Actually the original comment makes complete sense. To only give tickets for drunk driving essentially makes it so that drivers have blanket immunity from any c

Actually the original comment makes complete sense. To only give tickets for drunk driving essentially makes it so that drivers have blanket immunity from any criminal liability for their behavior, no matter how reckless, so long as they are not drunk on alcohol. By rarely holding reckless drivers responsible for their behavior, we are essentially incentivizing that behavior. From the car's perspective, the current law is great. Many people who would consider alternative transportation such as cycling or walking are discouraged by the fact that these activities are much more dangerous for you than driving. If you get hit by a reckless SUV at 40mph while you are in a car, you have a pretty good chance of surviving. Your chances of surviving as a pedestrian or cyclist are drastically lower. Rationally, many people then opt for the car (for me, must American roads are too dangerous for cycling so I only walk to get around even though I do enjoy cycling). This is a vicious cycle that ensures that cars will perpetually dominate our streets. I fear self driving cars (or an infinite series of failed attempts at self driving cars) are only going to make this worse. For all of the benefits that cars do offer us in our daily lives, from my perspective, it seems clear that the scales have tipped way too far in favor of the car. Different legal regimes are possible. For example, we could change the law so that by default drivers are assumed responsible for any collision they were a part of. In the case of a driver killing a pedestrian, the burden should fall on the driver to prove that it was the pedestrians fault. The current enforcement of the law seems to almost imply that pedestrians and cyclists are suicidal so if they die in a collision, it must have been their fault somehow. Surely we could require drivers to drive in such a way that they have very low probability of injuring anyone? Or would that be an unimaginable infringement on the rights of the driver (and car)? The beauty of a system that actually holds drivers accountable for the consequences of their actions is that we actually wouldn't have much need to enforce laws like speeding and running red lights because few would want to take the risk of losing their license if they were involved in a crash.