You can’t fix stupid

It's like the people driving around uninsured or without a drivers license tend to attract attention and get pulled over because they have a headlight out or not wearing their seatbelt.

entitled women like her will never learn, but at least she will not be a danger on the road for a couple of years

@@werholdMore likely only a few months.

Jerry and Gary

Hypocrisy is strong

Ten dollar.

You don't cycle round a UK city much? Abuse is normal. However, I think escooters maybe be now the primary transport of hate for drivers as they are now considered "the lawbreakers"

Thanks to our strict gun laws, you're unlikely to get shot, but you might be the victim of a drive-by shouting.

@@weevilinabox more likely they'll "clip" you as they go past, that or a brake check. Here in Bristol you have to worry that the same people follow the same routes at the same time-as do you if you commute. If you are going to report someone for phone abuse (and not a near miss) then it's better to be discreet

@@SteveLoughranIts hard to be discreet whilst still getting footage clear enough that the CPS will take it.

You also notice how the psychology of people changes when they are within the safety of a car. They are more willing to act tough and say nasty things to other road users.

I've a gliding mate from Christchurch, I love his accent. (RC model gliders).

*waves red card* Funnily enough I've just printed a red card that I might wave at some phone drivers haha.

@@CyclingMikey Do it! Do It! Do It!!!

Do you wear a crash helmet in the car, where the vast majority of head injuries happen, even with seat belts and airbags and more?

Why? Your friend in Melbourne wouldn’t have even been injured if the fackwit who hit her had been paying attention. Helmets don’t prevent being hit by a fackwit in a car who’s on their phone (which is horrible, regardless of wearing a lid, asi know from experience) and they don’t protect from a couple of tons of steel Please don’t victim blame, and save scrutiny for those inflicting the violence rather than those on the receiving end.

I thought exactly that myself! Some of those Canadian Geese have bombed me in the past. It was awful and stinky.

RCAF.

I probably could, but I try not to.

That's correct; no difference to two people in a car having a conversation!

It can do with a following wind and a clear risk to others - but not in this case User of mobile phones whilst driving is however explicitly illegal, and for good reason it’s facking dangerous. If you don’t want to get caught using your phone behind the wheel, don’t use your phone behind the wheel

You're right; it doesn't.

Thank you very much!

I hope Swedish drivers are better (but I suspect they aren't)

Loads probably; but what can anyone do about it unless you are a police officer?! They have no registration plate to identify them by and also a car weighing around one ton is going to do a lot more damage to someone than a person on a bicycle!

Classic whataboutery

What have you even done? You’ve got a camera, nobody is stopping you mate. I’ll even subscribe to your channel in anticipation.

The closest to that was that I was in two Dutch newspapers in Jan 2022, and then a week or so later I caught a Dutch driver reading one of those articles on his phone in his Tesla driving along Bayswater. I was so flabbergasted that I couldn't speak proper Dutch or English.

She's in a 3L petrol car, don't think she's going to be on the bus. Probably have a driver or something in future.

I’d like it more if drivers assumed that anyway….

He was pretty shocked at the speed mind.

​@@CyclingMikeyThere's no way I could fly pylon! My reactions are way too slow.

I once came third in the Zim national Quickie 500 race, never really that good. This one is much faster and scarier and I would struggle to handle it around a set of pylons without a great deal of practice.

@@CyclingMikey I'll stick to gliders! 😉

@@archivist17 And I'll keep playing with my indoor slow flyers 😁👍

Me? I’m a nobody. She? She was disqualified from driving.

what if someone has to adjust or correct google maps... they can't do that at a stop light???.. why are you taking it upon yourself to be law enforcement...???

@@ProjectLifeNetworktotal nonsense. Are you saying that if I saw an old woman being attacked on the street then I should walk past because I’m not a not police officer?? We’re all citizens of this country and we all have a responsibility to uphold all of the laws of this country. That’s the sign of a responsible and cultured society.

@@johnmanning5568 are you stupid?

