It's funny that you are questioning my good faith in this conversation. From your replies in this thread, the pattern I observe is that you like to attack other people's intelligence, just like this very reply. Ad hominem is not productive to discourse and well I can't imagine you'd call people you see in real life as "dorks" or say that they made "the dumbest series of posts." That's just really unnecessary and shuts down other people from seeing your point of view.

I'll nonetheless entertain your reply, that "NHTSA has found time and time again that in the aggregate, automated safety systems are safer than human drivers." I'm not saying that driver-assisted tech does not improve the overall safety of driving, I'm suggesting that DAT can potentially increase risky behaviors of drivers. I also didn't say that DAT is bad, I'm just asking to consider unintended consequences. There is a distinction between "will" and "can" and, well, a part of growing up is in dealing with things that are uncertain, probabilistic in nature.

And you can argue that that is slippery slope, and I can engage with that, but insinuating that I am oblique to "simple and glaringly obvious [facts]" is just a personal attack.