Ticket

Making the rounds this overnight is a Google+ post from one Cecilia Abadie, who received a ticket for wearing Google Glass while driving. She puts it thusly:

A cop just stopped me and gave me a ticket for wearing Google Glass while driving! The exact line says: Driving with Monitor visible to Driver (Google Glass).

That's not actually why Abadie was stopped, it appears — unless Google Glass caused her to break the speed limit. And folks are trying to argue that Glass falls under the exemptions for that particular California law anyway.

I think they're wrong, but I also think the discussion needs to be had.

Anyhoo, get used to seeing more stories like this. As with any new technology, there will be growing pains. We adapt as societies when new technologies become commonplace. And still very much in the early stages of wearables. And it's worth noting that Google Glass is very much not a consumer product yet.

 
There are 213 comments

TaiwanTeddy says:

If she was pulled over for speeding, then the cop is being nice. I would rather take this than a speeding ticket.

ilongbored says:

She still got the speeding ticket as well.

jfriend33 says:

This is silly. This is just some other attempt at bad PR. Remember those bars in washington banning customers from entering while wearing GG?

I'm sorry but I don't see as how GG would be any more of a distraction than having a cell phone. I think a visual overlay of who is calling vs having to look over to a handset is MUCH safer. Now if you were driving in traffic and got bored and wanted to delve into all of GG's features then we may have a problem. Still, no more distracting then a heads up display, a GPS unit, or a phone.

LAME LAME LAME!

meyerweb says:

What's lame is thinking it's safe to drive with something other than your surroundings in your field of vision. If there's any moving content on the Glass display, it can't help but distract your attention from the road. The brain is hard-wired to pay attention to motion.

Even if that weren't true, there's no way to know what the driver is seeing in Glass. Is it a static screen that only pops up if you get a call? Or is s/he reading text messages? Browsing the forums on AC? Watching a video? Any of the above is dangerous, and I don't want that person anywhere near me on the road.

When you're piloting a 3,000 lb or greater missile at speed, surrounded by other cars, motorcycles, bicycles, pedestrians, you need to pay attention to the F'ing road, not your phone calls, text messages or movies.

Frankly, I think anyone who causes, or fails to avoid, an accident while engaged in any online activity while driving a car should get a mandatory 1 year jail sentence for the first offense, 5 years for the second. An idiot talking on her cell phone came within about 24 inches of killing me a few years ago.

wsmather says:

Just today I heard a car horn near my house and looked up to see a car run a two-way stop sign. As the car with the right of way skidded to a stop to avoid her, she went on through the intersection, still yammering away on the phone. Really!?

abbott says:

Apparently meyerweb has not been in a new car with navigation in the last ten years.

Glass is no different than using built in voice command that comes with virtually every manufacturers' navigation system...you have to press a button to activate, say a command, and take your eyes off the road to glance at the screen for available options, then press a button and say another command. If anything, Glass is less distracting because the display is closer to your line of sight for driving than most radio and nav displays, and Google now voice recognition is more accurate than any built in system, plus it's always listening, so no need to press any buttons.

Even if the driver was texting, I'm sure glad she wasn't staring down at the steering wheel tapping away on a touch screen. Do you even know how glass works? Most commands don't require you to look at the screen at all. "Okay Glass, navigate to the nearest Walgreen's" three seconds later Glass says, "Navigating... In 1,000 feet, take a right onto University Parkway"

I would rather drive on a road with every driver wearing Glass than a road with just one driver texting on a normal phone. The reality is that 99% of us know our limits because, hello, we are putting ourselves at danger also. Any driver that wrecks because they were distracted, was a complete nut job to begin with, didn't have the ability to judge their mental capacity, and they were never safe on the road in the first place, in-car tech or not.

mwara244 says:

Not to mention the tablet sized monitors they put in the front dashboard on vehicles now with internet as well that have navigation and other apps. Plus I'd like to know How the cop is going to prove that GG was even turned on and being used. I'm sure there is a sleep mode to help save battery power.

When I was 16 I got pulled over for wear headphones while I drove in 91 because my 65 mustang I restored didnt have a stereo or speakers. The cop was nice and only gave me a warning and explained how it could impend my hearing of traffic or possibly a train. I should him they were cheap headphones and didn't have enough power to silence the outside world.

Frank John says:

Actually, it's impossible to drive by paying attention exclusively to your field of vision. There will always be screens/gauges/lights/alarms seeking your attention while you drive.
Some manufacturers even were innovative enough to place vital information on the windscreen so you can keep your head up. This data is an overlay to the field of view beyond the vehicle one is controlling.
Whether it's a car, truck or stealth fighter one has to pay attention to the information given.
Personally I don’t see Google Glass a distraction like a cellphone since the display is only a small portion of the field of view.

Jake Boone says:

Wrong. You're not supposed to be fucking with your phone while driving anyway that includes looking to see who is calling. We managed to get a long just fine on the road without cell phones there is not reason not to today. Having something right above your eye takes your eye of the road. Heads up displays and GPS units are situated just so that when you're scanning the roads or left and right they are part of the scenery therefore less intrusive. These things will go the way of the segway and bluetooth headset. That's a fact.

"Distracted Driving" and "Driving while using a mobile device" are laws in many states. There is more than enough proof that driving while talking/texting/viewing a phone or tablet can have serious consequences, usually for innocent drivers just trying to get home or to work, etc. There are VERY FEW reasons to be on the phone while driving. It can wait.

return_0 says:

She wasn't using a phone...

