Let's say for sake of simplicity that the system can reduce the risk with 50%. Under normal driving conditions when the risk of hitting somebody is say 0.0001%, you instead get 0.00005%, that can't be bad. If you provoke the system by actively aiming at a human you by definition have 100% risk of collision without the system, with it you have 50% of 100%=50%, I wouldn't want to be that pedestrian, even if the system could reduce down to 1%.
Autonomous drive on the other hand, you give the car control, as opposed to the car taking it from you (because you have been a bad driver). If you give the car control then you should know the systems limitations and which responsibilities you are giving away. What is control anyway? Is cruise control a half-assed version of autonomous drive or not?
Any victim should be dealing with.
Either a car is fully autonomous and carries the same liability and associated penalties as a car driven by a human or it might as well not exist.
Doing this half-assed is worse than doing nothing in my opinion, drivers that get to point at their car and say 'it wasn't me' is not an option.