Stationary phone drivers are still dangerous for many reasons: 1) The people using their phones when stationary are often the same people using them when moving. Being caught whilst stationary is a co-incidence, not a defence. It's easier for me to catch them when stopped, but so many were also seen using their phones when moving. 2) They are entirely unaware of people crossing the road around them. See here where a phone driver almost hits someone in the queue twitter.com/phonekills/status/1491526464520560641?s=20 3) They are entirely unaware of filtering cyclists and motorcyclists, despite the Highway Code requiring us to be aware of this. 4) Phone distraction lasts for a good time after you put the phone away. Even if you're only using the phone in each traffic queue at each junction (which is highly unlikely), then you're constantly topping up your mental distraction and are basically as disabled as a drunk driver. 5) Phone driving is worse than drink driving for distraction rates, and that's why it's part of the #Fatal4 behaviours that police target heavily. 6) Here's a police officer telling you that he has been on the scene for 3 fatal RTCs involving drivers who were stationary whilst using their phones, and then moved off and caused a collision: twitter.com/markandcharlie/status/1604073330751197184?s=20&t=uj8sgu7spu4cTyDqqqds2g 7) Policing phone drivers will help them stop other traffic offences too - it's vanishingly rare that someone only breaks a single traffic law like mobile phone use. I'm really not interested in this nonsense of "it's not dangerous when stationary, because it clearly is and it's clearly still very appropriate to catch these drivers.

Yes indeed, I was born in Zimbabwe and brought up there.

I'm told that it's very hard or impossible to successfully convict a driver for going through red unless it's about 1 second or more after red, or they audibly and visibly accelerated towards the light in reaction to it going red. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure why this is.

Would you like to try that again, this time in English please? If you don't use your phone when driving, you don't risk disqualificaiton. The danger comes from the phone drivers. No danger from my cycling to anyone.

2 tons of metal Vs perhaps 100 kilos of person and bike. Hmm I wonder 🤦‍♂️

@@jimbo1531 2 tons of metal won’t do any harm at zero miles an hour, that’s why I used the word stationary in my post. Hmmm I wonder

​@@philmercer4877check out car park crashes. A stationary car can still crush you with the pedal pressed. Bikes stationary or slow cannot accelerate that fast

@@philmercer4877 it will if you stop in the cycle lane

I’m amazed when someone tries to make 2 wrongs into a right. Statistically, phones distract drivers, whether stationary or not. The plummeting standard of driving in this country really doesn’t allow for distractions. Another significant fact is that the majority of people killed in accidents due to phone distractions are NOT the drivers. I am not a cyclist, but I have spent many years witnessing the results of accidents on our roads. Mikey on every corner would be just fine

Helmets aren’t going to stop you getting hit, and provide fack all protect against a couple of tons of metal.

I’ve caught a few drivers twice. They’re in my disqualified drivers playlist. Arrogance huh!

Oh yeah! I learned to fly sailplanes at our local club in Harare and went solo at 15, then paragliders and RC model aircraft. I'm still flying RC nowadays, that's an actual hobby for me unlike this.

Good boy

What makes you think that?

Entrapment how? Did I make her pick up her stupid phone and commit the offence?

Commercial vehicles not allowed to drive through the park. If caught just a fine no points .

​@@geofffletcher840They are allowed if the police or the Parks Officers give authority.

Who is sad? You're sad. You're crying salty tears because bad driving is being caught and punished. You're salty because you identify with criminal drivers. Your reaction tells me that you're worried about being caught by other camera cyclists and drivers. Tens of thousands of cyclists run video cameras and will report bad driving around them. From now on you'll remember this conversation every time you see cyclists on the road, and you'll think about some of us filming you. Some of our cameras are very easy to see, like GoPros, and some are nearly impossible to spot. Have fun looking for cyclists' cameras on the road. I'm not even in the top ten most prolific reporters in London. In 2022 almost 15,000 reports were made by the public that resulted in the Met issuing a notice of intended prosecution. This is in London alone. I did only 383 of those. I suggest you drive properly around us all. Feel paranoid. Google your own number plates. Regularly.

Stationary phone drivers are still dangerous for many reasons: 1) The people using their phones when stationary are often the same people using them when moving. Being caught whilst stationary is a co-incidence, not a defence. It's easier for me to catch them when stopped, but so many were also seen using their phones when moving. 2) They are entirely unaware of people crossing the road around them. See here where a phone driver almost hits someone in the queue twitter.com/phonekills/status/1491526464520560641?s=20 See this other tweet where a 5 year old child is almost hit by a phone driver who was stationary: x.com/cmdkenyon/status/1724483042046067052?s=20 3) They are entirely unaware of filtering cyclists and motorcyclists, despite the Highway Code requiring us to be aware of this. 4) Phone distraction lasts for a good time after you put the phone away. Even if you're only using the phone in each traffic queue at each junction (which is highly unlikely), then you're constantly topping up your mental distraction and are basically as disabled as a drunk driver. 5) Phone driving is worse than drink driving for distraction rates, and that's why it's part of the #Fatal4 behaviours that police target heavily. 6) Here's a police officer telling you that he has been on the scene for 3 fatal RTCs involving drivers who were stationary whilst using their phones, and then moved off and caused a collision: twitter.com/markandcharlie/status/1604073330751197184?s=20&t=uj8sgu7spu4cTyDqqqds2g 7) Policing phone drivers will help them stop other traffic offences too - it's vanishingly rare that someone only breaks a single traffic law like mobile phone use. I'm really not interested in this nonsense of "it's not dangerous when stationary, because it clearly is and it's clearly still very appropriate to catch these drivers.