Posted from my pure Google Nexus 4 using the AC app.

NoNexus says:

She was using a mobile device, you cannot use your laptop while driving and this is the same principle

----------------------------------------------------
My S-Pen went through hell to deliver this important message to you

Cory S says:

I haven't used glass. But it seems like a floating HUD could be safer than an in dash GPS system for directions.

NoNexus says:

In dash gps talks

----------------------------------------------------
My S-Pen went through hell to deliver this important message to you

So does Google glass...

jmbburg26 says:

Many new cars have a HUD that projects onto the windshield. How is that different?

Posted via T-Mo N3

Mo ZedEl says:

This.

Posted via Glade Air Freshener

DenverRalphy says:

A HUD on the windshield can be ignored when the situation warrants. An image beamed into your eye, not so much.

AnonGuyy says:

I created an account just to reply to your stupid comment.

A Google Glass headset features an image "beamed" into a prism, which then distorts the image in a way to make it look farther away so you can have an actual veiwable image. Also, the Google Glass headset is adjustable, but not so much as to be able to have it directly in front of your eye. To view the image, you must look up and to the left. Not to mention, mostly anything can be done via voice commands on Google Glass.

Either way, anything that is between your eyes and the road can be a potential distraction. No matter how out of the way it is.

A small image I can barely see is easier to ignore than a large image on the WINDSHIELD of a car. To me at least.

prlundberg says:

You can't watch a movie or follow twitter on your car's HUD.

+∞

Daf L says:

You can break a window using a brick - should bricks be banned?

You can shoot and kill someone with a gun, should guns be banned in the USA?

prlundberg says:

Funny you should mention guns. They of course are not banned here in the US nor as a gun owner myself do I feel they should be.

However they are heavily regulated. Just as driving is.

Likewise, if you glued that brick to your windshield, it would be a violation.

Nobody here that I'm aware of has suggested Google Glasses should be banned completely.

Daf L says:

The point I was getting at is based upon the reaction that people will/might use GG to watch a movie on it while driving therefore they shouldn't be allowed.

You can use almost anything stupidly or dangerously but you have to rely that people won't do that most of the time.

You could easily place a smartphone on your dashboard and watch a movie but I have never heard of that being an issue.

GG in car could actually make driving safer, using HUD to alert of hazards, traffic problems, car warnings and sensors, approaching emergency vehicles, Simple GPS navigations, Augmented reality alerts if you are driving too close to a vehicle, instant alerts if an animal or child is about to run out in the road etc...

However, it should be banned in cars just in case someone one day thinks watching a movie while driving is a good idea?

If you want your government to decide every step of your life what you can and can't do because you are not capable of deciding for yourself what is sensible and safe then that is up to you. Next you will have all cars speed limited based on your GPS location and making you have a mandatory stop every 2 hours for a ten minute rest. I would prefer just to use my common-sense.

prlundberg says:

Google Glass doesn't do those things you say would be of benefit. It's not even a consumer product yet. So that's a moot point.

Stop making ridiculous assumptions of how I feel government should work or what should be banned. You imply you personally have good commen sense. Use it. This is obviously something that is so new and rare that no lawmakers have even considered what, if any, regulations should be put in place regarding it. In the meantime, it does block vision so the officer was justified in issuing the ticket.

No need to make everything into a "government is out to get me" rant.

iowabeakster says:

This^^

--edit, someone reponded before i did

So strongly this. The driving safety benefits that this has the potential to bring are so immense, that I could go on indefinitely about it. It is so vastly superior to the stand-alone gps, or basic smart phone for GPS for safety reasons that it cannot be understated.

If you live where it snows, how many times have you seen the snow caked onto the road signs and been unable to read them... problem solved.

Maybe you simply missed that school zone because of heavy rain downpour... problem solved.

Maybe there is a hail storm dropping golfball sized projectiles at the earth 3 miles down the road...

Like I said, I could go on forever about this. And here's the thing, you don't need to buy a seventy thousand dollar luxury land yacht either. It would be affordable, and upgradeable and work just as well in 1989 corolla with 300K miles as it would in a Telsa...

Everyone could know their current speed (and the speed limit), without ever diverting their eyes from the road. One of the most common things that diverts people's eyes from the road (and required for safe driving) could be eliminated entirely.

That said, I am talking about the *potential* of google glass, not its current capabilities. So yeah lady, take them off. Although the officer did misapply the screened device law. Google glass is not a screen, it is a HUD. And let's give our police officers comprehension tests before setting them loose trying to enforce the laws.

prlundberg says:

Screen is a generic term. It pretty much encompasses anything a moveable image is displayed on. Google Glass does project the image onto a screen on the glasses. HUD stands for Heads Up Display, and "display" is interchageable with "screen" in any electronic device I've ever used. I don't think any court would consider otherwise.

brendilon says:

Your rationale is so far beyond awful I'm left at a complete loss for how to mock you.

meyerweb says:

But you can't ACCIDENTALLY throw a brick through a window because you're not paying attention. And if you accidentally shoot someone you most likely will go to jail.

wsmather says:

Way to conflate one thing with another...

zhecht says:

Did you actually read the law? The law exempts vehicle information displays, GPS displays, rear/side cameras, and multifunction displays that limit themselves to the above functions while driving. Therefore the HUD is okay.

