California driver pulled over for speeding, issued a ticket for wearing Google Glass

By on October 31, 2013, 12:30 PM

We expected Google Glass to introduce some privacy and ethical concerns once it finally launched but for one California woman, the troubles have already started. Cecelia Abadie of Temecula, California, was recently pulled over by a California Highway Patrol officer on suspicion of speeding and given a ticket for wearing Google Glass while driving.

Abadie posted the ticket on her Google+ page, asking if it was illegal to wear Glass while driving or if the cop was wrong. Her post has since garnered more than 500 replies both in support of and against wearing the device while allegedly speeding.

The California Highway Patrol (CHP) said the ticket was given as a violation of California Vehicle Code 27602 which makes it illegal to drive a vehicle if a television receiver, a video monitor, or a television or video screen or any other means of visually displaying a television broadcast or video signal is operating and visible to the driver while driving the vehicle.

In a statement on the matter, Google said the product is designed to help the wearer be in contact with the world and not make them be distracted from something as important as driving.

CHP spokesperson Jake Sanchez said anything that takes attention away from driving – putting on makeup, eating, talking on the phone, watching a video – is dangerous. Furthermore, individual officers have leeway in issuing a ticket as it’s every officer’s own judgment on whether the law has been violated.

What do you think? Do you think Abadie was in the wrong by wearing Glass while driving or should she not have been cited by the officer?




User Comments: 42

Got something to say? Post a comment
Burty117 Burty117, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

This could potentially be a toughy, I mean, If Google Glasses can have custom glasses in for help with your eyesight, surely it would then be safer to wear them?

If not though, I guess the better thing to do would be to simply take them off, I guess you could hook them up to your car Bluetooth and still receive calls etc... so it's not like it stops much.

Guest said:

Can't even read his handwriting, looks like someone needs to go back to school.

Guest said:

Cop was just jealous.

Guest said:

From the handwriting I'm thinking the cop used to be a doctor.

RzmmDX said:

You know what... why bother blurring out her address when it is clearly visible in her Google Plus page...

I blame ticket lawyers making it impossible for rich people to be fined for speeding because she was clearly speeding and all her concern was about the Google glasses, and so are most of the people supporting her.

Good job Officer for actually doing your job.

TomSEA TomSEA, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Was going to post the SNL Google Glass skit, but it looks like it's been removed from the ENTIRE internet.

gamoniac said:

Was going to post the SNL Google Glass skit, but it looks like it's been removed from the ENTIRE internet.

If you were using Google to search, that's probably explains it. Try Bing.

1 person liked this | insect said:

Google is already working on solving this with self-driving cars.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

Well, driving around with a HUD strapped to your face is bound to induce some serious, :oops: "paranoid delusions of Top Gun-hood".... :oops:

Google is already working on solving this with self-driving cars.
Right! When an individual indulges in this type of behaviour, creating your own problems, then taking credit for solving them, I believe the diagnosis would be "narcissism bordering on sociopathy".

1 person liked this | Tygerstrike said:

Ok this argument is sheer stupidity. If you took out the google glasses in this equation then she was STILL SPEEDING!! And that will get you a ticket. Its only compounded by the fact that she was wearing GG. Its no different then texting and driving. Sure her head would be in the right position to view whats comming at her, but her FOCUS is on the glasses not on the road. I dont know about you but I would be really pissed if a loved one of mine was killed because of stupidity such as this driver has shown. You dont have to be online all the time. You dont have to be in contact EVERY second. Driving and the safety of yourself and everyone else around you should be a MAJOR concern when behind the wheel. Not checking your facebook page doing 70+ down the freeway.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

@Tygerstrike And just for you, here's Venus checking her Facebook page:

OneSpeed said:

How can the CHP see if the Glass device in on?

1 person liked this | Skidmarksdeluxe Skidmarksdeluxe said:

"putting on makeup, eating, talking on the phone, watching a video ? is dangerous".

A lot of people don't seem to think so. I've seen some people do all this simultaneously, while driving at 120 mph.

The cop was probably rolling about laughing at how money she paid to look ridiculous wearing those silly things hence his illegible hieroglyphics. He shoulda let her go for making his day.

Tygerstrike said:

@Capt

DUDE LMAO!!!! Just turn the mirror into a cellphone and its perfect!!!! You could even equate the skeletons as FB drama!!! TOO RICH!!!

1 person liked this | captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

"putting on makeup, eating, talking on the phone, watching a video ? is dangerous".

A lot of people don't seem to think so. I've seen some people do all this simultaneously, while driving at 120 mph.

...[ ]....

One quick question, were you being a bad boy, driving alongside @ 120mph? Because, if you were driving 60, you would have missed all that as they whizzed by.....:eek:

It's a pity the iPad doesn't have a USB port for something like this:

1 person liked this | Guest said:

What do you think? Do you think Abadie was in the wrong by wearing Glass while driving or should she not have been cited by the officer?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Why do you even have to ask if it wrong. She was potentially endangering the lives of other people. Of course it is wrong.

