Slashdot Mirror
Woman Looking At Apple Watch Found Guilty of Distracted Driving (nationalpost.com)
Ontario law defines distracted driving as "holding or using a handheld wireless communication device" -- and a judge just fined Victoria Ambrose $400 for checking her Apple Watch while waiting at a stoplight. Long-time Slashdot reader innocent_white_lamb quotes the National Post:
Even with its miniaturization and trendy technology, an Apple Watch is no safer "than a cellphone taped to someone's wrist," said a justice of the peace, while convicting a Guelph woman this month of holding or using a hand-held wireless communication device while driving... "The key to determining this matter is distraction. It is abundantly clear from the evidence that Ms. Ambrose was distracted..."
When the light turned green Ambrose had remained parked at an intersection, according to the officer who ticketed her, though two cars ahead of her had moved forward. Ambrose testified that she was only checking the time, but the officer told the court he'd seen Ambrose check her watch four different times.
When the light turned green Ambrose had remained parked at an intersection, according to the officer who ticketed her, though two cars ahead of her had moved forward. Ambrose testified that she was only checking the time, but the officer told the court he'd seen Ambrose check her watch four different times.
Lying in court.
Clearly, she wanted to know if the time had changed from a few seconds before, because cars don't have things like clocks on the dashboard.
Yeah that's a given so stop staring at the clock. It is intimidated by your dirty looks. Spend your time paying attention to the world or just KYS already.
How many times would one reasonably check one's watch while waiting for one minute at a traffic light? Also, are dashboard clocks not standard in all automobiles? She was obviously screwing around with her device, which is wisely very illegal while driving in Ontario.
The lever is handheld and it communicates my intentions wirelessly to other road users. If I ever get pulled over for not using it, I will have a good argument to defend myself.
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
How many people crashed their cars because the were tuning the radio, adjusting the heater, checking the speedometer, spilled hot coffee in their laps, talking to the passenger, looked to the left instead of to the right...
The only solution is the self driving car. Humans are obviously incompetent. They can't even properly operate an elevator.
Isn't the car radio responsible for for displaying CallerID and time these days?
Distracted driving (ie fucking around with an electronic device) now causes more injury and death in Ontario than driving while intoxicated. A petty crime it is not if it kills people and ruins lives.
Guelph ?? Canada sure is a strange country.
Lots of part of Canada are like that. The cops are so bored that their only real job is to generate revenue through ticketing people for no good reason.
Like in Quebec: https://youtu.be/nsV3MrshZt4?t=1891
If they want to fine this lady, then how about they broaden the definition of distracted driving first, and catch her again?
I'm sure a crying baby or a dog jumping around can be just as distracting. Are these also handheld wireless communication devices?
In Ontario maybe but it was declared a couple of years ago in New York State that is was legal to text while stopped at a red light under the law, once you move again though,
I grew up on this city, and was beaten so badly by the local cops that I now,walk with a limp. They are abusive and have no idea what they're doing.
As she was pulled over in Ontario, your reply is utterly pointless.
The reasoning behind zero tolerance for any interaction with an electronic device while behind the wheel of a motor vehicle that isn't parked is that people, being the dummies they usually are, would often NOT finish their texting when the light turns green and would begin driving again while still dinking around on their device for a few more seconds. Through an intersection.
Even when stopped at a red light, you are still operating your vehicle, and thus are to remain alert to what is going on around you in the real world.
What she was looking at/using should have 0 bearing on this considering "when the light turned green Ambrose had remained parked at an intersection."
I don't care if someone's looking at the sky, people who do this shit deserve a distracted driving ticket, and there's a special place in hell for people who do this and make you wait through multiple light cycles.
Apple devices aren't capable of wireless communication.
Have gnu, will travel.
What is the difference between a watch and a smart watch?
I still drive a 2002 Mazda. No caller anything.
I stick my phone in the console and even if I hear something, I won't pull it out until I'm stopped at a light.
Most I don't respond to. But No One has ever derided me for not responding fast enough. IF someone did, I would explain the situation and if they had a problem with it ("No Excuses!!"), I would terminate the relationship at my earliest convenience.
There is NO need what-so-ever to answer the phone while driving. IF someone - like a head of state or US state department has to be that accessible - they have drivers.
My doc tennis partner doesn't even answer the phone when driving.
Me, "What if there's an Emergency?"
Doc, "There are people to do the job. They stabilize and do whatever. The ER docs are much better at it than me anyway. I'll come in the morning and check."
I wish they would define being distracted while stopped at a red light differently from driving down the road. Sure, it can cause problems and it should be something you get a ticket for, but $400 seems excessive, and takes away from the importance of the message of not being distracted while actually driving.
