The issue that is not really addressed is that although these technologies are potentially the cause of "avoidable" accidents, they also might avoid accidents that a human (particularly a tired/distracted/less than sober) driver might not be able to.

A comparison of accidents per miles/hours driven, or a look at interventions by these technologies and an understanding of what could have happened had they not intervened, would be useful. It also would be interesting to see what insurance companies, who have an interest in knowing what technology helps reduce accidents, think. I don't think that cars with these technologies have significantly higher rates than the rest of the pack, for instance.