Skidmarksdeluxe Skidmarksdeluxe said:

One quick question, were you being a bad boy, driving alongside @ 120mph? Because, if you were driving 60, you would have missed all that as they whizzed by.....:eek:

It's a pity the iPad doesn't have a USB port for something like this:

I was going 125 mph doing the same things (apart from putting on make up, that is)

1 person liked this | Sarcasm Sarcasm said:

I'm going to agree with CHP here. We have enough stupid drivers on the road. It will only be a matter of time before we hear stories of a person wearing google glass paying attention to the glasses and run over a kid or something.

learninmypc learninmypc said:

If it wasn't posted already, [link]

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

"Anything that takes your attention away from the motoring public in front of you is a distraction," Hale said.
Does that include billboards?

What about watching your dash board to make sure you are not going over the speed limit. I guess the instrument panels need to be removed out of the cars so you can keep your eye strictly on the road.

Guest said:

If I hold a turned off cellphone in front of me while talking, I am sure I would get in trouble for that too. Off or on is irrelevant. Prove it was off.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Next week they will be issuing tickets for you blinking your eyes.

matrix86 matrix86 said:

Am I the only one has an issue with the fact that she was pulled over for "suspicion" of speeding? How does that even work? That just sounds like a lame excuse to pull someone over.

"Herr herr, I don't have my radar on, so I'm just gonna randomly pull someone over and claim they looked like they were speeding, herr herr."

Seriously, if you want to pull me over just for a license check, tell me you pulled me over just for a license check. I have no problem with that. Don't feed me some lame excuse like "I suspected you might be speeding." Either I was, or I wasn't. You're a cop, you have a radar gun, use it.

As for this woman, she was in violation of a state vehicle code. End of story. What's to argue about? It's a device that displays a picture of some sort in your vision. There's nothing to argue here. Don't like the code? Take it up with your lawmaker.

matrix86 matrix86 said:

Does that include billboards?

What about watching your dash board to make sure you are not going over the speed limit. I guess the instrument panels need to be removed out of the cars so you can keep your eye strictly on the road.

Right, so let's exercise a little common sense here. Billboards...a distraction? Yes. Anything you can control? No. Unlike a cell phone, you can't put down and ignore a billboard.

Checking dash. A distraction? Yes. Necessary to keep you from driving above the speed limit, running out of gas, ending up stuck in the middle of road because of engine overheat? Yes. Since it's necessary for safety reasons, it stays.

Exercising a little common sense and critical thinking will take you far in life, my friend.

Guest said:

How to look like a complete retard.

"I think I'm in TRON!"

"Look, I'm Geordie from Star Trek!"

"Oooops, just drove into the back of a parked truck, I'm DEAD!"

.....fools.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

"Herr herr, I don't have my radar on, so I'm just gonna randomly pull someone over and claim they looked like they were speeding, herr herr."

Seriously, if you want to pull me over just for a license check, tell me you pulled me over just for a license check. I have no problem with that. Don't feed me some lame excuse like "I suspected you might be speeding." Either I was, or I wasn't. You're a cop, you have a radar gun, use it....[ ]....

For us in PA/ NJ the trip to Wildwood or Atlantic City NJ, can be made without tolls, by using NJ 322 east. Unfortunately, the Town of Folsom NJ, which more or less straddles route 322 is a notorious speed trap,

.

They have unmarked cars that just follow you for a 1/10 mile in sync, then read their speedo, and write the ticket based on that.

Anyway, me and the girlfriend were headed to the AC casinos at about 2:30 AM, when the Folsom cops pulled us over for , "weaving". I explained to the cop, "I don't think I was weaving, but it is entirely possible, as most of my attention was fixed on my speedometer, as I certainly didn't want to exceed 55 mph, since you'd undoubtedly write me a speeding ticket if I did".:eek:

The cop just handed my cards back, and basically told us to get lost.

I got the distinct feeling that, "weaving", was the current euphemism for, "license check" (This was in the year "20 BC", as in "before computers" .

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Exercising a little common sense and critical thinking will take you far in life, my friend.
Yes lets do use a little common sense. Tools do not hurt people. The way they use the tool does. People are making the very same claim with guns control. Everyone is not as irresponsible as we are being treated to be. But yet you say use common sense, and I say how can we use common sense when we are not given the opportunity by regulation. People don't get fired for having or wearing tools in the workplace, they get fired for how they use them. Common sense here implies the use of Google Glass is safer and an all-in-one tool to replace several gadgets that are further away from your line of vision. In fact with a little modification the dash could be streamed into a HUD using Google Glass, which would allow you to keep your eyes aligned with the road.

If you had read any of my other comments about Google Glass, you would know this is the first time I have actively supported Google Glass. I'm not currently supporting Google Glass, for one it is put out by Google. I however do see a future with this tech and this article is a negative force against what will be mainstream, regardless of how you or I feel about it.

1 person liked this | Heihachi1337 said:

If I'm reading that correctly (handwriting is hard to make out) it looks like 90 in a 65mph zone. I don't see the problem here, that seems to be typical Californian freeway driving.

Californians speed like crazy, as if their house is on fire, on the freeway but then slam on their brakes and drop it to 15mph when they see a cop as if it would make up for their speeding somehow.