It is pointless to say utterly pointless but you probably feel better. Feeling better is all that really matters.
Ya got any sources to back that up?
why do people such as yourself post on slashdot stories about "A" and then start talking about "B"?
the article is clear, she was fined in Ontario. What do the New York State laws have to do with this? was she at least on her way towards New York state?
Are you not still operating a motor vehicle when it is stopped at a red light?
If your 16 year old was driving, with you in the passenger seat, would you be fine with him/her diving right into the phone while at a red light, instead of staying aware in case, for instance, another driver is running the red when your light turns green? Or making sure all pedestrians have cleared the intersection before proceeding?
People like the woman in question are distracted, then notice the light has already turned green, and then hit the gas before looking for these common hazards.
There is never, ever a need to text or scroll a feed when behind the wheel. There is no such thing as an "emergency text". Park the car off the road and play with your phone to your heart's content.
Woman Looking At Apple Watch Found Guilty of Delusional Driving... Still fits though.
This reminds me of the need to separate texting while stopped and texting while moving offences.
Ah. Good ol' Montreal, Ontario.
A moron with power preaching about safety. And when he'll kill someone while drunk driving, his buddies will get him out with a slap on the wrist. Justice has been done. And the cop will get a bonus from the money collected by the state.
But that's the point, the light was no longer "red", it had turned green, forcing two cars who had been waiting to go around her, thus she was blocking the flow of traffic for no good reason.
In New York, the problem would have been immediately resolved after 100 milliseconds by the other drivers yelling loudly obscenities at her and continuously honking on their horns. In Canada, the other drivers were probably just too polite to honk or say anything, or if they did say something, they probably just mumbled an apology under their breath, that she probably couldn't hear in the first place.
Yeah, and so do traffic lights. Hang up and drive.
IMHO, the important consideration here is that she wasn't just ticketed for checking her watch, but she failed to respond to the light turning green, while checking her watch. Seems like this is good use of police discretion, in that she first exhibited symptoms of distraction, and only then did the officer determine what the distraction was, and ticket her accordingly.
Having been given a ticket for looking at my phone when driving (when I absolutely had not been doing so), I appreciate the idea that the whole incident was a response to the driver's failure to drive appropriately, rather than simply an excuse for a ticket.
Two clarifications:
1) I'm assuming it's true that she was first acting distracted, as described by the police officer. Not that I believe officers never lie, just that is sounds like the driver didn't dispute getting a late start when the light turned green.
2) I'm not saying I've never checked my phone while driving. Just that the one time I actually got a ticket for it I had NOT been checking my phone. No surprise that it was the last day of the month, during the period back when the NYPD has been accused of having implicit ticket quotas for officers.
i'd take these kind of bullshit rules more seriously if they outlawed OEM touch screen center console systems. how is that 'okay' but touching a cell phone is haram?
I have a ford fusion with the 'my touch' system. doing things like turning on the heated seats, or turning down the temperature require touching a finicky touch-screen panel. which invariably requires you to take your eyes off the road.
There is a law that covers that. Ontario has three classes of violations for this:
* Distracted driving. That's what was used here; it specifically outlaws using handheld electronic devices. This is the most recent law as well.
* Careless driving. A generic offence that can cover things like using your console systems.
* Dangerous driving; should be self-evident from the name. Probably requires a higher standard of evidence than the other two, and has correspondingly tougher penalties. Unlike the other two, it is a criminal offence. Includes an automatic one-year license suspension if convicted.
See also "stunt driving".
Reference: https://www.legalline.ca/legal...
As she was pulled over in Ontario, your reply is utterly pointless.
The reasoning behind zero tolerance for any interaction with an electronic device while behind the wheel of a motor vehicle that isn't parked is that people, being the dummies they usually are, would often NOT finish their texting when the light turns green and would begin driving again while still dinking around on their device for a few more seconds. Through an intersection.
Even when stopped at a red light, you are still operating your vehicle, and thus are to remain alert to what is going on around you in the real world.
Interesting. Is distraction limited to only electronic devices? It is not possible to get distracted by anything else? We need to get some new laws! Think of something something!
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
In New York, the problem would have been immediately resolved after 100 milliseconds by the other drivers yelling loudly obscenities at her and continuously honking on their horns..
In Texas, they would have taken a second amendment solution, and been invited to the White house.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
She technically would fail a driving exam for such behavior, as would many drivers for other common driving inattentiveness. She was stopped and often drivers while stopped take time to adjust temperature, check navigation , sip a beverage etc... all reasonable activities. A delay at the light is not a major danger to others. $50 plus the hassle of getting pulled over and insurance implications should be enough wake up call to her and others. The lady lied or is unfit to drive if she thinks checking time takes so long. She was likely checking other stuff perhaps weather , messages etc...
