[Mordisquitos]

I understand your point, but I can see the reasoning to arrest the passengers. In summary, the robotaxi company's business model and how its cars work is none of the emergency service's business. It's a car, in the way, with people in it.

If an ostensibly normal car were to block an emergency response, would its occupants be off the hook if they all denied having driven the vehicle to its current location, and said they have no ability to move it out of the way? I doubt it. They would be at the very least charged with something.

The same thing should go for alleged robotaxis—“But we don't control the car we're sitting inside of!”... not the city's problem. The car you were in was blocking an emergency response.

Would this be unfair? Yes it would. Would this make people fearful of using robotaxis? Absolutely yes it would. And would that put economic pressure on the robotaxi operators to fix these issues as fast as possible? Damn right it would.

[0xffff2]

These robotaxis are operating legally with permits from the city are they not? It's nonsensical to suggest arresting the passengers sitting in a licensed robotaxi for something they have no control over. This is entirely on the city (and state?) for authorizing something that clearly isn't ready for use on public streets.

[somebody78978]

So by your logic, if I order a human driven taxi, and the driver does something illegal, I should be arrested along with him? Obviously assumming I didn't threaten and/or bribe him to do that illegal action.

[EatingWithForks]

No, this is more akin to hiring an uber, the uber driver does something illegal and the cops arrest you for it with the idea that you can sue uber for the injustice. That's obviously wrongheaded.