I have had an Apple Watch since it was first released and I can assure you that I wouldn't need to look down at my watch 4 times to "check the time". If she was caught looking up and down 4 times and not paying attention to traffic moving then she was obviously reading a text message. I have a difficult enough time trying to read a text message while being a passenger in a moving car, let alone trying to read one at a stop light. I feel bad for her with receiving the hefty fine but lesson learned. One last thought, why would she even need to look at her watch for the time when most cars have the time on the infotainment system.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Ontario Judge Finds Woman Guilty of Distracted Driving for Looking at Apple Watch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Some of the analogies are lame. Denial is strong with this group. Person was distracted got a ticket end of story.
Before you start putting out more stupid examples, do a test.
Set a timer and wait 20 seconds then ask yourself if that seems like a long time to be sitting idle at a green light. Then for those with Apple watches document how long it takes you to check the time on your watch. Let me know.
Just dont do these things while driving.
Before you start putting out more stupid examples, do a test.
Set a timer and wait 20 seconds then ask yourself if that seems like a long time to be sitting idle at a green light. Then for those with Apple watches document how long it takes you to check the time on your watch. Let me know.
Just dont do these things while driving.
Not defending her... but it doesn't say the light was green for 20 seconds. It says she looked at her watch 4 times in 20 seconds and then failed to move when the light turned green. For all we know the light could have been green for 2 seconds before the cop shined his light. So we don't really know, and I do think the amount of time she actually sat there makes a difference.
I don't see the big deal of quickly looking at things while stopped, as long as you're still mostly paying attention. I will sometimes change my music... seems less distracting than the days of shuffling through cd books and changing cds.
You must be fairly young if you think most cars came standard with a clock for that long a period.
They were usually an extra cost option until at least the mid 80s, when digital clocks became cheap to make, and could be included in some base models. Digital tuning radios began about then as well, and could double as a digital clock.
Heck, even if your car in the 20s-80s had a clock, often it was electric with flimsy gears, and stopped working soon after you took delivery
So I think it'd be safer to claim that most cars with a digital tuning radio for the past thirty years had at least the option of setting its clock display.
Here's a wonderful history with pictures showing how automobile clocks often used to be works of great design before the advent of the digital clocks in the 70's. Ugh.
https://watchismo.blogspot.com/2007/06/time-on-road-dash-of-dashboard-clock.html
I would have to agree. How many times she was looking at her watch while at a red light is moot. And folks don’t roll all the time on green lights when they first flip. He apparently had zero evidence that she didn’t because she was looking at her watch but if that’s the case then it’s actually a plus that she wasn’t rolling cause that would be dangerous. And honestly how long was the delay.
[doublepost=1528122780][/doublepost]
Yep. Sounds like he saw her looking at her watch and waited when the light changed himself to see if she’d do something he could ticket.
I'm almost 65 years old.
You originally said that clocks have been standard for the past "90 years". No way, no how. Heck, even heaters were not standard until the mid 1960s, much less clocks!
As for examples. My first car, a 61 Chevy Sedan Delivery? No clock. My 66 Mustang convertible? No clock. My 64 Nova? No clock.
In fact, buying a stick-on clock (and compass and thermometer) was a popular aftermarket purchase.
Cheers!
Last edited:
Perhaps changing people you know might save your life one day. Almost do not know anyone doing something as irresponsible as checking even at light. Once in a blue moon, county red light no traffic, perhaps the danger is slightly less, people maybe more tempted.
The reason the law bans ALL HANDHELDS WHILE VEHICLE IS NOT PARKED/ENGINE RUNNING is because the driver loses the situational awareness while doing so and suddenly surges fwd when honked. At that point they can be T-boned by a vehicle burning red light (e.g. with loud music even emergency vehicles are hard to hear), cyclist, or child. To illustrate how dangerous distracted driving is, hours after reading the article, on a low traffic 60mph road, next car 100 m ahead, I glanced 1 second at my AC settings. Almost rear-ended the vehicle in front, because the one ahead of it slowed down to turn left on a side road. Expensive big German brakes, sticky rubber, hot day saved car and pride. Last time this? 2006 May, when rushing to a date and actually rear-ending at low speed, but high enough to need 10 years to clear that claim history. 2016 is when I could get low insurance discounts again.
