Both Subaru and Volvo -- and really any manufacturer you talk to, as long as it's not Audi with its self-driving car -- make it clear that they are not trying to take driving away from the driver. "If any system begins activation but the driver decides to steer away, you will not be in a fight with the vehicle," Kopstein said. "The car will release the brakes so you can maneuver out of the situation." Sullivan put it even more plainly: "We want you to drive the car."
So, if no one is trying to take away the driver's responsibility, why bother to have the car do the braking for you at all? Why not just beep or blink or, in the case of Cadillac, vibrate the seat to let you know you need to pay attention and drive the dang car?
Research says that a third of all reported collisions happen when a front bumper meets a rear bumper. And in half of those accidents, the driver of the rear car doesn't brake at all. So, apparently, we could use a little help in the braking department.
The IIHS determined that cars with automatic braking systems had between 14 and 27 percent fewer insurance claims for damage to cars, depending on the system. And that was for 2010 cars, which is practically the dark ages for these systems.
Besides, automatic braking doesn't operate alone. It's part of more comprehensive systems that include throttle management, lane departure warnings, adaptive cruise control and other safety systems. And the technology is only getting better, with better cameras and sensors. As the technology moves forward (EyeSight and City Safety are both already on their third generation), it'll get cheaper, and as it gets cheaper, it'll be in more cars, which benefits everyone. Even the woman in the muumuu driving the Humvee.