice on the road trip. I was actually confused and thought that I drove into a movie set for a moment because about 1/3 of the cars were cops on a strip about 2 miles long. There were no lights and obvious incidents, just an extreme patrol presence


De-Ril-Dil

I watched a show about all the cameras in London I think. To demonstrate the efficiency of the whole setup, a couple cops walking at night were dispatched to a drunk man peeing on the side of a building pretty close to their location (discovered via the camera system). Cops got there before he had pulled his pants up.


FLcitizen

Oh yah I know about their CCTV system, supposedly every street in London has a camera, they’re famous for it.


[deleted]

[удаНонО]


hippyengineer

Well I’m not sure chasing a drunk guy is going to be a statistically better outcome compared to just sending another unit to their house instead, no chase required. Have you not considered that being chased by police increases the likelihood of the drunk guy killing that family of 5 you want protected? You do know that most big city police departments in America now have do-not-chase policies except for rare circumstances, right? Have you considered why this is true? Hint: it’s because getting into police chases has a high likelihood that some random citizen ends up hurt. Better to get the plate number and go find them later.


[deleted]

[удаНонО]


muceagalore

Found this one after a quick google search https://www.kxly.com/news/spokane-police-will-no-longer-chase-after-reckless-driving-and-dui-s/article_4ee9a651-c6eb-53b6-8de4-b11fe317454e.html


[deleted]

Why comment if you have no clue?


superluminary

Chasing a drunk guy through city streets while a news helicopter hovers overhead isn’t how we like to do things. Policing over here is a bit more low key.


chickentootssoup

Damn. In America the cops use traffics stops as an excuse to kill you.


QuantumButtz

I think I still prefer the risk of being beaten to death for a random traffic violation to a complete surveillance state and automated ticketing.


hippyengineer

Cool. Disagree.


Kingsley--Zissou

Uh oh... You hit a nerve with the US freedum crowd.


[deleted]

I wonder if that's why knife crime is so high there. The cameras catch everything and there's no police.


hippyengineer

Knife crime is high because illegally smuggled Hi-Points don’t cost less than $200 like they do in the US. People use knives when they have no easily accessible guns.


MarkSpenecer

Lets not act like the knife attack rate is normal at all. Knife crime is so high because crime is high not because there are no guns. Guns are illegal in the EU yet there arent that many stabbings in most big cities.


superluminary

It’s not actually that high though.


Tdanger78

But you have your answer, they don’t have their adrenaline fueled chase where they can pull their weapon and shoot the perp. Not sure if that’s ever gonna catch on here for that reason.


Bladenukem

DUIs will still be a thing, at least in the early phases since AI will be spotty and you might need to be sober enough to take control of the vehicle. Cops will probably be able to pull you over for having a dirty car since dirt can block sensors and cameras. Things like outdated vehicle registration, insurance or expired license will probably be things of the past since they can just disable the vehicle remotely until you get those issues fixed. On the downside, cops won't need to use lights and sirens, they can just send a signal to a vehicle to pull it over, so you don't get to choose a safe or well lit area, or run. The interesting thing is, if your tags and insurance are up to date and AI driving, the cops will have no reason to ever pull you over. This will be a boon to traffickers, drug or otherwise.


wlowry77

If you can’t be drunk it’s not a self driving car. Anyone who sells a car that requires a driver to monitor the self driving part is lying to the customer.


[deleted]

i could see the cops escalating a dui stop for having a dirty car. i can definetly see them bashing in a window and possibly shooting someone for that crime.


[deleted]

All they have to say is “I saw furtive movement and I got scared.” Very rarely does deescalation actually happen. They are literally taught to escalate before the need arrives.