Well thank the Lord that we have your blessing to report dangerous driving. You can't imagine my relief.

Stationary phone drivers are still dangerous for many reasons: 1) The people using their phones when stationary are often the same people using them when moving. Being caught whilst stationary is a co-incidence, not a defence. It's easier for me to catch them when stopped, but so many were also seen using their phones when moving. 2) They are entirely unaware of people crossing the road around them. See here where a phone driver almost hits someone in the queue twitter.com/phonekills/status/1491526464520560641?s=20 See this other tweet where a 5 year old child is almost hit by a phone driver who was stationary: x.com/cmdkenyon/status/1724483042046067052?s=20 3) They are entirely unaware of filtering cyclists and motorcyclists, despite the Highway Code requiring us to be aware of this. 4) Phone distraction lasts for a good time after you put the phone away. Even if you're only using the phone in each traffic queue at each junction (which is highly unlikely), then you're constantly topping up your mental distraction and are basically as disabled as a drunk driver. 5) Phone driving is worse than drink driving for distraction rates, and that's why it's part of the #Fatal4 behaviours that police target heavily. 6) Here's a police officer telling you that he has been on the scene for 3 fatal RTCs involving drivers who were stationary whilst using their phones, and then moved off and caused a collision: twitter.com/markandcharlie/status/1604073330751197184?s=20&t=uj8sgu7spu4cTyDqqqds2g 7) Policing phone drivers will help them stop other traffic offences too - it's vanishingly rare that someone only breaks a single traffic law like mobile phone use. I'm really not interested in this nonsense of "it's not dangerous when stationary, because it clearly is and it's clearly still very appropriate to catch these drivers.

@@CyclingMikey grass!! why did you delete my other reply? was It because I was right about you judging people for being stationary and comparing them to actual people that do use phones whilst on the move? or was it because you don't wear a helmet on the road, Or the fact you also distract people whilst in there car yourself. pot kettle. taking the little mans money and supporting the big government isn't a stand up job. I don't in anyway condone people that use there phone and drive, But you Sir are just as bad. Grass!!!!

Grass? Who actually talks like that?

@@peterpan6821 Very rich that with a name called Peter Pan!! Clearly somebody that still wishes he was a boy!!! #NONCE VIBES

What qualifies me to do what?

People who don't want to be run over by a distracted degenerate, texting away whilst driving a 1600kg metal box on wheels... That's what qualifies him.

@@TenFalconsMusic Um, he walked up to the drivers, while they were sitting still in traffic. Idiot.

Disturb people while they are, sitting still, in traffic.@@CyclingMikey

You do know, Richard, that any citizen (yourself included) can report illegal behaviour of others?

Oh is that what he said? I just couldn't make it out. Maybe he thought I need a licence to film, or to drive? I've got a driving licence anyway, and nobody needs a licence to film.

Stationary phone drivers are still dangerous for many reasons: 1) The people using their phones when stationary are often the same people using them when moving. Being caught whilst stationary is a co-incidence, not a defence. It's easier for me to catch them when stopped, but so many were also seen using their phones when moving. 2) They are entirely unaware of people crossing the road around them. See here where a phone driver almost hits someone in the queue twitter.com/phonekills/status/1491526464520560641?s=20 See this other tweet where a 5 year old child is almost hit by a phone driver who was stationary: x.com/cmdkenyon/status/1724483042046067052?s=20 3) They are entirely unaware of filtering cyclists and motorcyclists, despite the Highway Code requiring us to be aware of this. 4) Phone distraction lasts for a good time after you put the phone away. Even if you're only using the phone in each traffic queue at each junction (which is highly unlikely), then you're constantly topping up your mental distraction and are basically as disabled as a drunk driver. 5) Phone driving is worse than drink driving for distraction rates, and that's why it's part of the #Fatal4 behaviours that police target heavily. 6) Here's a police officer telling you that he has been on the scene for 3 fatal RTCs involving drivers who were stationary whilst using their phones, and then moved off and caused a collision: twitter.com/markandcharlie/status/1604073330751197184?s=20&t=uj8sgu7spu4cTyDqqqds2g 7) Policing phone drivers will help them stop other traffic offences too - it's vanishingly rare that someone only breaks a single traffic law like mobile phone use. 8) Parliament recently chose to strengthen the mobile phone law around stationary phone use because it's dangerous and the science supports this. I'm really not interested in this nonsense of "it's not dangerous when stationary, because it clearly is and it's clearly still very appropriate to catch these drivers.