However, the law only exempts them if they are INSTALLED in the vehicle -- it doesn't exempt those devices if they are in your hand or on your head.

icebike says:

Your car HUD will never show you anything but speed and turn arrows for navigation.

Who knows what cat videos she may have been watching while driving, or what email she may have been reading. She was over the speed limit, so she certainly wasn't reading the speed signs.

Glassholes are just going to have to learn that there are places they have to disconnect from the Borg.

David Horgan says:

And you make a good point. That is a time and a place to check your Facebook. While driving is not.

Posted via Android Central App

franky_402 says:

Who says she wasn't just speeding to speed. Doesn't mean she was using gg for something. Have you never drover faster than the speed limit?

Posted via Android Central App

icebike says:

The word is Driven.

I believe in the NASA theory of speeding tickets.

They once denied an applicant for astronaut training based on speeding tickets. When he raised the issue, they told him, they didn't care how fast he drives, but they expected an astronaut to be observant enough not to get caught.

franky_402 says:

I don't know how I missed that one. I've never used the word drover before lol. Need to start proofreading from now on

Posted via Android Central App

wsmather says:

Your use wasn't that far off, but you'd need to be driving cattle to qualify. :)

Jake Boone says:

It's different in the fact that you are still focusing on the road. When you have a piece of glass hovering above your eye you're not. It's not quantum physics. Anything displayed on the windshield of a car is part of what you are looking at when you are scanning the road therefore not in the way. You would have to actually take focus of the road to look at google glass. That's the difference. That is why they are already pushing to make them illegal and I believe already are in some states.

Jake Boone says:

It's different in the fact that you are still focusing on the road. When you have a piece of glass hovering above your eye you're not. It's not quantum physics. Anything displayed on the windshield of a car is part of what you are looking at when you are scanning the road therefore not in the way. You would have to actually take focus of the road to look at google glass. That's the difference. That is why they are already pushing to make them illegal and I believe already are in some states.

David Horgan says:

You make a really good point.

Posted via Android Central App

VoltaicShock says:

Cops use laptops in their cars.

Cops also blow red lights when unnecessary.

Posted via Android Central App

KoreyTM says:

lol yup. With great power comes great dickishness.

alexlam24 says:

You forgot the part where they let a man get beaten by bikers and just stand by doing nothing.

Posted via Android Central App

prlundberg says:

You know, I just read the other day about a woman murdering her husband.

Which has as much to do with this story as these two comments.

wsmather says:

LOL!

prlundberg says:

You also can't drive a semi or motorcycle without the appropriate license. That doesn't mean you would be justified to do so without one.

ScottJ says:

Non sequitur

prlundberg says:

Laptops in cars is a job requirement for police, and they are trained to be more highly skilled drivers while dealing with distractions.

Not claiming it's safe, just that the original comparison is flawed.

ScottJ says:

No amount of training can make you a good drive while operating a laptop. Having one visible is one thing. Actively using one at speed is unsafe no matter who does it.

prlundberg says:

I didn't claim any different. But training can make you better at multitasking while driving than the average driver. And it depends greatly on whan and what you are doing on that laptop. I won't assume to know how exactly they are used.

icebike says:

The point is that cops DON'T do that while driving. (They used to, but its becoming very rare due to law suits).

The passenger seat cop might, but not the driver.

Download the free Scanner Radio app, and listen to any big city police broadcasts. You will often hear them read a license plate to the dispatch and ask to have that car's registration pushed to his screen. He's following some car, and not allowed to be typing while driving, so they use screen push technology.

This is a big issue in Texas recently, and because of crashes, most departments are putting technology in place to prevent typing while driving.

Google: police typing while driving
and you will see most of the hits are about banning this, either by policy or by technology.

ScottJ says:

No. His point that they were trained and thus could do things with technology that the rest of us can't.

I love it when people say "The actual point is..." and then proceed to miss the point altogether accompanied by some lame straw man argument.

wsmather says:

Wow, interesting. And germane, despite the comment above mine.

dcjose48 says:

+1

Posted via Android Central App

Johnny Z says:

Can I consider the 2 years of having a carPC, without getting in an accident, training?

Posted via my Nexus 6 running 4.5 Lima Bean

ScottJ says:

Only if you think anecdotal evidence is useful.

I have a penis and have never contacted an STD. It doesn't mean I'm immune.

talz13 says:

Brings back fond memories of this wonderful product:

http://www.amazon.com/AutoExec-Wheelmate-Steering-Attachable-Surface/pro...

phor11 says:

Yet car companies continue to build bigger and bigger touchscreen monitors into the center console that play movies, let you surf the internet, etc...

icebike says:

You won't find a single one of these that allows any of that while in motion.

After market, sure, but not from the dealer.

And you also get a ticket if the officer sees any motion on your screen other than a navigation app while you are in motion.

alexlam24 says:

They're too busy eating donuts.

Posted via Android Central App

prlundberg says:

As opposed, I suppose, to the lazy moo cows of modern America officers have to physically prove themselves able to protect?

droidhead_1 says:

Take it you never had one cause you can't do anything once you're driving

Posted via Android Central App

semahjiscool says:

Not really true because i can use mine while driving, and no its not aftermarket

return_0 says:

I suppose they're going to ban GPSes next, then. :P

Posted from my pure Google Nexus 4 using the AC app.

biggbrother2 says:

Wouldn't this qualify as a hands free device?

