Too funny kids. Cop pulls over Google car for driving too slow. No one to give ticket to.
Also discussed a bit at the end of this revived older thread: self driving cars and speed limits - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
How does a cop pull over a driver-less car?
Are they programmed to pull over for cops, emergency vehicles?
Well, it wasn’t really “no one to give ticket to”. Under California law, a self-driving car on public roads must have someone in the driver’s seat, in case of emergency.
And Google has said they are responsible for any tickets their driverless cars get, so …
The story I saw says the police department statement said the officer just wanted to know more about how the vehicle was selecting its speed, and also to make sure the programmers were aware of the need to not block traffic.
I suspect it had more to do with this part, though: the vehicle was doing 24 in a posted 35, but the vehicle has a top speed of 25.
Can’t really give somebody a ticket for driving to slow if they are literally going as fast as they can.
(Of course, if their low speed were due to malfunction, rather than design, one could cite them for operating an unsafe vehicle, or at least a mechanical malfunction.)
Yes, in fact the article says “Mountain View police said they regularly perform tests with Google to see how its cars react to emergency vehicles on the road”.
Yes you can. For example, plenty of highways have a minimum speed. If you are incapable of going that fast, you aren’t allowed to be on the road and can be ticketed. “I can’t go that fast” (or " I’m programmed to not go that fast ") is not a valid excuse in that case.
It’s just as unsafe if it’s due to design as if it’s due to malfunction. And what andrewm said above.
“Can’t you go up this hill any faster?”
“Yes. But company regulations say I have to stay in the truck.”
Not an acceptable excuse for Google car.
The google car had several cars accumulated behind it. The law in question wasn’t specifically for driving below any lower-speed-limit, it was for impeding traffic.
No, it is considerably less safe if it is due to malfunction.
I once had an old Toyota with a 2=speed transmission and a top speed around 45mph. At 45 mph, it presented a slight traffic hazard on surface streets that might have speed limits of 50 or more.
Contrast that with a similar car that normally should be capable of 70mph, but is malfunctioning so badly it can’t get above 45. It is quite likely that engine will just suddenly quit. Other things it is much more likely to do than normal: come violently apart, spreading engine parts and oil all over the road. Catch fire. Suddenly stop without the brake lights coming on.
A car traveling slow because it is experiencing serious malfunction is a hazard for a lot more reasons than its speed.
My point, which I didn’t make clear, was this:
Certainly, some vehicles are excluded from some roads. Most interstates are marked “no bicycles” and “no mopeds”, for example. In Virginia, mopeds are not permitted on any road where the speed limit is above 45.
And some roads have posted minimum speeds, although I have never seen one of those except on an interstate.
But, if one is complying with all of the above laws, and is operating a street-legal vehicle, one has the right to operate it.
And if both the driver and the vehicle are in proper operating condition, and the vehicle is moving at its maximum possible speed, I don’t see how it could be cited for moving too slowly.
Moving too slowly seems like it should only be a cite-able offense if it is being done by choice.
And to clarify: “I am not programmed to go faster than 25” would count as a choice, in my book. But the article I saw said the car could not go above 25, and the photo showed a car unlike any I have seen on the roads. So I assume it was designed to not go very fast, regardless of who is driving it.
What seems to be the slow-down, damn car?! Hurry up!
I’m sorry, Dave. I’m afraid I can’t do that.