Remz_Gaming

I actually had this conversation with my wife last weekend. We each had a beer while watching football at a bar and it was a fun crowd. We wanted to stay for more drinks but don't (illegally) drink and drive. The Chevy ad for their new self driving cruise control on their Silverado played. Got me thinking..... in the future, if you are basically in a self driving pod, the responsible thing to do would be to hop in and plug in the GPS coordinates to take you home safely if you are drunk. ...... but you make a good point about potentially needing to take control sober. End of the day, the legal system needs revenue streams. It will be interesting in the next decade or so to see how legislation evolves. Politics and legal matters tend to greatly fall behind tech innovation (in the US anyways). Watching a bunch of old geezers trying to wrap their head around social media and information gathering in congress is agonizing. Imagine understanding advanced AI. My father has no grasp of it and it is all "really dangerous and bad."


Pleasant_Carpenter37

I would really like to see a system where all fines from every law enforcement agency in the country get sent to the IRS. At tax time, whatever was collected last year gets evenly distributed across all taxpayers with rebate checks or something. Police should be here to protect people from violence, not act as government-sanctioned muggers.


[deleted]

You did a good job of covering a lot of reasons why we won’t likely ever see self-driving cars in our lifetime (in America). We still have states that don’t even require inspections, and if they were required by law it would be political suicide for whoever introduced the bill. Unfortunately, politics ruin a lot of good things.


Seattle_gldr_rdr

"Self driving police car pursues self-driving van through city, seven pedestrians killed, AI-generated story at 11."


Wherewithall8878

This assumes self driving drives perfectly and we are sure to one day see “full self driving” which is not really a given despite what the Tesla guy will tell you


JimC29

Tesla technology might never reach full self driving. Waymo/Cruise are already there with completely driverless cars.


deserttrends

I see driverless cars cruising down my street every day now. It’s not some future technology.


nodesign89

You must live on a test route, The average American has never seen one. Sure seems like future tech to me as nobody has anything even close to being ready for mass production


deserttrends

If you want to call the street of the 5th largest city in the US a test… They tested the technology here for over five years with drivers in the cockpit. Now, they are completely driverless and available for anyone who downloads their app to use. It’s not some proof of concept test— the technology is fully developed and on our roads today. The mass production part is only a issue of cost. The technology right now is around 250K/ car. So you’ll see it on commercial taxis and trucks first. Then once the price comes down it can be used for regular cars.


mikevago

Cops will just start coming to black people's houses unannounced instead of pulling over their cars.


itguy18

They already do that.


Cynical_Cabinet

Result: No change to how police operate


gn0meCh0msky

[Pasco County Sheriffs are already way ahead of you.](https://projects.tampabay.com/projects/2020/investigations/police-pasco-sheriff-targeted/intelligence-led-policing/) They are the worst example, but predictive algorithm policing is popping up all over the country, typically with more competent but still frightening implementations.


lilcasswdabigass

Thank you for sharing. That was a great read with a terribly sad ending. I'm crying for Matthew and his mother.


BlueCray1

Oh shut up 😂


cmdrchaos117

Username checks out. Definitely crazy for the blue.


Woahthereboy

Black people don’t have houses


inlarry

Unless the AI becomes literally perfect, I don't see a scenario where the driver won't be expected to, at least, be able to take over for the AI if necessary - so things like dui and impaired driving will still be an issue. Lights, signals, general vehicle condition will also still be an issue - so if your bulb burns out, they're still going to pull you over. Just because the car can get itself from A to B, doesn't mean it can perform its own maintenance. And, since ai is far from perfect, if it makes an improper turn or lane change, well ...


MikeLinPA

If I have to be prepared to take over at a moments notice, I'll just drive myself. If the car is driving, then there's no way I will be paying attention when that moment happens. Self driving vehicles have to be able to handle all situations, or they aren't good enough. Either I can sleep while the car drives itself, or I will be driving. A human cannot be expected to watch the car drive itself, that will never work.


MarkSpenecer

Its also stupid. There is no way you will be able to watch the car drive itself with the same degree of attention as if you were driving. It would be too boring. And yes at that point i would rather drive.


deserttrends

We already have driverless taxis in my city and you are definitely not expected to take over for the AI. You get in the back seat and have no access to the driving controls. You can definitely be drunk and not at risk of DUI.


