There is a perceived difference between the camera on a phone and that on glasses. You have to aim the phone at someone to record them, and that produces a behavior that can be associated with recording. It's not foolproof however and I have seen plenty of fights break out because someone who was texting was perceived to be taking a picture or doing a video recording.It's absolutely happened, especially with Google Glass -- because those were initially sold to developers, and the general public couldn't yet buy them. That created a lot of paranoia around them, since they weren't a product most people could really try out themselves and see what they really did and didn't do.
A private bar or club can ban whatever they like, just like some enforce arbitrary dress codes (like no tennis shoes). But eventually, I think the idea of glasses with cameras integrated will become mainstream enough that people stop treating it like a special situation. Every smartphone on the planet can do the same stuff and people always have them in hand in these establishments.
I don't see people warming up to the idea of potential recording. LED signals don't work since they will be bypassed. I remember when all camera phones had to make a shutter sound when a photo was taken. These days you don't know so you have to assume that if a lens is aimed at you then it's recording. That's going to be a source of tension for many people.
If we had legal electronics jammers that disabled all electronic devices within a defined radius then individuals would likely be more comfortable with the tech, unless of course, you had a pacemaker. This is fundamental weapons development. Make no mistake, stealth cameras are weapons.
I think an appropriate response would be to assume all Ray-Ban glasses are Facebook spyware and to treat anyone wearing any Ray-Ban merchandise as being a recording device. Kill the tech by making their brand crumble. Let all other eyewear manufactures know that this tech will end their company.