# People driving while wearing hoodies



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

Whats the score with this, how fucking cold is your car that you want to sacrifice the ability to look over your shoulder into your blind spot.


----------



## t'mill (Jul 31, 2012)

This bugs me too. If your that cold, truly that cold, then put your frickin heaters on :x


----------



## TTSam (Dec 12, 2013)

Its not about the heating, its about "looking badman innit!!"

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

TTSam said:


> Its not about the heating, its about "looking badman innit!!"
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Bit like the berks that wear sunglasses indoors, or at night :roll:


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

Do you mean wear hoodies with the hood up?! Or have you seen people with MASSIVE hoods that even when down restrict their view?!


----------



## jamman (May 6, 2002)

Matt B said:


> Whats the score with this, how fucking cold is your car that you want to sacrifice the ability to look over your shoulder into your blind spot.


Matt my good mate you live in Liverpool isn't it obvious? *

* They've nicked it


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

TTSam said:


> Its not about the heating, its about "looking badman innit!!"
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


alrite GWA

J
xx


----------



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

NickG said:


> Do you mean wear hoodies with the hood up?! Or have you seen people with MASSIVE hoods that even when down restrict their view?!


Hoods up, sometimes with baseball caps on under hoods as well so it looks like the hood has some kind of sun visor lol


----------



## davelincs (Jan 1, 2010)

jamman said:


> Matt B said:
> 
> 
> > Whats the score with this, how fucking cold is your car that you want to sacrifice the ability to look over your shoulder into your blind spot.
> ...


 :lol:


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

Matt B said:


> NickG said:
> 
> 
> > Do you mean wear hoodies with the hood up?! Or have you seen people with MASSIVE hoods that even when down restrict their view?!
> ...


Are they usually driving Corsa's, Punto's or Saxo's? :lol:


----------



## zltm089 (Jul 27, 2009)

Bad man rude boy style! :roll:


----------



## TTSam (Dec 12, 2013)

Lollypop86 said:


> TTSam said:
> 
> 
> > Its not about the heating, its about "looking badman innit!!"
> ...


My hair clearly isnt ginger :s

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

TTSam said:


> Lollypop86 said:
> 
> 
> > TTSam said:
> ...


Maybe your a gardener?? :?


----------



## TTSam (Dec 12, 2013)

Nope not a gardener haha

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

lol private joke Nick  lol

J
xx


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

V


jamman said:


> Matt B said:
> 
> 
> > Whats the score with this, how fucking cold is your car that you want to sacrifice the ability to look over your shoulder into your blind spot.
> ...


A stereotypical slur on the place I was born - how date you sir! I resemble that remark. Mind you I did get my Mk2 Escort nicked from Hanover Street. Then again, I had lived there for half my life and the locks were rubbish. Hoodies? Could be worse - could be snorkels 

A guy got done for driving with his hands behind his head the other day - said he was holding the wheel with his knees.

I remember a one armed rally driver who cranked the steering wheel with a knob on the rim and he held the steering wheel with his knee whilst changing gear with his left arm. He entered the RAC rally in the '80s and I seem to remember he had some support from the police in some way - may have been ex or sponsorship or something.

Point is you can overcome a handicap but why give yourself one?


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

John-H said:


> there for half my life and the locks were rubbish. Hoodies? Could be worse - could be snorkels
> A guy got done for driving with his hands behind his head the other day - said he was holding the wheel with his knees.


Lol, saw this idiot on the news. Funnier still was the policemans reaction. Where I agree it was silly of him to do it, the overreaction from the traffic cop was equally funny, you would think the guy was sitting on the roof driving with his feet dangling through the sunroof while juggling 3 hand grenades blind folded.

I'm mean really the chance of the car suddenly losing control and crashing are minimal. That and the road was empty. So even in the massively unlikely event of a blowout the idiot would only do himself harm.

Like I said still stupid to do, but more because you might get caught and look like a penis on TV. :lol:


----------



## Pugwash69 (Jun 12, 2012)

I wear a hoodie most times, but hood down.
The thing that makes me laugh is when you see a "dude" driving towards you with one hand at the 12 o'clock position, head down and staring upwards at you like he's using the force.


----------



## TTSam (Dec 12, 2013)

Or people driving with headphones in! That cant be safe, being unable to hear anything

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

It's interesting to see where people draw the line on what's 'dangerous' or 'safe', when in reality it's actually more or less 'risky' and the degree of severity we attach to risk depends on our own perspective - which may or may not be fair and proportionate.

One armed rally drivers changing gear using their knees is Ok but if you, with two arms learnt to do it with one hand in your pocket and were caught, you'd receive no sympathy - and yet is the risk not the same if the practice and training was the same? An academic example perhaps but demonstrates perspective.

Little science seems to be applied to risk. Who considers for example, that on average, driving more means more risk of an accident? Seems obvious but we don't think much about, it such as when changing jobs and covering more miles and we consider far lesser factors of more importance.

Tiredness, mood, age, health, alcohol, shoes, kids, loud music, funny radio programmes, time of day etc etc. There are many factors that affect driving risk but poor understanding of the associated risk, if any, is overruled by need and practice.

Did you know, if you smoke 10 cigarettes per day you have a one in 200 chance of dieing in any one year? Why do the same people buy lottery tickets with a one in 14,000,000 chance of winning the jackpot and paying for their own funeral?

One thing you need in life is a sense of proportion I think :wink:


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

TTSam said:


> Or people driving with headphones in! That cant be safe, being unable to hear anything
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I see this a lot! Whats the deal with this?! Surely these people don't all not have radios in their car?


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

NickG said:


> TTSam said:
> 
> 
> > Or people driving with headphones in! That cant be safe, being unable to hear anything
> ...


"hands-free"?

J
xx


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

Lollypop86 said:


> NickG said:
> 
> 
> > TTSam said:
> ...


People do that!? Whos THAT desperate to talk to someone that they wear headphones constantly whilst driving!?


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

someone who cant afford a parrot or too lazt to fit one?

J
xx


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Case in point. Jess I'm guessing, uses hands free and perceives that need, so understands why someone might have earphones in, whereas Nick clearly doesn't do this so associates only the risk, not the benefit.

Take a step back and recognise that there is extra risk associated with it's distraction but then quantify it as best you can with other risks that you take on. How does it compare? If it's hugely significant then fair enough but if it's much the same as other things, or less, does it not get lost in a sea of noise that makes up the big picture of risk? Just asking


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

John-H said:


> Case in point. Jess I'm guessing, uses hands free and perceives that need, so understands why someone might have earphones in, whereas Nick clearly doesn't do this so associates only the risk, not the benefit.


No I dont....my handsfree goes through my headunit........but I have friends who dont and use thier earphones to talk while driving.......

assumptions are usually the mother of all fuck ups.....

J
xx


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

I also have bluetooth in my daily car, which works amazingly!

Was more of a question as to why i've seen so many people wearing headphones in the car because it looks weird...

So really this thread concludes that;

If you are driving in your car;

1) Wearing a hoody - with the hood up
2) And a baseball cap
3) And sunglasses
4) With your headphones in

... then we probably all think your a knob!? :lol:


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

or just cheap lol

J
xx


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

My mistake. Ok, so you both use "hands free" in that you don't hold a phone with your hand obviously (eliminating that risk) - the confusion is over earphones with wires?


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

yes you know the ones your get with your phone with the microphone on the wire? I know people who still use those, however much it is against the law because you are having to divert your attention to operate the phone they still use them for the cheap option of being able to talk still whilst driving

J
xx


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

I remember those. Could just be listening to music though. Headphones may blot out a car horn which adds risk but so does a phone call even if hands free as the person on the other end can't see your road hazards and won't shut up for a tricky bit like a passenger. Music is easier to ignore. More swings and roundabouts on risk vs convenience (my point) - nothing to do with the way they look though :wink:


----------



## NickG (Aug 15, 2013)

But white head phones LOOK trendy?

"Look at me, i have an iphone!"

:wink:


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

Deaf people are allowed to drive on a normal license. They don't even have to inform the DVLA if they're driving a car or motorbike.


----------



## kevbeans (Jun 14, 2013)

I really should avoid this one but here goes anyway. For a start I totally agree with the OP that wearing a hoodie that restricts your view is dangerous and shouldn't be done.

Its the whole mobile phone thing that gets me. Lets say 10 years ago your driving your car and your pager goes off, you check it and realise you have to go to a certain destination. Grab the A to Z that's on your passenger seat, have a look in the index, find the right page then do the rest of your route one handed keeping an eye on your map turning pages when you need to. I don't think the plod would have batted an eye lid, you certainly wouldn't have got points so how is it that today looking at google maps on my smartphone more dangerous? Ok so if you don't want to compare past with present lets compare 2 different modern day scenarios, driving along chatting with a mate, music blasting and fancy a cig (I don't smoke by the way its just an example) so I pick up my bag from the passenger footwell, find my lighter and cigs and spark up. How is this possibly safer than if I'm peacefully driving along at the speed limit, my phone rings and I answer it and have a quick chat?

In the future you won't even be able to look at your watch without getting 3 points.... flame away :roll:


----------



## Lollypop86 (Oct 26, 2013)

FYI most sensible people get their **** and lighter out when they get in the car and put it somewhere reachable lol....i did in my ibiza but i dont smoke in the tt

Justtttt SAYINGGGGG

J
xx


----------



## kevbeans (Jun 14, 2013)

Lollypop86 said:


> FYI most sensible people get their **** and lighter out when they get in the car and put it somewhere reachable lol....i did in my ibiza but i dont smoke in the tt
> 
> Justtttt SAYINGGGGG
> 
> ...


I work with a guy who until a few months ago permanently smoked, he would spend 5 mins before each cig searching his bag and pockets for the packet and if once he found them he could find the lighter within the next 5 miles it was a miracle but he was probably an exception as he can never find anything, especially his phone!


----------



## zltm089 (Jul 27, 2009)

kevbeans said:


> I really should avoid this one but here goes anyway. For a start I totally agree with the OP that wearing a hoodie that restricts your view is dangerous and shouldn't be done.
> 
> Its the whole mobile phone thing that gets me. Lets say 10 years ago your driving your car and your pager goes off, you check it and realise you have to go to a certain destination. Grab the A to Z that's on your passenger seat, have a look in the index, find the right page then do the rest of your route one handed keeping an eye on your map turning pages when you need to. I don't think the plod would have batted an eye lid, you certainly wouldn't have got points so how is it that today looking at google maps on my smartphone more dangerous? Ok so if you don't want to compare past with present lets compare 2 different modern day scenarios, driving along chatting with a mate, music blasting and fancy a cig (I don't smoke by the way its just an example) so I pick up my bag from the passenger footwell, find my lighter and cigs and spark up. How is this possibly safer than if I'm peacefully driving along at the speed limit, my phone rings and I answer it and have a quick chat?
> 
> In the future you won't even be able to look at your watch without getting 3 points.... flame away :roll:


Apparently, if you have a passenger in the car, they can "alert" you if something unexpected happens...whereas if you're on the phone, you're all "alone"in the car and the other person can't alert you of any danger...... That's what they said in the speed awareness course... :?


----------



## brian1978 (Jul 10, 2013)

kevbeans said:


> I really should avoid this one but here goes anyway. For a start I totally agree with the OP that wearing a hoodie that restricts your view is dangerous and shouldn't be done.
> 
> Its the whole mobile phone thing that gets me. Lets say 10 years ago your driving your car and your pager goes off, you check it and realise you have to go to a certain destination. Grab the A to Z that's on your passenger seat, have a look in the index, find the right page then do the rest of your route one handed keeping an eye on your map turning pages when you need to. I don't think the plod would have batted an eye lid, you certainly wouldn't have got points so how is it that today looking at google maps on my smartphone more dangerous? Ok so if you don't want to compare past with present lets compare 2 different modern day scenarios, driving along chatting with a mate, music blasting and fancy a cig (I don't smoke by the way its just an example) so I pick up my bag from the passenger footwell, find my lighter and cigs and spark up. How is this possibly safer than if I'm peacefully driving along at the speed limit, my phone rings and I answer it and have a quick chat?
> 
> In the future you won't even be able to look at your watch without getting 3 points.... flame away :roll:


WARNING THIS MAY CAUSE A BLACK HOLE TO OPEN UP ENGULFING ALL THAT WE KNOW.......

But I agree with Kev on this. That's 3 now  In the days of the Nokia brick I had a job in sales and marketing and my mobile literally ringed constantly (on one on the 5 tones it had :lol: ) I also was required to Drive perhaps 5 hours a day and did about 2000 miles a week, I spend hours and hours driving with a phone glued to me ear. I was perfectly legal and pc plod didn't give a monkeys.
I had that job for 5 years 4 of which it was legal to drive and phone. Not even once did it cause even a near miss. That's probably 1/4 million miles on the phone driving.


----------



## kevbeans (Jun 14, 2013)

brian1978 said:


> WARNING THIS MAY CAUSE A BLACK HOLE TO OPEN UP ENGULFING ALL THAT WE KNOW.......
> 
> But I agree with Kev on this. That's 3 now


Ha ha, you know this just won't last


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

That's another thing with the "acceptable" risk threshold being lowered all the time with things previously considered acceptable now not. Perhaps roads are busier but often it doesn't stack up - like previous 60 mph limits being reduced to 50mph when cars have better tyres, suspension and brakes and the lonely road hasn't changed.

Spandex - deaf people can't hear car horns, good point - like one armed people finding driving more of a handful or one eyed people being less able to judge distance and with a partially obscured view (especially if they have a big nose) - risks one person can't avoid but is allowed, yet another would consider dangerous to mimic.

Nick, white headphones - I see :lol: Then there are the cyborg attachments too - I sometimes think they should have a laser eyepiece :wink:


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

John-H said:


> Spandex - deaf people can't hear car horns, good point - like one armed people finding driving more of a handful or one eyed people being less able to judge distance and with a partially obscured view (especially if they have a big nose) - risks one person can't avoid but is allowed, yet another would consider dangerous to mimic.


Some of the stuff I read said the (very minimal, admitedly) research that had been done into it suggested that there was no increased risk due to deafness.

If you think about it, it's pretty unlikely that hearing a car horn will help you avoid an accident. People don't use their horns to prevent accidents... They use their brakes or steering wheels. The horn is usually used _afterwards_ to reprimand the other driver.


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

I don't just think it's about us changing our definition of acceptable risk (although that does happen). It just takes time to understand risks and then to legislate for them. Mobile phone use, for example has been proven to increase risk. This is just a provable statistical fact, no matter whether it agrees with our limited personal experience or not. But when mobile phones were introduced this information wasn't available so people drove around for years legally using their phones at the same time. The risk didn't change and our willingness to accept risk didn't change. All that changed was our understanding of that risk.

The same thing happened with seat belts. I don't think anyone ever thought it was acceptable for so many people to die in relatively low speed accidents, they just didn't know it was avoidable. Once enough data was available from accidents involving cars fitted with seat belts, it was obvious they should be mandatory.

As an example of us changing our definition of acceptable risk, sat nav use has also been shown to increase risk, but it's been decided that this is a necessary and unavoidable part of driving, so that risk has been accepted.


----------



## Hark (Aug 23, 2007)

Drove last winter back from Oxford to Birmingham in a hoody with hood up. Had no coat and the heater failed due to a coolant leak, sooooooo cold.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

Hark said:


> Drove last winter back from Oxford to Birmingham in a hoody with hood up. Had no coat and the heater failed due to a coolant leak, sooooooo cold.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Then you are a twat


----------



## kevbeans (Jun 14, 2013)

Spandex said:


> As an example of us changing our definition of acceptable risk, sat nav use has also been shown to increase risk, but it's been decided that this is a necessary and unavoidable part of driving, so that risk has been accepted.


If this is the case yet there is another option (an a to z) then how is it necessary and unavoidable to use a sat nav?

This isn't just aimed at spandex but everyone. I think it was proven somewhere that certain music made people drive faster so lets say that music was the kind you listened to and it was made illegal to listen to it whilst driving would you continue to do so?


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

kevbeans said:


> If this is the case yet there is another option (an a to z) then how is it necessary and unavoidable to use a sat nav?
> 
> This isn't just aimed at spandex but everyone. I think it was proven somewhere that certain music made people drive faster so lets say that music was the kind you listened to and it was made illegal to listen to it whilst driving would you continue to do so?


Because an A-Z is no safer than using a sat nav. In fact it's less safe, as you don't have directions read out to you with an A-Z. Navigating is an unavoidable part of driving, so it makes sense to allow the use of maps or GPS, even if they are a potential distraction. The Police still have the option of prosecuting you if they think you're distracted to the point it's affecting your driving when using GPS, or a paper map.

If it was illegal to drive to certain types of music but the Police had no real way of knowing what you were listening to, I think I'd make a choice as to whether or not I felt it affected my driving. I know I don't feel as in control as I should be when using a phone, so if I'm in a car without bluetooth, I don't use one. Even with bluetooth, I wait till I'm stopped at a junction if I want to start a call because I think it's too distracting to go through the menus of my head unit while driving (receiving calls is easier as it's a single button press).

Again, it's about acceptable risk. I don't think using a phone is guaranteed to make you drive badly. It just raises the risk above what I'm comfortable with - especially when it's often easy to just pull over to make a call.


----------



## kevbeans (Jun 14, 2013)

Spandex said:


> Because an A-Z is no safer than using a sat nav. In fact it's less safe, as you don't have directions read out to you with an A-Z. Navigating is an unavoidable part of driving, so it makes sense to allow the use of maps or GPS, even if they are a potential distraction. The Police still have the option of prosecuting you if they think you're distracted to the point it's affecting your driving when using GPS, or a paper map.
> .


I agree but maps have been around since the first motor car which means they have been fine to use while driving for the last 130 years yet sat navs have been available to the general public for 14 years and already you can prosecuted if the police think its distracting you. I don't think its anything to do with the item in question I just think the authorities and police now look for more and more reasons to do you for anything driving related.



Spandex said:


> If it was illegal to drive to certain types of music but the Police had no real way of knowing what you were listening to, I think I'd make a choice as to whether or not I felt it affected my driving.


So what your saying is that even if something is illegal you would use your own judgement as to whether it affected your driving or not and even if it does you would still do it if you thought you could get away with it. I've no problem with that at all!


----------



## Spandex (Feb 20, 2009)

kevbeans said:


> I agree but maps have been around since the first motor car which means they have been fine to use while driving for the last 130 years yet sat navs have been available to the general public for 14 years and already you can prosecuted if the police think its distracting you. I don't think its anything to do with the item in question I just think the authorities and police now look for more and more reasons to do you for anything driving related.


Just because they've been around for years doesn't mean they're safe (smoking was around for years before anyone even suspected it might be dangerous, let alone proved it). They're a potential distraction, but one that's considered necessary, so it's allowed. The police *can* prosecute you for using a paper map if they believe it's distracting you, and they always have been able to. This isn't a new thing.


kevbeans said:


> So what your saying is that even if something is illegal you would use your own judgement as to whether it affected your driving or not and even if it does you would still do it if you thought you could get away with it. I've no problem with that at all!


I understand the difference between morals and laws. I don't mind going above the speed limit when it's safe to. The flip side to that is that I have no problem with the laws, even if I chose not to follow them. If I get caught, it's my fault and I take it on the chin. On the whole though, I think most of the motoring laws make perfect sense and I try to follow them.


----------



## Pugwash69 (Jun 12, 2012)

I have no problem with music or earphones. I wear earplugs or earbuds with riding for protection or directions. It doesn't stop me seeing everything. I was taught to ride with an earpiece too! I usually stick music on whilst driving to alleviate the tedium of speed restrictions.

You can't hear most things around you anyway in a car, else you'd hear me swearing at you with your mobile phone to your ear whilst you cut me up.


----------



## bilajio (Oct 2, 2009)

Lol I do this:
1) I'm bald and if it's cold I'm covering my head
2) the heaters actually aren't instantaneous as such blowing cold air around makes things worse
3) when looking over my shoulder I have a tool called a hand that allows me to move the piece of cloth to see where I'm going


----------



## Beezaboi10 (Feb 5, 2013)

what you have to remember is people driving round with their hoods up and baseball caps on don't have the luxuries of heated seats and a nice TT to keep them cosy  although saying that when ive got shorts on in the morning to go to the gym and you sit on that fresh cold leather i do let out a little cry :mrgreen:


----------

