The emergency braking system will automatically stop the car without your input whenever it wants. Judging from this thread, that could be due to anything. False positives have been reported. People should absolutely be able to turn this thing off if they don't trust it.
The proposed rules include false activation tests, monitoring/reporting of unnecessary braking, and NHTSA retains the ability to order recalls if false activations are unreasonably common. It also includes a request for comment on whether manual disablement should be allowed at high speeds. Feel free to submit one if you feel strongly about it.
Snow and gravel are the only valid situations where ABS can increase braking distance.
However, disabling ABS is still a really poor idea.
ABS increases braking distance in the snow because it allows the wheels to rotate so they can grip the road. ABS allowing your front wheels to rotate is why you have any marginal ability to steer and brake simultaneously. Without ABS in the snow your front wheels will lock while steering before your rears and you will lose control of the vehicle.
On top of that, disabling ABS usually disables the vehicle's entire suite of driver aids like traction control and stability control which are extremely helpful in snow.
I can't think of any situation, however contrived, where I would willingly disable ABS on a vehicle in snowy conditions... unless you were trying to slide a car around.
Note that these are all very niche concerns and I think ABS is a fantastic safety feature, but it's still a compromise to improve the averages. This is true of virtually all safety technology.
Absolutely not. There are other people on the road. Families. You don’t get to kill other people in a preventable accident because you believe you’re an above-average human who can outperform a computer.
> What if it being optional increases death statistics massively?
What else would you like to make mandatory to satisfy your death reduction statistics, I wonder? Vaccines?
Let's just go all the way: you're talking about eliminating human agency, autonomy and free will. You want to replace it with decisions made by committee with optimized outcomes and make them mandatory with force of law.
> Should we really be ideologically driven instead of relying on data and measurable effects?
Yes. Do you not have principles, values you won't compromise on?
The argument isn't that a human is better at avoiding accidents than an automated system, the argument is that, as an average human, I'm good enough and the marginal difference isn't worth the complexity and risk that the system introduces.
For another, the NPRM being discussed assumes that essentially 100% of new vehicles will eventually come with AEB systems in the near future. The proposed rulemaking is just formalizing that situation and setting performance standards.