Firing a toy firearm from a camera‑covered driverless taxi while minors were drinking would inevitably end badly.
A couple of teenagers were detained by San Mateo law enforcement earlier this week after a Waymo representative alerted authorities that the vehicle’s underage riders were consuming alcohol and firing what looked like a real weapon from the autonomous car.
A Waymo staff member, who was watching the vehicle’s live interior feeds, contacted the San Mateo Police Department upon witnessing the youths discharge a toy water-bead blaster that resembled a real gun, according to NBC Bay Area. Waymo provided the police with the car’s location and shut the vehicle down after informing the occupants that it was “experiencing mechanical trouble,” as reported by the police.
To inject a touch of humor into what could have been a more serious episode, the police department opened its recap on Facebook with the line, “Parents, do you know where your teens are? @waymo does!”
While the lighthearted post drew mostly favorable responses in the comments, some readers used it to question privacy in the era of autonomous transport. Irina Raicu, director of the Internet Ethics program at Santa Clara University, told NPR that the post could make Waymo passengers wonder what triggers police intervention. At the same time, Alessandro Acquisti, a professor of information technology at MIT, told the outlet that Waymo may not be fully candid with customers about how its data are used.
Nevertheless, framing the case as a privacy dispute risks obscuring how Waymo operates and what is expected of customers.
Access to a Waymo ride requires proximity to the vehicle. With the two teens aged 14 and 15, respectively, they would not ordinarily qualify to use Waymo unless they misrepresented their ages or the trip was booked under a different account.
Both scenarios breach Waymo’s terms of service, meaning the company would have grounds to terminate the ride under its policies.
Waymo’s rules also ban “drug or alcohol use” and “weapons of any kind” in its vehicles and remind riders that weapons may not be brought into the car. Waymo does not hide the fact that its cars are equipped with cameras and microphones that serve as the driver’s “eyes and ears.” Its data policy notes that the company may use cameras to ensure in‑car rules are followed or to review footage under certain circumstances, including live video during a trip.
Ultimately, it is a matter of choice. By selecting Waymo, the two youths agreed to comply with its policies.
It’s understandable for some to push back against the company for allegedly mischaracterizing the vehicle’s condition to justify detaining them. But as Jeanine Luna, a police department spokesperson, told the Associated Press, the teens were not “locked in” and could leave the vehicle at any moment. Given every chance to exit, the pair likely waited for Waymo to address the issue before continuing their joyride.
The incident might have unfolded very differently if the youths had been driving themselves. Instead, Waymo’s technology helped defuse the situation. Absent autonomous driving—which has an excellent safety record—the tale of two intoxicated teenagers driving and firing from a car window could have ended in tragedy.
Authorities ultimately released the teens to their parents without filing charges, though NBC reports that investigators are still weighing whether additional charges are warranted.
One can hardly fault Waymo for drawing a line at a customer’s deliberate disregard for policy and common sense when they choose to enact a Grand Theft Auto–style fantasy inside one of its cars.
