Wow. This is a tough one, as the technology currently stands. The cop says driving with Google Glass is the same (by the code) as watching TV or texting while driving. She says the Glass goggles were turned off (and, even if they weren't, might have had a GPS map thrown on them, which would be legal).
I think she can fight the ticket, to be honest, since the cop was unable to establish the state of the goggles at the time. But it does raise a whole new set of questions about what can — and what should — drivers with heads-up glasses do while driving? I mean, there's no doubt in my mind that they could easily be distracting as a mobile phone, but there are distinct uses (that GPS/map idea) where they could be quite legitimately helpful.
Reshared post from +George Wiman
Driving while wearing Google Glass: what do you think?
Traffic ticket for Glass wearer
56 view(s)
I don't think on or off should be an issue. I know they're cool and everything but why wear them if they're off? Personally, I do believe some people are capable of multi-tasking to the point of being able to use Google Glass, smartphones, watch TV, etc, while driving, but most aren't up to the challenge. Most aren't even capable of driving safely while tuning the radio.
For that reason, I don't believe there should be any exceptions, including maps. Pull over to check the map because, again, most people aren't up to the challenge of looking at a map and driving.
Don't mean to sound like an old stick-in-the-mud fart but I lost a friend because of an idiot texting while driving. Years ago, I had another friend end up in the hospital because she was looking for a CD to listen to while behind the wheel. That's why I say most aren't up to the challenge. People need to stick with just driving when they're driving, Distractions cost lives.
+Marty Shaw You are certainly correct that distractions cause lives. And that goes everywhere from eating to drinking to fumbling with a CD change to checking the GPS to talking on the phone (hands-free or not) to texting (ditto). Study after study shows that people suck at multi-tasking in this way, and reaction time and hazard perception go way down, no matter what the subjective sense is.
That all said, the utility of some of these things can also be quite high. Unless we're going to get rid of radios and speakers and cup holders and built-in GPS systems, some level of distraction will exist. The question becomes at what point the risk to the public becomes too high — as well as at what point do we legislate beyond the expectation of compliance.
That's true. Some level of distraction will always exist, and I think cops, judges, and lawmakers are about have an even harder time than usual with their jobs because some common sense will have to be applied… and that's in short supply at times. Technology is growing at such a fast rate that laws on paper simply can't keep up. And by the time a new law is put on the books, technology will have already come out with something new.
Was the officer in this scenario in the right? I guess it will be up to judges and lawyers to decide. Personally, I'd hate to work in law enforcement at this time because there are lots of gray areas to address when it comes to tech and driving.
And speaking of technology, some higher-end autos are working on (and might already have; not sure) a heads-up display that appears on the windshield. To me, that's not much different that what Glass offers, so another wrinkle gets added to the situation. Car makers won't be thrilled if one of their perks suddenly becomes illegal and that door could be opened if Glass is deemed a distraction.
I was worried about this until I got my Glass. Once I tried them out for a while, including while driving, I realized that it is less distracting than an in-car GPS.
They are specifically designed to be out of your line of vision and non-distracting. The only thing that is obscured at all by the block is part of my car's ceiling. When using them for navigation, my eyes only have to shift for a split second, and even then the road is still in my vision. Part of what folks don't know is that the focus point of glass is actually 7 ft in front of you (i.e. you don't have to focus on something an inch away). So, not only do my eyes not move as far from the road as looking at a GPS, radio, or cup holder, my focus doesn't have to change as much and it is faster to refocus on the road.
Why is everyone ignoring the fact that she was SPEEDING and That is why she was pulled over? The glass was just the icing on the cake just as if she hasn't been wearing a seatbelt. How is the cop to know if the glass wad turned off or no? No proof. She was stupid enough to exceed the speed limit by quite a bit, who says the glass was really off?
+Zay Inked I'm not ignoring it, I'm saying there should be no added fine. Even if Glass was on and she was using it for navigation, there should be no extra fine.
+Zay Inked I don't mind her getting fined for speeding. In fact, I applaud it.
But simply having Glass-es on should not incur an additional fine, if they are off or being used as a navigation device; simply wearing them is not a prima facie case that she was doing the equivalent of "watching TV".
I think it's in the vein of places banning glass wearing inside. No entrance if you have glass on because they can't be sure if it's on or not.
I think that's a bit different, +Zay Inked — especially if there's an exception on the books for navigational aids (as Glass can be). If they want to pass a law banning wearable HUDs, then they can do so — assuming without such a law that wearing such a thing means it's being used in an illegal fashion is unreasonable.
I also feel that any place banning entrance while wear glass is stupid unless it is a place that is also going to ban all cell phones (and now, watches).