The other day someone besides at red light was reading his cell holding it low. Noticed him advancing just by hearing traffic resume, not even looking ahead! 200 m onwards – so x2 large soccer fields, I honked him and pointed at his eyes. He reacted and complied, carefully aware that one 911 call by another motorist and he is done- they can get intersection cameras, plus eyewitness is accepted in court. Fundamentally, he knew what he was doing as being wrong.
Fact- it takes 100-200 ms or less to glance and get the time- sometimes I do it so fast that I do not realize it. Reason I do it this way because it is faster than looking at two small font spots full of regular vehicle telemetry. That could take 500-750 ms, plus reacquiring SA, at 30-40m/s I missed one and a half footbal fields looking for the digiclock. BTW this is a reason Bugatti Porsche and many makers actually place an analog mid dashboard.
“Until the can prove differently” officers visual is the proof. Point finale. In all handheld conviction, none ever overturned (including the Google glasses) for failing to “prove.” If he saw her staring, that is the proof. Took note? Proof. Observed her doing this? Proof. Why? Because the 100ms gesture is not noticeable by any officer even staring in the car, but 1-10 seconds from red light onwards are tangibly relevant.
Fact: conviction proves that she was checking her Apple Watch functions. The defence argument of it not being a handheld is stupid. What if one mounts the iphone with a kit running style?
Electronically impaired drivers are more prevalent than drunk ones, and am in favour of the 5-10 point suspension and possibly vehicle removal. 1-2 seconds, 200m NO VIS SA at 40-50 mph is madness.
Last edited:
Distracted driving could kill you at any time. Climate change (née Global Warming, until the earth stopped cooperating with the party line) is fake science and won't kill you or your kids or grandchildren. Russians didn't buy any elections; you're better to worry about illegals voting, Democrats who think black people haven't figured out identification, and sketchy voting machines. Alcohol and tobacco? Last I checked they were legal and matters of individual choice. Assault weapons is a scary sounding name,perpetuated by tyrants who want to strip away gun rights for all but governments, for weapons with the same capabilities as a hunting rifle.
Except that she wasn’t driving while distracted. She was sitting at a red light and there is zero mention that she rolled the car without having her eyes on the road. She was literally ticketed for not rolling the moment the light changed because she was looking down for a moment. That’s what the officer reported, that was when she was ‘distracted’.
Very true, and the usual response is for a driver behind to sound their horn, startle the distracted driver who reflexively starts moving suddenly without having had time to assess the state of the traffic around them, potentially causing an accident. This is why you normally sit at the red, watch what's happening as the light goes green, assess that it's safe to proceed then accelerate. Looking up from your lap, instantly accelerating while simultaneously putting your phone on the seat beside you with one hand is unsafe.
Many LEO's are considered a "certified expert" while most civilians are not.
This is one of the reasons why we have seen increased requests for body-cams.
Of course. All the time but I do it seamlessly the way I read subtitles when watching a foreign film. It’s really not that hard to do!
You must be fairly young if you think most cars came standard with a clock for that long a period.
They were usually an extra cost option until at least the mid 80s, when digital clocks became cheap to make, and could be included in some base models. Digital tuning radios began about then as well, and could double as a digital clock.
Heck, even if your car in the 20s-80s had a clock, often it was electric with flimsy gears, and stopped working soon after you took delivery
So I think it'd be safer to claim that most cars with a digital tuning radio for the past thirty years had at least the option of setting its clock display.
That's true, but every car for the last 20 years at least hah included a dashboard clock or one Incorporated into the audio system. Before smartphones almost everyone wore a wristwatch, which required only a quick glance to tell the time, and you can do it without taking your hands off the wheel. Before touch screens in car audio systems there were tactile knobs and buttons with which most people would become so familiar that they could adjust them without even looking. Most cars these days have steering wheel switches which can be learned easily to change stations, or tracks on a playlist, or invoke voice commands. Most phones have handsfree modes as well, but people don't use them. I see people in luxury cars with phones to their ears all the time when the car clearly has Bluetooth, or CarPlay, or Android Auto, but they can't spend 5 minutes to set it up and understand it.