Posted via Android Central App

NoNexus says:

It gets in the way of your line of sight

----------------------------------------------------
My S-Pen went through hell to deliver this important message to you

zero3187 says:

Yeah it would be like blocking off a section of your windshield with a sticker

shaggie04 says:

Ha! Isn't this also very similar to a "heads-up display" that some cars feature, where speed and things like that are actually displayed in the windshield just above the dash? I know Google Glass can do/display much more and could be much more distracting, but it seems like if they want to ticket for this (and I'm fine with that), they probably need to more clearly define what a monitor is.

Oh, I see now that someone below already had this thought.

biggbrother2 says:

I thought the whole point of view Google Glass is that it's just off your line of sight? Otherwise I could see lots of things being in a person's line of site.. GPS unit.. Inspection sticker... Rear view mirror... windshield HUD.. windshield wipers...

Posted via Android Central App

ScottJ says:

Exactly. I believe you have to look up to see the display.

brendilon says:

"Inspection sticker... Rear view mirror... windshield HUD.. windshield wipers..."
Seriously? Don't be an idiot.

pseudoelf says:

I find the rear view mirror to very much block my forward view. I need to constantly check that there aren't vehicles/objects blocked from my view. I have also driven vehicles were the shape and position of the A-pillar interferes with my forward visibility.
(I am quite tall, in many cars the roof even blocks out overhead traffic lights across the intersection if I am in the first couple positions.)

Posted via Android Central App

Xader says:

I have the same problem.

At 4-way stops, it's almost guaranteed that my rear-view mirror will completely hide a vehicle at the sign to my right.

There have been close calls.

flychinook says:

Yeah, those items are a bit of a stretch. But how about all the Crap some people hang from the rear view mirror? I've yet to see anyone pulled over for that crap.

Posted from my Motorola MicroTac via the Android Central App

Jake Boone says:

They do. Just because you haven't seen doesn't matter.

iowabeakster says:

My rearview mirror blocks my line of sight too. And all the roof pillars of the car frame do too.

ilongbored says:

Much more accurate title than the Verge's. Thanks Phil.
To everyone still confused, she got a ticket for speeding, and distracted driving was added to the ticket as well.

codiusprime says:

Seriously, the Verge has gone way down in quality lately. Click bait title with incomplete articles on 80% of their articles, then you get an amazing one like the open pit burning article from a few days ago and I forgive them all over again.

VAVA Mk2 says:

Similar to BGR then?

Posted via Android Central App

MERCDROID says:

You read BGR? No way.

Posted via Android Central App

curl2k1 says:

Ok, so are they also going to ticket everyone that owns a car with a HUD?

mrbanks says:

+1

shaggie04 says:

+1

brendilon says:

HUDs don't have Twitter feeds.

If Samsung made penis implants, would they have TouchWiz? - dchawk81

hmmm says:

HUDs do not partially block your vision.

ScottJ says:

Neither does Glass.

prlundberg says:

It certainly does, it blocks quite a bit of periphrial vision to your upper right.

I won't claim that's more obstructive than a typical rearview mirror or many sunglasses. But let's state facts here ok?

alexlam24 says:

You can move the projection part out of your sight so it's not an obstruction

Posted via Android Central App

prlundberg says:

I was not aware of that, thanks for clarifying. But if she did not have it folded up, then there is no argument left, correct? It would be an obstruction plain and simple. We don't know all the details here. For all we know the officer could have asked what it was, and she could have said it was for checking email.

murof says:

What department still uses hand written tickets in 2013? That's what I want to know.

Posted via Android Central App

hmmm says:

Every ticket I have ever received has been handwritten. I haven't gotten a ticket in a few years though so maybe things have changed. I doubt it though. It is easier and cheaper than having a printer in every car.

ScottJ says:

Every one

brendilon says:

All of them.
While many departments have printable tickets, they also all have handwritten ticket books for when (not if) the technology fails.

brendilon says:

How about Gear, Pebble and the Sony SmartWatch? Those would be screens visible while driving as well.

If Samsung made penis implants, would they have TouchWiz? - dchawk81

Just take them off before the cop comes up to you

Posted via Android Central App

Allen Brown2 says:

Kind of like how people remove their radar detector when when they get pulled over. Cop pulled me over and gave me a warning, I'm thinking because he could not get an accurate read. This was years ago.

Posted via Android Central App

icebike says:

The only state where Radar Detectors are illegal is Virginia.

prlundberg says:

Yeah, but if they see it, that's pretty much a gauranteed ticket. And rightfully so.

reddragon72 says:

People, we all know the reasoning behind this.

The cop was jealous lol He probably put in a request for glass when it was made available and was denied so he is going after Google glass wearers lol

GG has been out for almost a year now and this is the first time someone has been sited for this, so again sounds like this cop was jealous lol

brendilon says:

You know for a fact that this is the first time? I would bet against that.

If Samsung made penis implants, would they have TouchWiz? - dchawk81

KoreyTM says:

He probably meant the "first time" in regards to the level of awareness by the public. I know this is my first time hearing about a story such as this one.

Argh says:

I'm torn on this one. The problem is that how distracting it is depends on the use-case, and that's not visible to the officer.

If it could be forced in to a "car mode" that shuts off all distracting text/email notifications, providing a HUD with speed, voice navigation etc. it could actually be safer than looking down at the dashboard.

