I see it both ways. Can understand [strike]the nanny-state [/strike] and can understand how there could be some twisted, fun, or informative use for it wherever you are. Personally, I don't think it would impact my driving...but I may just be being arrogant.
As J. Clarkson once said, funny how something like a phone or Glass is
deemed not acceptable because it's a 'distraction', yet it's ok for a couple
to have screaming kids in the back where the driver is constantly looking
back at them to tell them to stop kicking each other, etc., during which the
driver isn't looking at the road.
On the motorway I've seen drivers eating meals (with both hands! Using their
knees to turn the steering wheel), putting on clothes, reading books, all sorts
of crazy things. Sadly never a copper around to give them an earful for such
Evidence is now available to show that, if anything, forcing drivers to use
hands-free devices has made lack of driving attention worse (see recent
New Scientist report). Since various cars already have HUD setups, and
onboard satnavs & general car control systems make use of displays that
force one to look away from the road, it's clearly a contradictory idea that
Glass should be singled out for a ban. If Glass can't be used, then neither
should any screen-based control setup or HUD in cars.
This kind of political move is just bandwagon-thinking. They're assuming
there will be a vocal minority against it, so they're prempting the outcry to
Traffic law should be based on evidence & reason, not public bias
and political soap-boxing.
And cypeq is right, I don't remotely see how it could be enforced.
Heck, the police here don't even enforce existing laws against
using normal mobiles (not hands-free I mean); I see dirvers
using them all the time, though nothing was as bad as watching
a woman drive her car past me up a hill (I was waiting to cross
the road), past several turn-offs, a library (lots of children around),
three bus stops and a bus terminus, all while putting on her freakin'
makeup using the car's sun-visor mirror, ie. not looking at the road
_at all_. A woman across the road from me stared in astonishment;
we both looked on, half expecting the driver to plough into a tree.
Tech devices like Glass are the least important issues the govt
needs to be tackling on the roads. Just general bad driving is
more blatantly dangerous. I see no end of people breaking red
lights (anyone else here in Edinburgh? Check Queensferry Road
junction, it happens on every change of lights), entering box junction
grids when the exit is not clear, etc.
r1master, have you got Glass and do you drive with one? Unless yes to both then you are the one who doesn't know what they are talking about. So who do I listen to, some nimrod on a forum with no credibility or a whole Government department whose sole reason for existing is road safety? Back under your bridge, troll
I wish I could say i'm proud to be British.... i'm just not, because it's such a nanny state. The department for transport and no doubt the Tories probably can't wait until cars drive themselves, because obviously a human shouldn't be in control of all that moving mass.
back_by_demand - Wow calm down... You're mean...
I know that very few people have access to these so how can a group start making judgement calls on something they are not using (and if they are using them, I would have thought there would be a study or something...)
From what I have READ... Using these and looking at instructions for a map for example would be a quick look up to the screen and forward again, no different to looking in the rear view mirror or speedometer.
Obviously you would not want to use it for reading a text message.
My point is that the governments these days are very quick at saying NO to something they don't understand or invest any time into researching...
Again, you're mean... don't be a mean... we are after value conversation and discussion here... not bashing...
R1Master, am I mean? Really? welcome to the internet, I have no patience to dress up all sweetness and light for people who think their self-confessed limited knowledge exceeds that of a Government Dept with hundreds of people working in a professional capacity for the purpose of road safety.
Yes, point conceded "looking at instructions for a map for example would be a quick look up to the screen and forward again, no different to looking in the rear view mirror or speedometer" very probably, the same as you could likely do things with a mobile phone that would not distract you.
The point is that whilst using one you could also be checking Facebook updates or browsing items for shopping, or watching porn. Nobody bans things for the things that are harmless, they get banned for the ban things they do.
Next time you go on a plane try taking a loaded gun with you, then try to argue that you have no intention of using it and that is excellent for home defence, all very laudible, but unlikely to get a ban lifted because of the potential for misuse. These are the things that the people at the DoT, DVLA and DSA think of whilst you paint a rosy view of how harmless something is from your ivory tower.
I can see multiple uses for Google Glass for safe drivers.
1. Assist in determining traffic violations, if any.
2. Assist in navigation, highlighting relevant signs on road.
3. Assist in police officer power abuse prevention.
There are some cons, mainly in safety and privacy given the type of technology. However, responsible drivers would benefit; irresponsible drivers will still create/cause accidents/hazards regardless of Google Glass. Let me ask: which is safer, a Facebook browsing driver with a cell phone or Google Glass? Neither is safe, but I bet the Google Glass wearing one is at least less of a risk versus the other. I can also see why police would hate it - cause they hate being recorded.