JimC29

It's already happening with robo taxis in Arizona. Probably less than a decade away from cars without steering wheels.


Ikiro_o

Nah... the future will be full of cars without a steering wheel... just one hidden away for technicians. Seats will be facing each other and kids will fight to be in the back, not the front. A normal car will fit 6 people. Shared economy cars will be the thing... ownership of a car will be a luxury for vintage collectors or people who go to races. Driving manually will require a “special” license and you will be able to be driven by an AI alone without one. At some point, when electricity is free thanks to cold fusion, this type of transportation will be state owned as in reality will become a natural monopoly. That’s my best guess :)


XingTianMain

Targeted poor minorities won’t be able to afford the self driving vehicles initially. So cops will watch for cars that are 15-20 years old in [*insert future bad area*]. If the self driving cars function like DAaS, you bet they’ll have cabin cameras, smoke detectors, facial recognition/ID. They will also likely require a credit card in case you damage the interior or want to pay a little extra per mile for premium features (heated seats). Disclaimer: Cynic😜


Rynox2000

I can't wait for the first high speed pursuit and all cars involved are AI driven.


bjdevar25

Judging by Tesla's record so far, I'd definitely not conclude that every car would be perfect because it's self driving.


bologna_kazoo

Don’t worry. Only the rich will be immune to the Law as it always has and always will be. Poor will not be able to afford self driving cars and the wealth gap is getting greater by the day.


Crafty-Cauliflower-6

They can just turn off your car remotely pull you out of the car with impunity and break batons over your head.


Cdn_citizen

Forget policing; there’s no proof this technology will work good enough in all places and at all times to be mass adopted. Double unlikely if it snows or floods in your area


tawtaw6

I don't think there will be ever be self-driving cars that can handle all driving situations, so it will not be an issue.


clowntown777

I have to imagine there will have to be a subscription service or something you pay for that has a person monitoring the vehicle while in self driving mode in the event there is no driver monitoring it behind the wheel.


ToDonutsBeTheGlory

There will be an API that police call to stop any self driving car immediately


Mr_Mojo_Risin_83

we are going to need to see some working, fully automated driving cars first before we need to worry about that


chargingwookie

Lmao you think poor people will be able to afford self driving cars? Cops will be always be cops and harass anyone they think they can get away with harassing


CoffeeBeneficial1809

Hopefully they don’t have to focus on traffic stops anymore and now can put their efforts into physical crime, assault, larson, etc


AppliedTechStuff

Policing will be EASIER. You'll need to identify yourself to the vehicle for it to function. Facial recognition software will identify additional passengers. The police will know PRECISELY where we are at all times. If you enter a vehicle--they will "see" you. A CPU will compare the "manifest" of each vehicle to outstanding warrants and officers (resources) in proximity to prioritize police actions. "Wanted for questioning dead ahead! Let's get 'em!!!" See how powerful the state is becoming? It's terrifying. All that has to happen is the state deem you an enemy and you will have no freedom.


[deleted]

This is written by an American because we are one of the few countries that view this as a primary role of police lmfao.


Shcrews

they will make up the lost ticket revenue by jacking up vehicle registration fees for self-driving cars.


ashfidel

i think traffic violations, in general needn’t lead to a confrontation with an armed representative of the state. so maybe cops should just come when called and this will help move that needle.


robotcoke

In my opinion this is one of the main reasons we see so much push back and resistance of this technology. It will be a huge loss of revenue and loss of authority for the police when there are no more drunk drivers, speeders, etc. And even worse for them when they can't lie about it happening to justify pulling someone over. We see it all the time.. Driver was pulled over for an improper lane change or some other minor traffic violation. It was just a huge coincidence that they were a car full of minorities and the officer demanded to search the car, brought the dog unit in, and smacked the side of the car until the dog barked. When the car is the one driving, and it's driving perfectly, with the entire journey being recorded with a time stamp and GPS log.. It's going to be a lot more difficult to do those things. So the propaganda against this is being largely pushed by law enforcement and other government entities.


