Self-driving Waymo pulled over for illegal U-turn, officer has no one to ticket

Skye Jacobs

Posts: 1,998   +58
Staff
Facepalm: A recent traffic stop in California highlights the growing tension between rapidly advancing road technology and the traditional enforcement tools available to police. Until regulatory frameworks catch up, officers in California and elsewhere continue to encounter scenarios where autonomous vehicles operate outside the reach of existing laws.

Police in San Bruno found themselves at the center of a rapidly spreading online debate after pulling over a self-driving Waymo vehicle that made an illegal U-turn during a weekend traffic operation. The incident raised questions about how law enforcement should handle traffic violations committed by autonomous vehicles, which technically have no driver to cite.

According to the San Bruno Police Department, officers were stationed early Saturday morning for a DUI enforcement operation when the Waymo vehicle executed the illegal maneuver directly in front of them. Police managed to stop the car, but as Sgt. Scott Smithmatungol explained, there was no mechanism available to issue a traditional moving violation citation since current law requires a human driver or operator to be identified on the ticket. Parking violations can be left with an unattended vehicle, he said, but moving violations are written against individuals, not machines.

The department later recounted the encounter on Facebook in a post that drew more than 500 comments and fueled an online debate. Some residents criticized the force for not citing Waymo directly, while others asked for clarification on how officers got the vehicle to pull over in the first place. The post referred to the incident as a "glitch" and said Waymo had been contacted about the vehicle's behavior.

For now, officers have no authority to penalize a company in these situations. That is expected to change next year when a state law takes effect giving police the ability to report moving violations involving autonomous vehicles to the Department of Motor Vehicles. The DMV is still finalizing how those violations will be processed and what potential penalties could apply.

Waymo, a subsidiary of Alphabet, said it is examining the incident. Julia Ilina, a company spokesperson, told the Los Angeles Times that its autonomous vehicles are "closely monitored by regulators" and that the company remains committed to improving safety as part of its ongoing efforts to refine the technology.

The vehicles operate commercially in Phoenix, Los Angeles, San Francisco and surrounding areas, including the San Mateo County suburb of San Bruno, where the incident took place. With a population of around 40,000 residents and a police force of about 50 sworn officers, the San Bruno PD is significantly smaller than neighboring agencies, something Smithmatungol noted when describing the scale of attention the weekend stop drew nationwide.

"It blew up a lot bigger than we thought," he said in an interview with the Associated Press.

Permalink to story:

 
The simple solution is that the companies operating these self driving cars should be cited, and pay the same fines any human driver would for a similar infraction.

The impact a ticket has on a company, as a de facto regulatory fine, would be a fraction of the impact it has on a person.

It's why men like Steve Jobs routinely flouted traffic and parking laws. It was chump change so he broke the law on a daily basis going to work. From a cost-benefit analysis, he was right.

Back to Waymo, this creates a perverse incentive for them to err on the side of breaking traffic laws due to fines being a rounding error for their business. The fines must be much steeper if they will act like regular drivers.
 
The impact a ticket has on a company, as a de facto regulatory fine, would be a fraction of the impact it has on a person.

It's why men like Steve Jobs routinely flouted traffic and parking laws. It was chump change so he broke the law on a daily basis going to work. From a cost-benefit analysis, he was right.

Back to Waymo, this creates a perverse incentive for them to err on the side of breaking traffic laws due to fines being a rounding error for their business. The fines must be much steeper if they will act like regular drivers.
in some countries there is a points system besides the fines. So when you accumulate more than a threshold in a given interval your license gets suspended. I believe this system would work for autonomous vehicles also. As for the fine being too small, switzerland has income-based fines for serious offenses where the amount is determined by the offender's wealth (income, assets)
 
The points system where I live only applies to tickets issued to the driver. Whereas the automated speed camera tickets, for example, don't incur any points because it is not proven who was actually driving.
 
The points system where I live only applies to tickets issued to the driver. Whereas the automated speed camera tickets, for example, don't incur any points because it is not proven who was actually driving.

Yeah. I'm only taking about the US market (this occurred in CA and the rollouts in the US are occurring in major US cities). Otherwise we could get down a rabbit hole: Say, Chinese rollouts, etc...
 
The points system where I live only applies to tickets issued to the driver. Whereas the automated speed camera tickets, for example, don't incur any points because it is not proven who was actually driving.
That's a ridiculously trivial issue to fix - where I am, the registered owner of the vehicle is the default recipient of the fine and points, unless they declare which which specific other person was driving. It seems pretty self-evident that the owner of any vehicle should be the default responsible party
 
I have a solution. Everytime a self driving vehicle makes a mistake, impound it and make the company pay huge fees to pick it up.
 
Last edited:
Back