backtop


Print 64 comment(s) - last by eBob.. on Jan 24 at 9:54 AM

Google Glass ticket tossed due to lack of evidence

At times new technology not only creates a rush of similar products, but it can cause issues for the early adopters. Just look at the confusion among some businesses and even local authorities having to do with the Google Glass wearable computing device. One restaurant in Seattle has already banned people from wearing Google Glass devices inside and makes no apologies for doing so.
 
A woman in California was issued a traffic citation while driving and wearing her Google glass device back in October. The woman was initially pulled over for speeding and was then issued a ticket for using a “visual monitor” in her car while driving.
 
The highway patrol officer said that wearing Google Glass was a violation of state law, but the woman vowed to fight that ticket and took it to court. A San Diego court commissioner dismissed the ticker this Thursday after it was found that the officer had no proof that the device was operating at the time she was pulled over.

 
"There is no testimony it was operating or in use while Ms. Abadie was driving," the commission stated during the hearing.
 
Another reason for the dismissal is that an expert didn’t appear to testify that the device had been calibrated.
 
The officer who issued the ticket for speeding and for wearing Google Glass noted that he initially wasn’t going to cite the driver for wearing the glasses, however, he noted, "She got a little argumentative about whether or not it was legal for her to wear them."

Source: Reuters



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Glass should be banned while driving!!!!!!
By BillyBatson on 1/17/2014 6:04:08 PM , Rating: 0
You are clearly the one with a mental disability here.
First off Wearable technology is rapidly becoming commonplace. If you're going to ban Glass, why not under the same breath ban all prescription glasses and contact lenses while behind the wheel? I am sorry but when did prescription glasses and contact lenses become wearable technology? Why would we ban those they aren't distracting and they AID vision which is needed for driving.

Let me see did crime rates go down from not being allowed to have loaded guns in reach... hmmmm.... and you call me the moron LOL you're just absolutely ridiculous. I would actually argue and say that there would be more crime, even if a small percentage more, if this laws did not exist. Ever heard of road-rage? thank you.

I am not advocating the loss of all freedoms. But if studies show that txting while driving is more dangerous than neutral than sorry it should be banned, and glass is the same thing if not worse because it is always in your field of vision and ready to use. Should driving under the influence be legal too then? was your right to be drunk behind the wheel taken away from you? I also don't care about you or you protecting yourself you can go drive into a wall while looking at your phone for all I care. No, these laws are to protect me from idiots like you just as much as they are there to protect you from yourself. So go kill yourself already before you hurt someone else.


RE: Glass should be banned while driving!!!!!!
By Reclaimer77 on 1/17/2014 6:27:30 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
and glass is the same thing if not worse because it is always in your field of vision and ready to use.


Do you understand how a HUD works? Comparing Google Glass to texting is idiotic. Ever wonder why avionics systems use HUD's? Because you never have to take your eyes away from where you are going and what you are doing!

quote:
I am not advocating the loss of all freedoms.


No not all at once. You'll just justify the loss of each one individually for whatever nanny state Nazi reason you can think up.

There wasn't a SINGLE case of an accident caused by Google Glass when this law was made. You Liberals make everything a goddamn APOCALYPSE!! We're sick of it.


By Monkey's Uncle on 1/18/2014 10:23:59 AM , Rating: 1
It depends on proving what you are doing with the glass that makes it distracting or not or even enforceable. That is exactly where the legality question comes in.

The charge was dropped because the cop could not prove that the device was even powered on. It is not against that state law to wear google glass while driving. It is (supposedly) against the state law to USE google glass while driving.

And there is no way on earth that a cop can make a charge like that stick. Ever. Unless the glasshole is stupid enough to actually admit they were using it (I suppose there will be a few morons like that out there).


By Piiman on 1/18/2014 12:48:52 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe if you quit blaming everything you don't like on Liberals you'll feel better.


By Divide Overflow on 1/18/2014 2:53:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Do you understand how a HUD works? Comparing Google Glass to texting is idiotic. Ever wonder why avionics systems use HUD's? Because you never have to take your eyes away from where you are going and what you are doing!

HUD avionics provide pilots with information to aid their ability to FLY. Automotive HUDs give drivers information to aid their ability to DRIVE. They don't display web browser, email, texting, etc. which distract the users focus on their primary task, DRIVING.


By Rukkian on 1/20/2014 1:17:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Automotive HUDs give drivers information to aid their ability to DRIVE.


And GG can do the same exact thing. Again, the issue should not be Google Glass, or any other device, it should just be distracted driving, which is already in the books as a law. If you are distracted while driving, you should get a ticket. Just having a device available does not mean it is distracting.

Why the need to make new laws just because a new distraction comes out? What happens when Apple comes out with one, new law, now Samsung comes out with theirs - new law, now google makes a new one and calls it Google HUD - new law etc etc. Why make potentially 1000's of new laws, when it all already falls under distracted driving?


By ritualm on 1/17/2014 7:51:10 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I am sorry but when did prescription glasses and contact lenses become wearable technology? Why would we ban those they aren't distracting and they AID vision which is needed for driving.

Precisely why Glass should be allowed to be worn while driving. While you insist that it causes the driver to be distracted, the rest of us can rightly argue that it is a driving aid.
quote:
Let me see did crime rates go down from not being allowed to have loaded guns in reach... hmmmm....

No answer? Figured as much.
quote:
I would actually argue and say that there would be more crime, even if a small percentage more, if this laws did not exist.

That law did squat to lower crime rates. Were criminals and gang members ever prevented from driving while carrying fully loaded firearms on their hands? Nope. Meanwhile, ordinary civilians are denied yet another method to protect themselves when sh!t really hits the fan.
quote:
Ever heard of road-rage?

So what? You'll still have road rage even if CA gave the US Constitution the middle finger and banned all citizens in the state from owning and using firearms, and you'll still have people dying from road rage with the ban in place.
quote:
I am not advocating the loss of all freedoms.

That's what every supporter of the Nanny-state mentality claims on their opening arguments. Nope, not buying your book of lies.
quote:
I also don't care about you or you protecting yourself

Therein lies your entire argument for banning Glass. You believe we don't have the right, capacity, and ability to protect ourselves from danger.
quote:
these laws are to protect me from idiots like you just as much as they are there to protect you from yourself

As claimed by the "idiot" who thinks the powers that be have fully sanctioned rights to dictate what we can/not do while driving a motorized vehicle.
quote:
You are clearly the one with a mental disability here.

You have the mental faculty of a Westboro Church supporter. Rage harder.


"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki