[Akrapovic]

I completely disagree with the idea that a modern vehicle is "de-skilling" current drivers. Given that decades ago, a driving test involved driving up and down a runway and knowing the basic controls, and todays test is FAR more comprehensive, I don't think that's fair.

In 1960, there was some 6 million registered cars on British roads. There was also 8000 (!!) deaths in traffic collisions. In 2010 there was 30 million registered cars. There was under 2000 deaths. So there are 5 times more vehicles, but less than a quarter of the deaths.

Now you could argue that the vehicles being safer were the cause of the reduced deaths. So lets look at general accident statistics. In 1960 there was 341,000 injuries - this includes minor and slight injury. In 2010 there was 203,000, so a reduction of over a third. In 2013, there was 181,000, which is a further reduction of about one tenth in 3 years, with no major advancements in car technology.

So I do not agree with the suggestion that we're deskilling drivers. The statistics show the opposite where despite a massive increase in vehicle numbers, we're having less accidents than ever before, killing less people than ever, and putting people through a driving test which becomes more comprehensive every year. And this is before we start talking about todays information overload society. The idea that current drivers are worse is the lovely nostalgic feeling we get about the old days. It isn't reflected in the statistics at all.

I do not believe that an argument against self-driving cars should be the de-skilling argument. There are plenty of good pro/con arguments for the vehicles. I believe they have their place in the world, but it isn't in my garage.