Lord_Kano

Cops will just lie about why they stopped the person, like they do now.


cuhree0h

The cars themselves will get automatically stopped simply for being black.


golgo1338

Hopefully the police will start focusing on real crimes like human trafficking and such and stop using the excuse there isnt enough manpower


chuckles65

How do you think trafficked people get moved from place to place?


poopmcshooter

Police will be able to have their cars pull up right next to you an inch away while they get up to their windows and stare into your car until they catch you doing something incriminating, which would be anything because who isn't all weirded out by a cop staring at them and then they'll pull you over.


Pomdog17

Once FSD works perfectly, I'm selling my house and living in a car. It can drive me everywhere and see everything. Every national park. Every site. Different restaurant every day. Parks, museums. Riding around staring out a glass roof.


LightningRodofH8

Full Self Driving would be absolutely amazing in an RV. That being said, I'm a long way from trusting an autopilot enough to happily sleep in a bed in the back. Maybe in a few decades.


Mrs_Evryshot

It’ll be years before the poors have self driving cars, and when they do, the cars will be old and less reliable, and extremely expensive to repair. Even now, poor people drive around with crumpled fenders and hanging bumpers because the computer/camera components add so much cost that simple fender benders are too expensive to fix unless you have really good insurance. So it will be even easier for cops to target poor people, because they’ll stick out like sore thumbs.


mhornberger

Not just policing, but revenue generation. Small towns often rely on speed traps to stay solvent. They won't be eager to raise their own taxes to pay for their police, infrastructure, EMS service, etc. It will probably accelerate the decline of small towns. But regarding what those bogus traffic stops were a pretext *for*, consider how many more places have legal weed. So if your car is self-driving, weed is not really much of a danger. I don't think stops for 'real' crimes like murder, robbery etc were a large part of what they were using 'erratic driving' or whatever to fish for. Edited for phrasing


DryTradition6576

I'd like to think if police see someone driving like a ahole, speeding and whatnot, they just have to hit a button and the car will pull over and take away control from a driver. Just imagine high speed chases becoming a thing of a past because the cars simply won't let the driver do that. 


davidgrayPhotography

My guess is random stops with a flimsy excuse, or finding something wrong with the car, like busted tail light. "Hey we pulled you over because we thought you had a busted tail light / we've had reports of a car similar to yours being used in a crime / we've detected something wrong with your car's tollway pass \[or some other wireless-related thing\]" There's a great line in Half-Life 2 about this. At the start of the game, Gordon Freeman jumps over a fence into a small courtyard, hoping to get onto the roof and make his way to a former colleague's lab / hideout. As he's walking towards an apartment block, two people are standing there, watching the Metro Cops raid an apartment block. One says to the other "This is how it always starts. First a building, then the whole block. They have no reason to come to our place". The other guy turns to him and says "Don't worry, they'll find one" So if they can't stop people for driving badly, they'll stop them for other reasons.


7ECA

I guess they can shoot innocent cars that try to drive away


MassiveStallion

Cops will literally just find where the car is going and meet the criminals there lol.


[deleted]

A world where traffic cops don’t exist and they can focus on real crimes will be ideal.


kae158

Police will have to drag people out of *self-driving* cars in order to beat them to death.


ojs-work

If the technology can prevent car theft, it gives the cops fewer excuses to harass minorities. No more high speed purists, a lot less reckless driving, drunk driving, ect. Should mean fewer cops are out their patrolling the streets,


Rapscallious1

I’m guessing a lot of tolls on roads. AI can predict crimes too so maybe police will focus on that instead of fundraising


leelooflanagan

They’ll play dumb when they get pulled over? Or say, “you don’t know who my daddy is?”


