Tesla drivers say new FSD update is repeatedly running red lights

Technical behavior & failures

• Multiple anecdotes of recent FSD versions running red lights, ignoring school bus stop arms, mis-handling stop signs, and in at least one case striking a curb hard enough to damage wheels.
• Some commenters argue that even if no collision occurs, running red lights or entering bike lanes is inherently unsafe.
• Others ask whether FSD is actually clearing red lights only when “safe” (no cross-traffic), but are pushed back on the idea that this can ever be considered acceptable behavior.

Safety vs human drivers & data transparency

• Several participants ask how FSD safety compares statistically to human drivers.
• Repeated point: Tesla does not release the detailed, methodologically clear safety data needed to make this comparison.
• Tesla is accused of cherry‑picking numbers, omitting base rates and confidence intervals, and previously promoting misleading safety stats, whereas Waymo is cited as publishing more rigorous analyses.
• One commenter who has used FSD heavily claims it is “orders of magnitude less safe” than an average human and would be deadly without close supervision; others contest this based on their own positive experiences.

User experiences & expectations

• Some Tesla owners say FSD trials were impressive on good days but still produced sudden dangerous mistakes, making it more stressful than helpful.
• A number of buyers of FSD feel misled about promised capabilities and timelines, describing the purchase as a waste or “party trick.”
• A smaller group reports long trips (hundreds to thousands of miles) mostly on FSD and considers it a “game changer,” insisting critics underestimate its current capability.

Legal responsibility & regulation

• Consensus that under current law the human driver receives any ticket and bears primary liability, since FSD is officially Level 2.
• Some argue the manufacturer should share or assume liability once the system is marketed as self‑driving; Mercedes’ limited‑scope Level 3 system is cited as an example of a company taking responsibility.
• Concerns are raised that owners pay for damage and higher insurance premiums caused by FSD mistakes, while Tesla bears little direct cost.

Comparisons with other systems

• Waymo is repeatedly contrasted as more conservative and statistically better documented, with some pedestrians and cyclists saying they feel safer around Waymo vehicles.
• Others note Waymo’s own failures (wrong‑way driving, hitting a pole, a bike crash) and question the degree of hidden remote human oversight.
• Disengagement data: Waymo reports to California DMV and shows far more miles per intervention than community‑reported Tesla FSD numbers, though environments and definitions differ.

Level 2 vs “Full Self‑Driving” branding

• Many emphasize that Tesla’s FSD is legally and practically SAE Level 2 and requires constant supervision.
• Several argue the “Full Self‑Driving” name and past promises (e.g., near‑term Level 5, cross‑country sleeping) are misleading or fraudulent.
• Others counter that, if treated as advanced driver assistance rather than autonomy, FSD can be a useful though imperfect aid.