Damn, don't you think "we" as a society should eliminate the negative effects/activities? since aside of not having any utility it may bring negative outcomes..
The problem is, that "negative effect/activity" is not an objective thing.
To me, drinking(alcohol) is a pointless activity, with literally no upside. It costs money, doesn't feel good, I don't see the social aspect of it, and the danger it poses to people is well documented - it's a "negative" for society in my book. But, at the same time, I am fully happy to acknowledge that there are people who enjoy it, who like to party, and I would never say that drinking should be banned.
I know a few people who treat driving like I treat drinking - they see it as boring, without any benefit, with negative consequences well documented and they clearly think that society would be better off without it. They think that the day that manual drivers are banned can't come soon enough.
As mentioned above - we are not robots. Not everyone enjoys the same things. And that's great.
I don't think comparing drinking to driving is a good idea,
think of drunk driving, it's illegal. Why? Because it kills people it brings negative experiences such a death on a scale, just drinking at the bar doesn't cause this, right?
The same thing with driving in an autonomous environment, if it causes rapid increase in killings - it should be illegal in the same way as drunk driving. Don't you think so?
No, actually I think that long time before autonomous cars are common, or anyone even thinks about banning manual cars, vast majority of cars on the market will be already equipped with systems preventing accidents. There will be no reason to ban manual cars, because manual cars will be nearly impossible to crash, unless you specifically want to crash(and I bet you will be able to do that in an autonomous cars too since I can't imagine it won't have some sort of manual override).
Also, just to address your last point - why would manual driving cause increase in killings? In the worst possible case, it would stay at the same level as now,no? In fact, it's hard to argue that it won't get better, because autonomous cars will avoid dangerous situations caused by manual drivers better than humans would.
In other words - in increasingly autonomous environment, the risk factor of manual drivers will go down, not up.
Please read my comment above, I'm not saying the TOOL or an object should be banned but a COMBINATION of a USE should be banned. And yes, the use large knives in public places where there is a risk of killing people should be banned, is there any objection to this?
Yes, there is objection to that. There's plenty of legitimate reasons to have a large knife in a public place..obviously.
There's only a risk of killing people unless you're ISIS or a psychopath. Do we ban everything because of a few assholes? Yes, we do a lot of the time, and that's pretty sad.
To me, drinking(alcohol) is a pointless activity, with literally no upside. It costs money, doesn't feel good, I don't see the social aspect of it, and the danger it poses to people is well documented - it's a "negative" for society in my book. But, at the same time, I am fully happy to acknowledge that there are people who enjoy it, who like to party, and I would never say that drinking should be banned.
I know a few people who treat driving like I treat drinking - they see it as boring, without any benefit, with negative consequences well documented and they clearly think that society would be better off without it. They think that the day that manual drivers are banned can't come soon enough.
As mentioned above - we are not robots. Not everyone enjoys the same things. And that's great.