Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 80 posts

Re: California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

#61

Post by Zikes »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #18
Zikes wrote: post #3

> Odle said he had not been planning to cite Abadie for wearing Google Glass, but that he did so because of her reaction to his questions. "She got a little argumentative about whether or not it was legal for her to wear them," he said. At first this sounded pretty vindictive, as though I could hear the officer ending the argument with "fine, we'll let the judge decide!" But after a little thought that sounds like a…

I'm going to say that it is entirely unreasonable for the police to be ignorant of the law.

The point is that there was no law to be ignorant of, as there had been no precedent for whether or not Google Glass qualified as a "monitor in view".

Re: California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

#62

Post by Anderkent »

wavefunction wrote: post #58
Shivetya wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will side with the cop here. Knowing a few who are in this line of work I am more than amazed at what they put up with. Put it to you this way, your not being pulled over because they don't like you, your not being pulled over because they are having a bad day, your being pulled over because you flagged yourself; speeding, running a stop sign, tail light out, etc. There is no reason to get argumentative with someon…

I've been pulled over for a "crack in the windshield" which wasn't visible from where the police officer's patrol car was sitting. I know because I went back and checked from his vantage point. I get that you're trying to provide some nuance here, but let's not pretend that all police officers are honest and decent individuals just doing everything by the book. It goes both ways.

Wait, so was your windshield cracked or not? The way you said it seems it was; in which case I don't see what was wrong?

Re: California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

#63

Post by EpicEng »

clhodapp wrote: post #50
EpicEng wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're going to argue with someone who has the power to make your life difficult then, well, prepare for your life to get a bit more difficult. The cop didn't do anything illegal. Under the law I believe he can cite her (the whole "monitor" thing), but he has discretion. The law is a bit vague, enforcement will be up to the judge. Regardless, it sounds like she was argumentative. That's fine, but accept the conseq…

What you are describing is exactly wrong behavior. You may think that most people become petty tyrants when placed in positions of minor authority (and there is some experimental support for this idea), but that doesn't mean that it is right. Given that their job requires that they be given the legal ability to do a lot of things that would be illegal for a non-police citizen to do, I believe that police officers sho…

Are you saying that the cop was wrong and that the citation was unwarranted under the law? If so, and if that is true, then I agree with you. However, that's not obvious as far as I know. Glasses which are essentially monitors are a pretty new thing, and California has existing law which states that "monitors" within the view of the driver (an exception is provided for mounted GPS) are illegal.

What I'm saying is that I believe the cop was within his rights to issue a citation. If that is true, then he did nothing wrong. He has discretion. If you're going to argue with the person who has a choice in whether or not to punish you then you should expect to be on the losing end.

It's no different than getting pulled over for speeding. Assuming that you were in fact speeding, the officer is allowed to issue a citation, or not. It's up to him. If you're a jerk then you're going to get one. "Tyrrany"? C'mon.

Re: California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

#64

Post by rhizome »

Shivetya wrote: post #53
martypitt wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're giving the officer a very generous amount of "benefit of the doubt". He didn't say "I wasn't sure about the legality, so I referred it to a judge", rather saying he cited her because she got argumentative. ie., "Don't challenge me if you disagree, otherwise I'll treat you as though you've broken the law." That's pretty crappy behaviour on the officer's behalf IMHO.

I will side with the cop here. Knowing a few who are in this line of work I am more than amazed at what they put up with. Put it to you this way, your not being pulled over because they don't like you, your not being pulled over because they are having a bad day, your being pulled over because you flagged yourself; speeding, running a stop sign, tail light out, etc. There is no reason to get argumentative with someon…

Put it to you this way, your not being pulled over because they don't like you

Maybe not, but by the same token it's not OK for them to add to a ticket because their ego is challenged, and to do so raises all kinds of unfavorable stereotypes about law enforcement.

Re: California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

#65

Post by rhizome »

Zikes wrote: post #60
Tehnix wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, instead of letting a "crime" skate by, he could let the judge decide whether it's illegal or not.

I don't think it was a matter of whether or not it was a crime per se, but that if it did fall afoul of the "monitor in view" law then it meant that there was a potential danger in its continued use. It's not difficult to infer that the officer initially intended to issue a warning to the woman about wearing Glass while driving, and that she argued the point saying it was not illegal. Her argument definitely would've…

There are a whole host of allowed monitor uses in cars, not the least that entire occupations are exempt from the law. From what I've read, the officer did not attempt to gather any information along those lines once they were challenged, they just decided to show her who's boss.

