I specifically mean that Arizona chose to allow self-driving cars on their roads with little regulation and that lack of regulation contributed to the death of a pedestrian.
Yea, I'm really splitting hairs at this point, but you can't use the Uber incident this month as evidence to support the claim that "regulation is good". You could use the incident as evidence that "Arizona's regulation is not good".
We _can_ support the claim "regulation is good" by pointing to other states that did regulation right and seeing how their fatality rates are better than Arizona's.
But yes, I agree with the spirit of the statement, Arizona needs better regulation, and it seems pretty clear that "regulation is good" in this case.
