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 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?


"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson














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