Re: California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

#66

Post by rhizome »

EpicEng wrote: post #63
clhodapp wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you are describing is exactly wrong behavior. You may think that most people become petty tyrants when placed in positions of minor authority (and there is some experimental support for this idea), but that doesn't mean that it is right. Given that their job requires that they be given the legal ability to do a lot of things that would be illegal for a non-police citizen to do, I believe that police officers sho…

Are you saying that the cop was wrong and that the citation was unwarranted under the law ? If so, and if that is true, then I agree with you. However, that's not obvious as far as I know. Glasses which are essentially monitors are a pretty new thing, and California has existing law which states that "monitors" within the view of the driver (an exception is provided for mounted GPS) are illegal. What I'm saying is th…

What I'm saying is that I believe the cop was within his rights to issue a citation.

Not if he didn't even try to discern whether it was being used for navigation. You ask whether the citation was unwarranted, but I think that betrays an authoritarian attitude. Was the citation warranted? The judge says no.

Re: California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

#67

Post by dragonwriter »

EpicEng wrote: post #63
clhodapp wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you are describing is exactly wrong behavior. You may think that most people become petty tyrants when placed in positions of minor authority (and there is some experimental support for this idea), but that doesn't mean that it is right. Given that their job requires that they be given the legal ability to do a lot of things that would be illegal for a non-police citizen to do, I believe that police officers sho…

Are you saying that the cop was wrong and that the citation was unwarranted under the law ? If so, and if that is true, then I agree with you. However, that's not obvious as far as I know. Glasses which are essentially monitors are a pretty new thing, and California has existing law which states that "monitors" within the view of the driver (an exception is provided for mounted GPS) are illegal. What I'm saying is th…

> What I'm saying is that I believe the cop was within his rights to issue a citation.

Cops don't have "rights" to issue citations. They have power to issue citation as an aspect of their job, and an obligation to use that power within its legal bounds, which include, in the case of issuing citations, generally that there be probable cause to believe that the person has violated the law identified on the citation.

Re: California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

#68

Post by vinceguidry »

Anderkent wrote: post #62
wavefunction wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been pulled over for a "crack in the windshield" which wasn't visible from where the police officer's patrol car was sitting. I know because I went back and checked from his vantage point. I get that you're trying to provide some nuance here, but let's not pretend that all police officers are honest and decent individuals just doing everything by the book. It goes both ways.

Wait, so was your windshield cracked or not? The way you said it seems it was; in which case I don't see what was wrong?

I think the GP has the idea that a cop needs a reason to pull anyone over. Unfortunately no such requirement exists anymore, IIRC the Supreme Court said that cops can lie about it. They keep up the pretense so as to not rub it in our faces how much of a police state we've become.

Re: California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

#69

Post by Anderkent »

vinceguidry wrote: post #68
Anderkent wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, so was your windshield cracked or not? The way you said it seems it was; in which case I don't see what was wrong?

I think the GP has the idea that a cop needs a reason to pull anyone over. Unfortunately no such requirement exists anymore, IIRC the Supreme Court said that cops can lie about it. They keep up the pretense so as to not rub it in our faces how much of a police state we've become.

Except if he actually had his windshield cracked it's more likely that the cops saw it than that they pulled a random car over without cause and it turned out to have a cracked windshield.

Re: California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffic ticket

#70

Post by EpicEng »

dragonwriter wrote: post #67
EpicEng wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that the cop was wrong and that the citation was unwarranted under the law ? If so, and if that is true, then I agree with you. However, that's not obvious as far as I know. Glasses which are essentially monitors are a pretty new thing, and California has existing law which states that "monitors" within the view of the driver (an exception is provided for mounted GPS) are illegal. What I'm saying is th…

> What I'm saying is that I believe the cop was within his rights to issue a citation. Cops don't have "rights" to issue citations. They have power to issue citation as an aspect of their job, and an obligation to use that power within its legal bounds, which include, in the case of issuing citations, generally that there be probable cause to believe that the person has violated the law identified on the citation.

Ok, you're right; I used the wrong term. How does that change the substance of my argument exactly?
Post reply on HN