But then, I imagine a lot of people would also want the graphical GPS view. I'm not sure how much of a distraction that would be, as I haven't had the chance to try it. I don't know if it's any worse than people who have their phones mounted on the dashboard or windscreen for GPS (quite common in the UK).

prlundberg says:

Why are you torn? There is no forced car mode. There is also no reason to be wearing them in the car unless for a distracting purpose.

Back when I was in high school I had fuzzy dice hanging from my mirror. It was illegal and I knew it. I never did get a ticket for that, but I had friends get tickets for hanging garters and tassels (yeah, we were a high class crowd). If I had, I would have accepted responsibility without complaint.

Personal accountability and common sense seem to be rare virtures these days.

ScottJ says:

You are over-simplifying. It's a common tactic in discussion board debates but a weak one.

You think it's reasonable to get a ticket for a tassel hanging from your mirror? What about an air freshener?

There are many uses for glass that make things safer, ala HUD and navigation purposes.

It's people like you that allow police states to develop. The powers that be count on the compliant ones.

prlundberg says:

LOL, those are nice assumptions and generalizations you used while demonstrating oversimplifying.

I clearly stated I was in fact NOT compliant. I also didn't comply too well with other various speed and showing off laws. That doesn't mean I don't think the laws are in place to serve valid and reasonable purposes. How ironic that you take offense to my "simplistic" post yet respond to it with an equally if not more simplistic "slippery slope" argument.

Yes, there are valid and safe uses for Glass. But there are also some very unsafe uses for it. It is not a consumer product yet and the regulations have not taken a look at it, nor has Google limited functionality while driving to ensure it is safe at this point. Car manufacturers have in fact done this with HUD and touchscreen information systems. I see nothing wrong with this citation, as it should not be up to the officer to determine what exactly she was doing with it.

ChrisFricke says:

Where in America are fuzzy dice illegal and when did this happen? Forget Google Glass this is an outrage!

ScottJ says:

In my state it's illegal to not have a litter bag in your car. It's rarely ever enforced but it's one of those laws cops can use to harass non-compliant drivers.

eszklar says:

Surprised she didn't say "OK Glass, record a video" of the encounter with the Police Officer and upload it to YouTube.

brendilon says:

And that wouldn't piss the cop off at all...

If Samsung made penis implants, would they have TouchWiz? - dchawk81

And? What is he going to do, throw the tickets he already gave her at her?

Posted via Android Central App

KoreyTM says:

That would be funny to watch from Glass' perspective.

brendilon says:

So pissing off cops for the sake of pissing off cops is fun to you? Here's hoping you get run over by a truck the next time you cross the street, that would be fun to see.

ScottJ says:

Cos have all the power. So yes. Not wise but certainly fun.

When one is writing you a b.s. ticket for a non-applicable statute then yeah. You sound like a worthless, non-essential government employee but that's redundant.

Yes next time she should kiss the cop. F'g moron.

Posted via Android Central App

xketchupx says:

im guessing you hadn't read? she was getting the ticket for speeding THEN tackled on the GG violation.

He tackled her too? Then she definitely should have recorded it.

Man this is getting more dicey by the minute.

Posted via Android Central App

MERCDROID says:

He was trying to get some, lol.

Posted via Android Central App

prlundberg says:

Of course, because cops doing their job don't deserve any respect.

That's the way people who have never earned anybody's respect think on the way to their job flipping burgers.

And acting like an ass will have no effect on how you are treated in return, or in what other violations they will try to find. Because they aren't human, they are government cyborgs.

You make a very valid point about social interaction and anybody with life experience will naturally agree with you.

But it completely undermines your point to say that after the fact when she already received the tickets and its clear the officer went out of his way to be a bureaucratic ass about it.

Posted via Android Central App

prlundberg says:

I don't know exactly what happened as detailed information is not in the article. If you do, please elaborate as to why you feel the officer "went out of his way to be a bureaucratic ass".

The judge will throw this cop and his ticket right out. VC 2706 of the California Code governs displaying a "television broadcast or video signal". The actual law is codified under the heading, "Television".

The legislature in its infinite wisdom clearly did not encompass delivery of internet content within the plain meaning of the law. The cop blatantly over-reached and used any statute he could find regardless of merit. If she doesn't have a lawyer, she should get one so as to make a lesson of this cop who probably has committed similar offenses in the past.

Should the state possibly revise the law? Yes, but that's after consideration of the facts of these Google Glasses. As it stands the state has no case for this alleged offense and it can't make up the law after the fact, ad-hoc.

Posted via Android Central App

"The Glass was on, but I wasn't actively using it" to conserve the battery, Driver Cecilia Abadie said.

That settles it. This cop was in the wrong. Case closed.

HULKchampion says:

Good job on the police officer. Google glasses being worn while driving is ridiculous. It is a mobile device, even though it's hands free... still obstructs your line of sight.

But a lot of modern cars have a HUD display on the windshield that can display navigation and speed and such. That might get in your line of vision

Posted from the awesome new Nexus 7

brendilon says:

HUDs don't have twitter and email feeds.

And you're so certain that that's what they were doing at that time.

brendilon says:

Nobody can know aside from the user. She shouldn't have had it on at all in the first place.

ScottJ says:

Your opinion. Thankfully, that's all it is. I can only imagine the tyrannical Regine you would concoct if given power.

Proclamation #1: Glass is banned

Proclamation #2: All computer interfaces henceforth shall be touch only...

tbonepat11 says:

I am very sure that Google is aware of this and will by lobbying the heck out of lawmakers around the country to prevent this from happening. This isn't the Segway which didn't have the political power to prevent it from being banned in most cities.