This is absurd. We shouldn't be penalizing people for looking at devices when they are STOPPED at a light. This will only encourage people to play with the devices when their vehicles are in motion and police are less likely to see them doing it.
When the hell did common sense go out the window?
Here you go
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/opp-distracted-driving-death-1.4019014
The problem was she didn't drive forwards on a green light, and has nothing to do with the Apple Watch. If she drove forward when she should of, then nothing would happened. Stop making this about the watch and make it about the total lack of driver responsibility.
Depends..if I'm waiting a minute at a light, i probably would be checking my watch "is this light broken, or does it only FEEL like forever". Would also have raised the watch to see both it and the light at the same time. Doesn't sound like this case though.
As for dashboard clocks, some get replaced by spitting out what radio station is on, or the current track playing on the cd/mp3 player. Actually have to reach over and press a button to get it back to the time..for a split second, then it's back to by
That's one stupid judge. The car was not moving, therefore she wasn't driving distracted.
Most efficient are drivers in Greece (esp. taxi drivers) who somehow manage to honk half a second BEFORE the light is green.
Title says all
The summary says, "though two cars ahead of her had moved forward". If they were ahead, they didn't have to go around her.
Some dingus trying to get cute with the intent of the law.
If you believed slashdotters, it is also practically impossible to detect if someone is speeding and the reasons why not are convoluted and entertaining.
You misread it. The two cars were ahead of her
My point isn't that the woman isn't a moron if she's texting
But she is, though.
but distracted driving is literally the first law in Canada the gives the cops the ability to pull you over for literally no reason
You mean other than the reason that distracted driving causes more deaths than intoxicated driving, and police have a sworn duty to stop people from operating their motor vehicles dangerously in ways that would lead to death? Of course, in my experience, cops aren't doing shit to stop this. I see them texting and driving just as much as the public does.
You know what, fuck you. I hope you get killed by a distracted driver. The irony in that would be delicious.
This should be marked up as funny, check Google for where Montreal is. Its commonly referred to as "La Belle Province" ;-)
In Ontario, yes. Pay attention.
didnt quebec secede years ago? only quebecers care about quebec. and they aren't relevant to ontario driving laws ANYWAY.
yea, the texas law is similar to NYS as well. it even goes one step further. as long as your car isnt moving, you can look at your phone. this includes not only stopped at a stop light, but sitting in traffic as well.
Well, from a "danger* point of view, it makes sense :
- if your car is moving, if you're distracted, you're at heavy risk of causing some accident.
- if your car is immobile (no matter if it's because you've parked and shut down the engine, or simply because the traffice is stoped), if you're distracted, at worse you're only at risk at make the people behind you angry because you didn't resume driving as fast a they would have wished, but otherwise you don't cause any danger.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
My 16 year old? No - she's oblivious enough to the real world as it is. Get her nose in a phone and we'll be there all morning. My wife? Yes, because I trust her competence. I know she's going to drop the phone as soon as the traffic starts to move. The same goes for people drinking and eating in their cars. Some people can do "distracting" tasks in a few seconds of downtime whilst stopped in traffic, and maintain awareness and be completely safe. Other people can't. It's something that anyone can teach themselves to do, I think.
Just waiting for people to get ticketed for checking their speed. We need some clear definition of what "distracted" is.
This is retarded, plan and simple.
If looking at a phone or a watch is now unlawful. Then the following must be unlawful as well.
1. adjusting your set
2. adjusting climate controls
3. adjusting radio/audio controls
4. adjusting the rear view mirror or side mirrors
5. reading into the passenger side area for anything (say a book)
6. using storage locations, center arm areas, glove compartments
7. reaching behind or below the seat for anything (say a book)
8. grooming
9. eating
disagree, don't care.
As she was pulled over in Ontario, your reply is utterly pointless.
The reasoning behind zero tolerance for any interaction with an electronic device while behind the wheel of a motor vehicle that isn't parked is that people, being the dummies they usually are, would often NOT finish their texting when the light turns green and would begin driving again while still dinking around on their device for a few more seconds. Through an intersection.
Even when stopped at a red light, you are still operating your vehicle, and thus are to remain alert to what is going on around you in the real world.
More often than not, Texters would not even notice that the light has gone green until someone behind them has beeped at them. Then they'll act indignant because they were beeped at.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
You're responsible to be alert until you're legally parked.