|
|
|
|
|
by michaeldhopkins
4611 days ago
|
|
It's supposed to show that the Tesla car is structurally sound and prevented the object on the road from ripping further into the car than it otherwise would have. It's also supposed to show that the car got the driver out of a dangerous situation by displaying warnings early. Finally, it is supposed to show that the car is resilient when bad things happen because it is still drivable. I'm just explaining the viewpoint of the letter since you were unsure. I'm not opining that it is effective/ineffective or productive/counterproductive. |
|
I think the point is still valid that the safety features are nice but the core issue is that the car burst into flames during a seemingly minor accident.