I would love to have my GPS/Mobile HUD on glass while driving. Much less distracting them looking away from the road or down at the dashboard.

I have always been wary of old politicians who don't use cell phones making laws banning them from in car use. They are probably not aware that we use our phones for gps. I guess we could go back to opening up those big ass maps in front of us lol.

Yeah, lol. A big map is a huge vision obstructor.

Posted from the awesome new Nexus 7

hmmm says:

Something that partially obstructs your vision is not a good thing. GPS can speak the directions to you so you never need to look at it.

tbonepat11 says:

So does Glass...it speaks to you. On a side note, who doesn't look at their gps when using it? Of course you glance at it. As you glance at your MPH etc. Maybe they should band speed limits so help us focus on the road?

ScottJ says:

It's my understanding that glass requires you to look up to see it. Plus, isn't the display transparent? By your standard sunglasses should be banned.

brendilon says:

It's not about the view, it's about attention and the reality is people will use Glass to view texts, emails and twitter feeds while they drive, distracting her attention from the road.

ScottJ says:

He said that it "partially obstructs your vision". Levels of distraction is a different argument and is debatable.

brendilon says:

What exactly is debatable about distractions while driving being dangerous? Glass certainly represents a distraction.

ScottJ says:

Stating as facts things not in evidence.

Alex Keb says:

I'm glad cop gave ticket, we have enough distraction in the car already.

This will be thrown out. The cop over- reached and the cited law, VC Section 27602 does not apply. Typical bureaucratic attempt to throw the book at someone to see what sticks, regardless of merit.

Posted via Android Central App

hmmm says:

Something that is so easily distracting should not be allowed while driving. I agree with the people who feel this was a good call.

ScottJ says:

How do you or the cop know how distracting it is?

brendilon says:

Have you ever used Glass?

ScottJ says:

Have you?

MERCDROID says:

I can't/won't fault the officer for doing his job. I don't think the officer would have pulled her over, just for wearing Glass. But, since she got pulled over for speeding, the officer felt that Glass was/could have been the cause, hence the additional citation.

It's important to note: some of us agreeing with the ticket doesn't equate to a dislike of a new and possibly revolutionary product.

But, I tell you: people drive like shit, (and assholes) when they are distracted, whether the distraction be a phone, Glass, etc.

brendilon says:

People drive like shit when they're NOT distracted, they're even worse when they are.
Goggle Glass should not be worn when driving. I expect this is something Google will add to their TOS.

MERCDROID says:

I completely agree. I think, it would be good, if Google chimed in and clarified how they envisioned Glass to be practical.

Posted via Android Central App

ScottJ says:

Thanks for the clarity. I was waiting for your pronouncement as supreme decider of these things.

99.9% of us have never used Glass and thus don't know how distracting it is etc. I don't blame the cop. When you are a hammer everything looks like a nail. As stated in the article, new technology requires new thing as to its appropriate use, regardless of knee-jerk reactions.

globster2000 says:

I think that Google glass needs more development in order to be used in the car. Like you said, it can be a distraction if the user twitters, browse, check emails, or view things he shouldn't be seeing when driving. However, if the glasses can go into a specific limited driving mode that helps drivers to be aware of the road without distractions and be approved for driving then I don't see why they should be banned from driving. As for the citation, I doubt it will hold because the technology is still new, but there should be regulations for the current Google glasses to not be worn because the current prism can be distracting.

Posted via Android Central App

lightyear420 says:

"Driving with Monitor visible"???? I sincerely hope this is a joke. Let's think about all the normal, everyday devices that could fall into this category but slip through the cracks every day, shall we? GPS, HUD, DVD players, laptops (yup, I know, but every single police cruiser in the country has one, and I always see them using it while driving!), and smartphones. Now, let's think about it this way: Google Glass can potentially have prescription lenses, and if you wear prescription glasses, you can technically be issued a ticket for not wearing them. Yup, that makes this a catch-22. You can be given a ticket either way, because it's a monitor that is visible to the driver if you wear them, but if you don't wear them, you're breaking the law by not wearing prescription glasses.

To sum it up, this cop sounds like an idiot. They are too stupid to know what the driver said in explaining what Google Glass is, so they issued a ticket. Either that or they are just jelleh that they don't have a pair yet, so they wrote a ticket out of spite.....hater! :/

dmedesha says:

In a way the ticket would be a good thing if she goes to court with it and Google throws an army of attorneys at it. Using a Google Glass display is a lot different than watching cartoons on your iPhone while driving.

MERCDROID says:

The ticket is a good thing. Why? This is a topic that has to be addressed. Better now, while Glass is still in beta.

Posted via Android Central App

brendilon says:

Google won't throw an army of attorneys at this, Google will side with the police. Glass is not a device that should be worn while driving. It IS a distraction and would be a huge liability for Google if they encouraged people to wear it while driving.

ScottJ says:

Again with the black and white statements. Nuance is obviously not your strong suit.

Lol. +1

Posted via Android Central App

MERCDROID says:

Yeah, I know, Glass can be used with prescription lenses. But, I feel as if a ticket would only come into play if the display were powered on. If the display is "off," then they are "functioning" as "dumb" eyewear.

Posted via Android Central App

It is still a monitor.

Posted via Android Central App

MERCDROID says:

Not if it's off. If that's the case, then I'm not allowed to wear prescription glasses anymore.

