This feels like the same flawed catastrophizing logic I see with anti-car movements like Vision Zero or discussions about coronavirus lockdowns - emphasis on negative outcomes and fear mongering without consideration of the positives or benefits that we are trading off against. Driving is a great convenience that saves us time by getting us directly from point A to point B quickly. It has a low rate of serious injuries and fatalities. The unregulated driver assistance tech from Tesla may have flaws and drawbacks that result in some rate of injuries and fatalities, but overall it reduces the rate of negative outcomes tremendously. Isn’t that proof enough that it’s a net positive? Why is regulation here a good thing when it may increase costs and inhibit the fast path to innovation we get otherwise?

To me this sounds like an unproven and spurious claim that regulation will offer more benefit relative to letting a company like Tesla innovate freely. I don’t buy it, and it feels like they’re trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist.