I agree that right now devices like this are a huge distraction while driving, but devices which are physically coupled to the driver's head have huge potential to actually improve the attentiveness and overall safety of a driver, so long as they're made to do so. Outright banning all such devices limits this possibility.
I really wish the direct approach to the law could work so that this technology could evolve at its normal pace. What's the issue we're trying to solve? Unnecessary injury/property damage due to distracted driving. What should the law be? Enforce a severe punishment for drivers who cause personal injury or property damage while driving distracted. Oh, you were typing a text message when you ran over that pedestrian? Well we're going to drain your personal assets first, perhaps garnish your wages, and then if and only if those assets don't cover the damages your insurance will start to kick in. Oh, the pedestrian died due to your provable distractedness? You're going to prison.
But again, I realize that's very ideal and won't work in the real world. Negligence doesn't respond to punishment in the same way as crimes which require the perpetrator to make an active decision to forego their morals. Negligence is by definition passive. It's the act of not doing. You could argue that device-induce distracted driving is a more active form of negligence, but the psychology behind the way beeps and buzzes control our lives is weird. Want to cut ahead of a long line when all you need to do is ask someone a question? Look up the phone number for the person sitting behind the desk and call them. Nine times out of ten they'll answer (protip to students: this is a really good way to hack your university's registration office). Logic is completely suspended when Pavlov's bell rings.