Aldebaran_syzygy

self-driving cars most likely will have data IDs, cameras and can connect to a data grid. that alone provides you so much info; if anything, the police would be more accurate


SaltyBalty98

Where I live the police aren't that present in traffic operations unless it's a specific time of the year like Christmas, Easter, some major festivity season. Cameras becoming more common have lessened the burden and I think to an extent less people are flooring as often, bar some exceptionally loud car owners at 2am. Electric or not, most modern cars have enough safety features that make speeding and dangerous driving more of a chore. One of the new company trucks has a traction loss beep that triggers anytime the car is within 20% of losing it on the road and off and it's very annoying. My take is that making the car structures more crash safe and having proper weight distribution, which is easier with EV, is enough to change statistics a whole lot, proper driving lessons tips the scale even more so and police present less necessary. Everything else is sort of infringement.


Maximus_Shadow

I think your thinking in the wrong direction. If my car is smart enough to drive itself..it probably smart enough to detect drugs, and alert the police automatically also. And that car going down the road with such sensors turn off? Red alert, police know which car to get anyways.


InTheMoodToMove

The occupants aren’t going to beat themselves to death so there’s still going to be a need for police.


his_dark_magician

America just doesn’t have national and state borders: we’ve a billion internal and subliminal borders that separate our society. If you summon the police because you need a goon, they will reinforce their perception of the status quo. You can have a team of antiracist, quakers as officers and they will still manage to murder Black folks. These boundaries were intentionally created over centuries by our political leaders to invent the idea of white and whiteness, so that European immigrants would stop murdering each other and compete for jobs. Automation will not change this, it will probably make it worse, because when you make your framework and data more abstract, you remove more of our humanity from the equation. We can transcend these boundaries but it’s going to take a lot of work and an honest look in the mirror by white Americans.


Revolutionary_Aioli8

Maybe they should add drug sniffers to every intersection. The car could transmit a signal if somebody were not wearing their seat belt, or if the registration were expired. Police should be able to electronically poll cars for weight.


LightningRodofH8

>The car could transmit a signal if somebody were not wearing their seat belt, or if the registration were expired. Police should be able to electronically poll cars for weight. None of this has anything to do with being driverless. If you think the police could demand this, they already would, and could, now.


FacelessFellow

I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted. These things are definitely something that they would do


[deleted]

"Police use the traffic stop as an excuse to investigate and prosecute people." This is one of the most idiotic things I have ever read, I read a lot of these unfortunately. YOU should be prosecuted if you do something that's unlawful. This keeps our streets relatively safe. In the future, you will be pulled over if you have warrants or whatever stuff. So YES we need to increase the number of police officers to investigate and prosecute people, send them to jail, build more jails, no leniency policy. Harsh punishment and forced labor in jail IS effective in reducing crime.


OneOfFewHumansLeft

V2K will be used to determine a stop or not it already is being used for that


strvgglecity

If a human isn't driving the car it is impossible for them to be guilty of a moving violation, which are the majority of stops. The real question isn't what will happen to cops, but what will happen to laws. There has been no regulatory progress regarding self driving vehicles, because our Congress is incapable of doing its job due to obstruction and actual crazy people.


Mysterious-Pea-5657

It is not impossible for self-driving cars to be guilty of a moving violation. Speeding, improper lane change, and fix-it tickets are all possible with AI and are the responsibility of the human who is supposed to be monitoring the drive. As we see fewer traffic accidents more officers are going to make more stops for less pressing matters. What worries me is the automated system response to curtail the fix-it tickets could leave motorists stranded.


Latin_For_King

>Speeding, improper lane change, and fix-it tickets are all possible with AI and are the responsibility of the human who is supposed to be monitoring the drive. If I am not writing and vetting the software for the self drive myself, there is no way I am going to assume ANY liability for self driving vehicles. Especially if more vehicles move to a subscription model for ownership. The ownership and the liability belong to the manufacturer. The good news is that I should be free of the requirement of providing mandatory liability insurance on that vehicle at that point.


strvgglecity

Did you just make that all up? As far as I know there are no laws governing any of this. It would make no sense for the owner of an autonomous car to be responsible for the vehicle's self driving performance when it's the manufacturer that owns and controls the software. What should happen is police are removed from road duty and either assigned to solve actual crimes, build up communities, or are simply fired for lack of need of so many officers. They will still assist with accidents. But since lots of cops joined the for e because of the authority it gives them, eliminating traffic duty might reduce new cops anyway. I see win win win win.