Posted via Android Central App

Your glasses don't have a monitor built in. Maybe if you could detach Google glass from your prescription than that would be different. The ticket for a monitor being visible to the driver is bull crap.

Posted via Android Central App

MERCDROID says:

Yeah, I'm anxious, to see how this plays out, in court.

Posted via Android Central App

lightyear420 says:

me too! I hope the judge throws this out, because it sounds to me like the cop couldn't find anything good to write a ticket for, so they stretched the law in their favor as much as possible. The bonus, if the driver wins, is it will be held as a precedent....but that's also a double-edged sword.

prlundberg says:

Read it again. She was pulled over for speeding.

MERCDROID says:

Yeah, I'm anxious, to see how this plays out, in court.

Posted via Android Central App

brendilon says:

Google Glass is not meant to be a replacement for prescription lenses. If you don't have another pair, you shouldn't be driving. Glass should not be worn while driving and Google will end up backing that up. it IS a distraction and there is no reason to wear it.
Your rambling argument sounds like the rant of an entitled brat who wants to play with his toys while he's driving.

ScottJ says:

Yes, Dear Leader. We HAVE absorbed your wisdom. We WILL do your bidding.

MERCDROID says:

Lol

Posted via Android Central App

MERCDROID says:

I remember Google saying that Glass would be compatible with prescription lenses. But, in no way, am I endorsing it. I could only see myself wearing them, when I'm enjoying the outdoors.

Seriously, I'd rather see Glass banned from the car now, due to a ticket, than seeing people get into accidents and Google suffering a fallout because of it.

Posted via Android Central App

zhecht says:

Did you actually read the law? The law only applies to monitors forward of the driver's seat (so rear DVD players are okay). It exempts vehicle information displays, GPS displays, rear/side cameras, and multifunction displays that limit themselves to the above functions while driving, but it if they are INSTALLED in the vehicle. Therefore your smartphone is okay if it is in a dock (installed), in your pocket (not visible), or in the rear seat, but not if you are holding it or wearing it on your head.

It also exempts vehicles owned by municipalies and electric, gas, water, sewer, and telephone utility companies.

In short, of the items of your list, the GPS and HUD are okay, the DVD player is okay as long as it is not visible from the front or won't let you play movies while driving (a portable DVD player in the front seat SHOULDN'T be visible), the laptop is okay if you're a cop, and the smartphone is okay if it is in your pocket or in a dock (California requires cell phones to be used with a hands-free device, so holding the phone to use Google Maps isn't okay).

dmedesha says:

"But officer, I was looking at the Glass GPS to see what speed I was driving. Guess there is something wrong with the GPS if I was going THAT fast."

Actually, looking at HUD-type gauges in Glass is probably safer than looking down at distractions like speedometers and taking your eyes completely off the road. Side-looking and rear-view camera displays in Glass would be useful, too. Of course it won't matter when we are being driven around in Googlemobiles.

This to me is scary. I use my phone and tablet for GPS all the time, I have mounts for both of em'. Maybe as long as your not pulled over for being wreckless the cop won't give you a ticket for the monitor.

Posted via Android Central App

MERCDROID says:

They know that people use GPS all the time. I got a speeding ticket in El Paso, while I was road-tripping to North California, and the officer made no mention of my GPS. That officer probably saved my life, lol. No more speeding for me.

Posted via Android Central App

I hope your right.

Posted via Android Central App

TheDoctor 46 says:

This is a valid ticket and the precedent needs to be set early on. No way you can tell me reading an email out of the corner of your eye or scanning facebook isn't dangerous.

But where are they going to stop? Now they can give a ticket for any monitor in your dash. What about the radio that tells you who sings the song that is playing? The lawmakers will have to clear this up before long.

Posted via Android Central App

brendilon says:

You assume they haven't already done so.

ScottJ says:

They haven't.

MERCDROID says:

While I somewhat agree with you; we don't want to set the precedent that new technology isn't welcome in the automobile. Ever since it's conception, Glass has had a rocky welcome. So, I'm not surprised to see this happening. But, again I say: if she hadn't been speeding, would she have gotten the ticket?

Posted via Android Central App

brendilon says:

"No way you can tell me reading an email out of the corner of your eye or scanning facebook isn't dangerous."

Exactly. Google needs to come out and tell people NOT to wear Glass while driving. Texting, talking on the cellphone, emailing.. all Distracted driving cases have been banned for a reason, they cause car accidents. Hell, there was even a subway operator in Boston a couple years ago who got in an accident while texting.

Ditch the technorati entitlement folks and use some common sense. Driving isn't play time.

ScottJ says:

Shit Brendlion is on another high horse. Heaven help us.

I propose that you do NOT (see, that was for emphasis) know whether or not Glass is distracting as you have NOT used it.

I suggest that lawmakers do NOT make knee-jerk laws until they have used the technology and evaluated it.

prlundberg says:

Glass is distracting, or at least is quite capable of being distracting. You don't have to use it to understand that.

Lawmakers have not made knee-jerk laws. Existing laws are being enforced on a type of product that isn't in any regulations. Until it is, it would be up to Google or their supporters to prove it is completely safe and not a distraction.

It is perfectly safe for me to have a half-empty case of beer sitting next to me while I drive. But there are obvious reasons why it is not. The same logic applies here, for better and worse.

MERCDROID says:

I remember that story about the subway operator. That's some scary shit, man.

Posted via Android Central App

vor says:

Yet another law in this state to raise revenue for the bankrupt state...

