News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by martypitt on Thursday January 16, 2014 @11:26PM (#7074298)
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.

Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by Pxtl on Thursday January 16, 2014 @11:31PM (#7074309)
Yeah, sounds like Contempt of Cop.
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by Shivetya on Friday January 17, 2014 @05:25AM (#7075108)
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 someone doing their job, let alone a traffic cop. All that while they are working on your incident they have to watch out for traffic, your actions, and ensuring you don't get so excited your a threat to yourself or them.

More than likely, being familiar with "our type"; techies, she came off as a pretentious twit and treated him with contempt for being an ignorant cop.

Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by wavefunction on Friday January 17, 2014 @06:31AM (#7075274)
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.

Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by Anderkent on Friday January 17, 2014 @10:32AM (#7076249)
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 traffi... by wavefunction on Friday January 17, 2014 @08:34PM (#7079637)
It was, maybe 3 inches lengthwise, about 2 inches off the edge along the bottom with a black background. My real contention was that I was pulled over for being poor (in my hoopty '90 626 at the time) and he saw the crack when he approached. He also didn't mention the crack until he had spent the previous 25 minutes threatening and cajoling me to tell him if I had been drinking or drugging and driving.

I wouldn't have minded this if I were pulled over for speeding and he noticed and added it to the ticket but to get pulled over for being poor, harassed and then written a ticket for the windshield crack...

Maybe that's an acceptable way for the police to pull anyone they feel like over, but there should be some sort of suspicion required. I know this is the everyday experience of a lot of people but I don't think it's acceptable for it to happen to them either.

Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by QuantumGood on Sunday January 19, 2014 @01:47AM (#7083656)
Citing for something found isn't bad practice per se, nor is pulling over searching for statistically likely infractions. But too many officers use this argument as an excuse for bad behavior.

I've been abused in a similar manner, versus given a warning and relevant "counselling" (how to not get pulled over) from an officer with a more mentoring style.

Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by dragonwriter on Sunday January 19, 2014 @02:22AM (#7083730)
Reasonable suspicion is required for a traffic stop; the Supreme Court has ruled that stops to check for violations without reasonable suspicion violate the Fourth Amendment.

Of course, being legally required doesn't mean it is actually the practice.

Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by vinceguidry on Friday January 17, 2014 @05:36PM (#7078936)
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 traffi... by Anderkent on Friday January 17, 2014 @05:49PM (#7079003)
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 traffi... by rhizome on Friday January 17, 2014 @02:05PM (#7077725)
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 traffi... by EpicEng on Friday January 17, 2014 @02:46AM (#7074751)
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 consequences. Like I said, he is free to cite her, and I don't necessarily blame him for doing so given what I've read.

Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by clhodapp on Friday January 17, 2014 @04:45AM (#7075009)
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 should be given very little leeway for acting in bad faith (honest mistakes are a different story: I feel like most people are already quite intolerant of honest police mistakes, probably too much so).
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by EpicEng on Friday January 17, 2014 @01:40PM (#7077582)
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 traffi... by dragonwriter on Friday January 17, 2014 @04:23PM (#7078494)
> 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 traffi... by EpicEng on Friday January 17, 2014 @05:49PM (#7079007)
Ok, you're right; I used the wrong term. How does that change the substance of my argument exactly?
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by rhizome on Friday January 17, 2014 @04:15PM (#7078449)
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 traffi... by EpicEng on Friday January 17, 2014 @06:03PM (#7079086)
It was dismissed because there was no proof that they were turned on at the time. How in the hell a cop could ever prove that is beyond me.
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by rhizome on Friday January 17, 2014 @06:52PM (#7079310)
Even better.
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by EpicEng on Friday January 17, 2014 @07:21PM (#7079429)
Right... until some guy watching a video on his glasses while driving plows into you and your family.
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by rhizome on Friday January 17, 2014 @07:43PM (#7079489)
And then it becomes an issue. Am I missing part of the logic here?
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by EpicEng on Friday January 17, 2014 @10:00PM (#7079855)
I believe you are missing a fair amount of logic...
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by rhizome on Saturday January 18, 2014 @12:23AM (#7080194)
ZING!
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by rhizome on Saturday January 18, 2014 @12:24AM (#7080195)
Just because the cop didn't do anything illegal doesn't mean he wasn't being a dick.
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by droopybuns on Friday January 17, 2014 @01:40AM (#7074617)
If we have to choose between a cop and a glasshole for douchebaggery, we all lose.
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by Karunamon on Thursday January 16, 2014 @11:37PM (#7074326)
Pretty typical, unfortunately..
Re:California woman who drove with Google Glass beats traffi... by cLeEOGPw on Friday January 17, 2014 @04:19AM (#7074951)
It is clearly stated that using visual monitors while driving is against the law in the state.