First of all. i do understand that even one person injured/killed from a vehicle accident is too many. Where I differ is that I see a solid black line. On one side is active behavior that should be prohibited. On the other, that same behavior has zero chance of hurting anyone.
How about when you're too damned self-important to realise that not moving for 5 seconds on the green delays everyone behind you for 5 seconds, means people try to change lanes from a stop into the moving lane with no inconsiderate Samantha Bee holding up traffic in it, resulting in accidents, then results in two or three cars who would have otherwise made the green having to wait through another light cycle which cascades backwards through traffic, especially if traffic is heavy. Get enough of you boors in traffic and the whole system comes to a grinding halt. Moral of the story, think about how your behaviour negatively affects others.
Except she was driving
[doublepost=1528141985][/doublepost]
It’s not a bogus ticket, it’s against the law to be distracted behind the wheel and here in Ontario they are really cracking down on it. Doesn’t matter if you’re at a stoplight or moving, driving is driving and you should know what is going on around you at all times. Driving is a privilege and while doing so you not only hold your life in your hands, but anyone around you whom you can impact by making a mistake. It’s irresponsible and stupid to think that checking you phone or a message at ay time is okay while driving
Better to be mouted, in your lap can imply to a cop you’re using it while driving and you’ll probably get a ticket
[doublepost=1528142335][/doublepost]
Stoped at a light it still driving...
Wow. Is everyone out to get you? How about focusing on real facts and stop assuming the people you're chatting with are the problem. I could just as easily call you names, but won't because it's childish.
Fact: People interacting with technology while driving a vehicle has a very real potential to cause problems
Fact: Vehicles not moving do not cause traffic accidents (but may be involved in one)
Fact: If a vehicle is blocking traffic... it's an annoyance (of varying degrees)
Fact: If *I* am blocking traffic for any controllable reason it makes ME a ass.
Fact: If *you* are enraged when being inconvenienced for a few seconds.. it's makes YOU an ass
If your life really is so driven by "seconds matter" you should probably take a helicopter. People are inherently fallible... and every single one of us will, at one point, get distracted sitting at a red light.
Now... go take your anxiety meds and chill. Leave policy debate to people who will at least make an effort to evaluate the facts.
[doublepost=1528146800][/doublepost]
No... stopped at a light is STOPPED.
If we allow policy (and thus laws) to be made based on your logic, taken to it's conclusion you could get a speeding ticket parked in your driveway... because the vehicle has the POTENTIAL to speed.
Laws must be written to encourage or discourage actual behavior of an individual.. not of potential behavior.
[doublepost=1528147045][/doublepost]
OK... then I have a question. At what point does a person/vehicle go from "potential" to "driving"?
[doublepost=1528147235][/doublepost]
Question for you: where you live, do the officers have computers in their vehicle? Where I live they're freakin mounted where the officer can always see the screen, and indeed they receive alerts while the vehicle is moving. The local jurisdictions have determined that this is both a 'safe' scenario and that the benefits outweigh the potential risks.
Last edited:
Stoped on a road with other cars on in and parked in a driveway where there’s only you is a completely different thing. Stopping at a stoplight you are still responsible for the car, still responsible to not impede traffic, pay attention. Doesn’t matter if you’re stopped at a stoplight, I’ve seen multiple accidents happen while someone was stoped, but if you’re looking at your damn phone the no way you could react to anything. Everything you’re saying is complete bull, you’re trying to justify something that is worse than getting behind the wheel drunk, something that has killed so many and cause many more accidents, why do you need to check your phone at every god damn notification you get, they’ll still be there when you arrive. These laws are there because they make the roads a safer place, and disobeying them can and will cause casualties, and you deserve to be charged for any rule you break.
So... you've seen a stopped vehicle cause an accident? Did you get a video? I ask because the laws of physics would suggest that the stopped vehicle was most likely hit by a moving vehicle rather than the other way around.