	From simple cruise control to fully self-driving vehicles, car manufacturers like General Motors, Tesla, and Volvo are pushing the boundaries of how artificial intelligence exists in cars. As quickly as fully autonomous cars become a part of our everyday lives, we must have laws and regulations that govern the use of this technology. But, who is to blame when a self-driving car crashes unexpectedly? Does the driver who chose to purchase the vehicle bear the responsibility? Or is the manufacturer who supplied the technology on the hot seat? The few accidents involving self-driving vehicles have settled on a case by case basis. However, experts predict 10 million self-driving cars will be on the road in the next 3 years, and inevitably result in many more mishaps and accidents. Currently, juries have held manufacturers liable for most of the damage done during a crash caused by a self-driving vehicle. This is with the intention that consumers are buying the vehicles with the confidence that they are completely safe when driving around with the manufacturers technology. This policy also encourages companies to ensure that there are several backup safety systems, and considerable time and money invested into product development to avoid legal trouble and blood on their hands. Recently, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Society of Automotive Engineers has devised a 6-level automation scale to dictate who is held responsible: 6 being a completely self-driven vehicle and 1 being a standard car with full human control. Most cars today fall into the 2nd level; equipped with only cruise control, automatic parallel parking, and an early brake alert system, so most of the driving is done by a human, and in return the driver is held responsible during a crash. But, anything over the 2nd level, the courts would look towards the manufacturer. I do not believe that the manufacturer should bear the full cost and responsibility for a crash by one of their products. Though it does incentivize companies to strive for innovative and extremely safe technology and if the companies market a self-driving car as something the driver does need to control, then yes lets hold them responsible. But, I believe we can incentivize companies to build the safest technology possible and ensure the safety of the users without taking personal liability out of the picture. Its out of the question that self-driving cars are safer than human controlled cars, the data backs this up, so why should the manufacturers of self-driving cars bear greater liability than manufacturers of a standard car? If I go out and crash my car, Toyota doesnt pick up the bill on the repairs, so why should Tesla have to do that for creating a safer product Competitive market pressures will cause manufacturers to invest in the safest and most trustworthy technology to earn the publics confidence and create demand for their products. When you go out and buy almost any product you are assuming the risks and adverse effects that may turn into reality. If you want to avoid these risks, then dont buy the product. But, punishing self-driving car makers for making a far safer product than the cars currently on the streets now is not logical. In conclusion, the manufacturer should not be held completely liable when a self-driving car is involved in a crash. 

Sources:
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-wholl-responsible-self-driving-car.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/who-s-responsible-when-a-self-driving-car-crashes/