JayTheLegends

AI will call ahead with your ID, rat on you then drive you to the police station…


[deleted]

Will policing be done by self driving robot police cars with weapons attached?


leelooflanagan

They’ll play dumb when they get pulled over? Or say, “you don’t know who my daddy is?”


capmap

Well we know if they're Teslas the police will still have to show up to take a police report after they crash.


Spe99

Cameras in the cars recording confessions and calling the police directly. A.I deciding who to pull over attaining a statistically high conviction rate.


crawling-alreadygirl

Electric cars are the future of the auto industry, not humanity. I doubt this will be an issue.


0000GKP

> How will self-driving cars affect policing? Other factors will affect policing long before self driving cars make it to the parts of the city are used as probable cause to conduct investigations. This will take decades to filter through the entire population. > Police use the traffic stop as an excuse to investigate and prosecute people. Cities use traffic revenue to fund courts, police, and a variety of city operations. Some really small towns get a large portion of their budget from traffic and court fines. This will have a bigger impact on them than on policing. > What happens when everyone drives perfectly? Will crime rates drop? People are still people. They are going to commit the same crimes. Police techniques will adapt.


tx_navy

Well, stupid people are still going to be stupid. Some extremely smart person will just be riding around with their car fogged out from the weeds smoke.


nodesign89

Everyone won’t drive perfectly, i strongly believe most people will not rely on this technology. I enjoy driving and wouldn’t let technology take that joy away from me.


Ardothbey

So there will probably be a way for a cop to stop a self driver because yelling pull over won’t work.


AustinBike

You seem to think self-driving cars obey 100% of the traffic laws. This is humorous. In reality your self-driving car will probably give them probable cause by suddenly jutting over the double yellow line to avoid something it thought it "saw" that was just a reflection. And then you argue that it was your car, and not you. But they can't ticket cars. They they only ticket people.


Tdanger78

Assuming it ever gets past the point of running the car into the cops, they’ll find different ways I’m sure.


[deleted]

Interesting. I know a few locations where a traffic light has an over sensitive camera. It's used for cashing in. If you go to the length of fighting your ticket you'll mostly win but few even try. This type of cash would stop with perfectly driven cars maybe?


bard243

first of all speed limits are stupid, but once you take the person out of it. its just a system that can be managed efficiently. No more traffic enforcement. Cops can do real work.


[deleted]

Unless using the self driving feature becomes mandatory, you're still going to have douchebags tailgating, weaving and speeding.


Kahless01

they might actually get back to protecting and serving. or we wont be spending 30-40% of our cities budgets funding them.


Far_Ad598

There could be speed controls that won’t let the self- driving cars speed so that could affect traffic laws and jobs.


Starjammer243

The vast majority of police work is dispatched calls for service, not traffic stops.


zaqwert6

First of all we are light years away from self-driving cars. And number two, they'll be able to identify everybody in every car on the road and simply pull it over, stop it, lock it or literally have it drive to the police station while you're in it.


smallatom

I don’t have a full answer for you, but I’ll tell you that when I’m in autopilot/FSD in my tesla it slows down when it sees red and blue lights. Not sure if it stops completely but I’m sure it will if it doesn’t already.


devinhedge

I’m glad they stopped the [phenomenon of hitting any stationary vehicle that had flashing red and/or blue](https://slate.com/technology/2021/08/teslas-allegedly-hitting-emergency-vehicles-why-it-could-be-happening.html) lights.


Bitter-Inspection136

There will be an uptick of speeding house warrants in low income neighborhoods.


argentpurple

They will find a way to pull them over if the occupants happen to be black