All aside, you folks are aware you can argue and fight individual charges. Yes, she was speeding but that is not the issue. The issue is the Google Glass.

I'm pretty sure they allow for hands free devices in California (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) and I know that some cars (see Corvette and some Pontiacs) have a Heads Up Display HUD and that is totally acceptable in a car. What's the difference between Google Glass and that hands free HUD?

1 person liked this | Taycat Taycat said:

I can't imagine what people have said in support of the driver. Maybe they're the same ones that do distractions while driving.

Guest said:

People drive poorly enough now with talking on the phone, NO GOOGLE GLASSES WHILE DRIVING!!!!!!!!!

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

People drive poorly enough now with talking on the phone, NO GOOGLE GLASSES WHILE DRIVING!!!!!!!!!

The only way I could stand behind that line of thought, would be to to forbid talking or listening while driving.

ceh4702 said:

Until you have been rear ended by a person using their phone, you will not get it. I got slammed about a year ago sitting at a stoplight and the woman did not even apply the brakes. Slammed into my car pushing my car into the one in front of me and pushing that care into the one in front of her. I think if this happens the driver casing the accident should be charged with premeditated attempted murder. You just cant fix stupid. Just suspend their license for a few years.

ceh4702 said:

Just start crushing people's cars up. They should use cameras to spot people talking on the phone and mail them a $500 fine.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Until you have been rear ended by a person using their phone, you will not get it.
That is not true! Possibly true in most cases but not all. Besides this is Google Glass in question not Cell Phones. Google Glass would be the equivalent to wearing an ear piece, which is legal and should not be compared to Cell Phone legality issues.

avoidz avoidz said:

People are bad enough on the roads. Add mobile phones and Google Glass and things are just made much worse. She was definitely wrong for wearing that stupid device.

Tygerstrike said:

@Heih

The difference is that a HUD in a car is going to show the same information as the dash, just at a easier level to view. Google Glass means more spongebob. Hence WHY its illegal in california to have the driver viewing a video monitor of any kind. I dont understand what the issue is here. Reguardless of the Google Glasses, she was STILL speeding. That alone should have been enough. What makes it worse is the glasses. So not only was she speeding, but she was distracted as well.

Yes this is new tech and as such there are going to always be ppl who wish to circumvent existing Laws in order to get thier way. But the underlaying issue is distraction plain and simple. She should have KNOWN better as CA has some of the strictest hands free laws out there.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Reguardless of the Google Glasses, she was STILL speeding.
Which is what the ticket should have been all about. Google Glasses are irrelevant in this case against the regulation in which they are being prohibited and the officer knew that when the ticket was written.

1 person liked this | Camikazi said:

If I hold a turned off cellphone in front of me while talking, I am sure I would get in trouble for that too. Off or on is irrelevant. Prove it was off.

With the cop making the accusation he would have to prove it was on not the other way around. The cop added that in for no reason because there is no way he could know she had it on and was using it at all, now the speeding yea the ticket for that is fine.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

With the cop making the accusation he would have to prove it was on not the other way around. The cop added that in for no reason because there is no way he could know she had it on and was using it at all, now the speeding yea the ticket for that is fine.
Besides the safest place for the $1600 dollar device is wearing it. I'm sure if I was to buy them, I'd want to keep them safe as possible. What it boils down to is the cop sees an easy pay check when he spots someone wearing Google Glasses. I'm questioning whether or not she would have been pulled over, if she had not been wearing Google Glass. I've not lived life in California, but I have lived in the fast lane a few years. I was once traveling at a higher rate of speed than posted with an officer as one of the traveling companions. My only complaint was waiting several miles and pulling me over after I had reached my offramp and decided to get off the Interstate. The ***** didn't want me as long as I was on the Interstate, and that made the citation wrong.

Guest said:

IMO the glass functions a lot like a HUD that fighter pilots use. If anything it helps to make you hyper aware of your surroundings. Like anything else in life a person can be distracted by anything in or out of their vision. The bottom line though is using the device itself should not be considered in violation of any traffic or driving laws.

Guest said:

Watching your speedometer takes less than a second. Reading something on a cellphone or google glasses takes longer... I have watched people not looking for at least 5 seconds. It takes just 1 second for something to happen in front of you and you would not be ready.

It's a distraction, plain and simple. However I do believe that they should like ****** like that go along their business... sooner or later they will get the consenquences.

Raoul Duke Raoul Duke said:

Californians speed like crazy, as if their house is on fire, on the freeway but then slam on their brakes and drop it to 15mph when they see a cop as if it would make up for their speeding somehow?

People drive like that in Canada as well, drives one crazy if you try to actually follow the speed limit (tickets are expensive!). First they pass you like they are drafting you in F1 and passing on the stright, then when they see the radar the brakes slam on nearly causing rear-ends as they drive so close together, then they go way, way below the speed limit (so now they are holding me up, must be that guilty conscience), until they get past, then its go, go go.

As far as google glass....officer did the right thing even if she wasn't speeding. A Heads up display would only display pertinent info like speed, engine overheat, while Google glass displays useless sh!t

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.