Driver Gets Ticket for Driving While Wearing Google Glasses

[BraveSirRobbin]

Just saw this on the news and thought it would be of interest to some of our membership as there was talk previously of some early adopters of Google Glasses. (California Highway Patrol)
 
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/driver-plans-fight-ticket-driving-google-glass

 

[pete_c]

Thanks BSR!
 
Interesting what will be the outcome of bringing new technology and connectivity on demand wherever and whatever you are doing.
 
Today; in downtown Chicago; a quick look; you will see some XX% of individuals walking around sort of absentmindedly looking down at their PDA phones; walking oblivious to their surroundings ....which is not always a good thing....it used to be just the conversations on the cell phones; or using blue tooth to talk....the questions and the answers will provide some lively discussions....

 

[IndyMike]

The report indicated that the Lady in question was pulled over on CA 15 while driving 80 in a 65 zone.  I've driven the 15 quite a bit over the years.  Much like the 294 in Chicago or the 465 in Indy, traffic moves at anywhere from 5 mph to 80 depending on conditions.  Under good conditions, CHP will not even glance at a person traveling 80 (you're moving with traffic).  In order to get pulled over you need to be
A) Moving much faster than surrounding traffic
B) Doing something stupid.
 
Given the above, the officer had every right to be suspicous of some sort of distraction or impairment.  He saw the glasses.  Given that headphones and earbuds are illegal in CA (even on a bicycle), I can't concieve of anyone thinking that Google glasses would not be.  Audio impairment is a "sometimes" problem.  Visual distraction is constant.
 
I haven't always agreed with the CHP, but I'm sollidly behind them on this one.
 
Regardless, the lady in question has managed to achive celebrity status.  Perhaps that was her intent all along...

 

[sda]

Update.  Ticket dismissed because "there wasn’t enough proof that Cecilia Abadie was operating the computerized glasses while behind the wheel."
ttp://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/jan/16/google-glass-goes-to-trial/
 
Anyway, look for more nanny laws because of this.
 
More from the illustrious California lawmakers:
"As of January 1, students in California public schools have been able to choose whether to use the boys’ rest room or girls’ rest room, as well as the girls’ locker room or boys’ locker room, based on whether they feel female or male, not whether they are anatomically female or male."
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/01/14/all-wrong-in-california-girls-can-use-urinals-in-boys-restroom/
I'd say "unbelievable", but it is California after all.

 

[tmbrown97]

I live in CA - things sometimes go too far.  For instance - saw lots of these this last week:
http://safechemicalpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/disney_prop65.jpg

 

[neillt]

Well, to be fair Prop 65 had the right idea... the problem is that now we just plaster signs and stickers on everything saying "This might be bad for you... this is your prop 65 warning".
 
Labeling everything as potentially toxic is cheaper than even one law suit by an ambulance chaser.