Sam the Centipede wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 4:05 pm
Yes, yes, there's a general principle in motoring law in many (most?) countries that if you drive into the rear of another vehicle it's difficult to blame the driver of the front vehicle – "why were your driving so close sir/madam?" – but the apportionment of blame is not the issue.
Having watched literally hundreds of Tesla crashes, the scenario is all too common where something unexpected happens, the Tesla stops for it and the car behind it plows into into the Tesla at full speed because the driver behind was not paying attention. The Tesla may or may not be pushed into the car ahead.
I've been in an accident like that (before I had a Tesla). I was following too closely (as were others) and the traffic jammed. I braked hard and avoided a collision, but the truck behind with bald tires hit me and knocked me into the car ahead. Fortunately the collision was low speed and there was no damage.
The thing is that a Tesla under Full Self Driving (the Beta version) requires eyes on the road, enforced by a driver-facing camera in the cabin. So you can be pretty sure that the Tesla driver is looking at the road most of the time and the car's automatic systems are quite good at stopping when the car in front stops -- not perfect but very good. Plus the Tesla is not going to be following too closely. That is, there are TWO systems independently paying attention, making it highly unlikely that a Tesla will plow into a car ahead, far less likely that a car solely relying on a human driver.
The problem with negative propaganda is that a person or technology can be criticized for a failing, but that criticism can be made out of the context of considering the failings of alternatives. We have 6 million auto accidents in the US every year.