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

By ritualm on 1/17/2014 7:51:10 PM , Rating: 3
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.
Let me see did crime rates go down from not being allowed to have loaded guns in reach... hmmmm....

No answer? Figured as much.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You are clearly the one with a mental disability here.

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

"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki