[kamaal]

>>It shouldn't be possible to disable safety features.

Here really it needs to be defined what qualifies as safety. The act of driving(in certain circumstances) in itself is unsafe by many a definition, by relinquishing control to the driver you open all the risks that likely to occur. Its hard to draw the boundary as to what is safe and what isn't. Please tell me should cars carry mandatory breath analyzers? and disable ignition in case the analyzer finds traces of alcohol in the breath? Should there be a detector to check if the driver at the wheel has been well rested a night before? A detector to check if the driver isn't in rage? These scenarios only increase exponentially, but remember when you relinquish control to the driver you now open door for all risks equally. Therefore you can't handle all the thousands of situations, instead what you do is remind the user of the responsibility, double check the user decision and then relinquish the control to the user.

Therefore in all seriousness, if you take control of the car regardless of the situation you are really responsible. Even if you control the car through your phone.

[CydeWeys]

There's a qualitative difference between allowing disabling of a safety feature (what I'm talking about) and adding additional ones (every example you just mentioned). In that light, do you have any response to my statement that it shouldn't be possible to disable safety features? Note that requiring the addition of other safety features is a separate issue.