This is why I'm looking forward to autonomous cars. Bring it Google!

Posted via Android Central App

DJeremyC says:

Cop must be an Apple fan and was jealous that Apple hasn't figured out how to make something cool like that for him.

MERCDROID says:

Yep, that's exactly right. How could we not see it? It's so blatantly obvious, this cop has a "chip on his shoulder" for Google.

/s

Posted via Android Central App

scoobdude says:

Alright guys, in California if the ticket is an infraction... Then there needs to be a contract.

There is much more to the story. Look up Craig on YouTube.

Posted via Android Central App

shaggie04 says:

I think we're missing the bigger issue here...What does Tony Stark have to say about all of this? How will this affect Ironman?

Lekoq Grande says:

+100

DustoMan says:

So I think where they got her is this rule about GPS placement:

"(12) A portable Global Positioning System (GPS), which may be mounted in a seven-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield farthest removed from the driver or in a five-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield nearest to the driver and outside of an airbag deployment zone, if the system is used only for door-to-door navigation while the motor vehicle is being operated."

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc26708.htm

Technically Google Glass is positioned in the upper right portion of the driver's field of view. It's not in either of the lower corners. I think it's dumb too, but that's how the law is written.

the gator says:

Thank you for supplying the link, as a police officer for 30 years this could be defended as a Bluetooth device. I had tried Google glass it does not obstruct your vision the way it is designed and I feel she probably could beat this in court as the way the law is written. Good luck

ScottJ says:

That's good to hear. It certainly beats the speculation-fueled knee-jerk reactions of others.

scouser73 says:

What do the police do when cars pass them which have Head-up Displays that were fitted during manufacture, would they also be stopped?

From what I gather, Google Glass doesn't restrict the use of both eyes, only one which is partially 'impaired' for want of a better word; by the HUD. Would the police also stop people who only had one eye?

In my opinion, I think it's better to have a clear view of the road ahead and not to be sidetracked with such things like Head-up Displays; whether that be Google Glass or in-car HUD's.

There definitively needs to be more clarification on what drivers may or may not use whilst driving.

Edmarines says:

Isn't a GPS a "Monitor visible to Driver"? Are they illegal in California as well?

zhecht says:

No, the law exempts GPS units when installed in the vehicle (but not when handheld or on your head)

I'm just gonna wait and see how this all pans out. No one needs to know my expert opinion.

Posted via Android Central App

Lekoq Grande says:

we all know the cop was just jealous he cant afford 3,000 dollar smart glasses..LOL

Ikeman90 says:

it was 1500

Ikeman90 says:

I think the issue at hand here is responsibility of the driver. People keep throwing out gps and HUDs from manufacture. there is a reason a standalone gps cant do anything else. and the HUDs dont come able to do much else but music and temp control. anything that might draw your eyes for more than a moment is a problem. altho glass does have gps capability, it can also play a movie or browse facebook. and an officer cannot be sure what you are doing with the eyewear so i would nto say he is not in the wrong here.

benass49 says:

I understand why the woman was given a ticket, but I also think there should be laws specifically for this type of scenario. 'Driving with a monitor visible' could also refer to a GPS navigation system or a stereo. I understand the law, as well as agree with it, but I hope that sometime soon this particular issue can be addressed.

Posted via Android Central App

Ed MacMar says:

I blame the government shutdown for all this nonsense

Posted via Android Central App

I find it tough to believe driving while wearing Glass is more difficult than trying to drive in rush hour when the sun is blinding and even sunglasses and the visit barely helps.

What about people that wear eyepatches? They are still allowed to drive correct. At least Glass is see-through.

Maybe it's time to force all eyeglass wearing drivers to get Lasik or wear contacts while driving?

This can get really silly the more common sense is removed from the thought process.

www.STLTechTalk.com

smeghead4269 says:

You can't control the sun. You can control whether you're wearing Glass.

dplane says:

California...nuff said

Posted via Android Central App

Wicket says:

yep!

Wicket says:

as a Californian this doesn't surprise me..

It never ceases to amaze me how many excuses people can come up with to skirt/break/ignore laws and common sense.

prlundberg says:

+1

No such thing as personal accountability anymore.

ScottJ says:

It's unsettled law. Put your soap box away.

K White1 says:

I'm sure most officers would be upset with someone who's speeding down the road and wearing Google Glass, like they're rushing back to Deep Space Nine.

Posted via Android Central App, HTC One

Gearu says:

Good. Got what she deserved. The fact she is oblivious to what she is doing is just sad, obviously braindead.
Stop supporting the downfall of humanity.

PZR18 says:

Fuck the government & their rules

Posted from My GNote 2 via AC App

davidnc says:

The cop was probably just jealous.Some cops around here road rage too,passed off duty cops before and they pass back flashing their badge like it means they are wearing a crown or something .Also the state police here recently was on ABC new (Nightline) got caught going 80 mph racing to a doughnut store .
http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/troopers-caught-speeding-doughnut-...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5NxfnRjPGQ

Jamookie says:

I bet he called one of his buddies on his iPhone after. In 5 years he'll be complaining about these punks wearing the Google cheap knock off copies of iGlasses.

More related, with all the hacking going on with the computer controls in cars recently, I could see a rooted version easily being wired into the cars system so you can hook into all the dash functions. Would love to see more cameras in cars. maybe with some range, IR, and motion detection safety features incorporated.