Much appreciated

You're all fart and no poo. You'll do nothing.

After all these years of government adverts and Police promoting the banning of phones whilst driving, the message of Don't Drive and Phone has become extremely common knowledge with the public. And yet here we are ...

Mikey

Sorry Mikey

Stationary phone drivers are still dangerous for many reasons: 1) The people using their phones when stationary are often the same people using them when moving. Being caught whilst stationary is a co-incidence, not a defence. It's easier for me to catch them when stopped, but so many were also seen using their phones when moving. 2) They are entirely unaware of people crossing the road around them. See here where a phone driver almost hits someone in the queue twitter.com/phonekills/status/1491526464520560641?s=20 See this other tweet where a 5 year old child is almost hit by a phone driver who was stationary: x.com/cmdkenyon/status/1724483042046067052?s=20 3) They are entirely unaware of filtering cyclists and motorcyclists, despite the Highway Code requiring us to be aware of this. 4) Phone distraction lasts for a good time after you put the phone away. Even if you're only using the phone in each traffic queue at each junction (which is highly unlikely), then you're constantly topping up your mental distraction and are basically as disabled as a drunk driver. 5) Phone driving is worse than drink driving for distraction rates, and that's why it's part of the #Fatal4 behaviours that police target heavily. 6) Here's a police officer telling you that he has been on the scene for 3 fatal RTCs involving drivers who were stationary whilst using their phones, and then moved off and caused a collision: twitter.com/markandcharlie/status/1604073330751197184?s=20&t=uj8sgu7spu4cTyDqqqds2g 7) Policing phone drivers will help them stop other traffic offences too - it's vanishingly rare that someone only breaks a single traffic law like mobile phone use. I'm really not interested in this nonsense of "it's not dangerous when stationary, because it clearly is and it's clearly still very appropriate to catch these drivers.

How many people have been killed or injured in the last 10 years from people on their phones in standstill traffic?@@CyclingMikey

I wonder if that defence would stand up in court when you’ve crashed in a farmers field while drink driving

Yeah and drunk drivers who drive reaaallly slowly shouldn’t get done either

Are any of the people he caught drink driving? No. Blockhead@@bestbehave

johntimbrell. Oh dear! Regarding your last sentence. Educate yourself at "IAM Roadsmart" before saying something as daft as that.

Stationary phone drivers are still dangerous for many reasons: 1) Should a child or shorter person cross in front of them they wouldn't even see them, and would likely then move off, running them over. Here's an example someone else caught where the driver almost takes out a pedestrian at a crossing: twitter.com/phonekills/status/1491526464520560641?s=20 2) They are entirely unaware of filtering cyclists and motorcyclists. These drivers are often slow to react when the queue starts moving, and then when someone behind them beeps they drop the phone and hastily move off without even looking. 3) If you imagine these people only use their phones when queuing at the traffic lights, that's terribly naïve. The gardener in LM63BTZ was on the phone whilst driving along, and quite likely had been doing it for some considerable part of his journey. These phone users are constantly using their phones, but it's just much easier to catch them when they're in the queue. 4) Phone distraction lasts for a good time after you put the phone away. Even if you're only using the phone in each traffic queue at each junction (which is highly unlikely), then you're constantly topping up your mental distraction and are basically as disabled as a drunk driver. 5) Phone driving is worse than drink driving for distraction rates, and that's why it's part of the #Fatal4 behaviours that police target heavily. 6) Here's a police officer telling you that he has been on the scene for 3 fatal RTCs involving drivers who were stationary whilst using their phones, and then moved off and caused a collision: twitter.com/markandcharlie/status/1604073330751197184?s=20&t=uj8sgu7spu4cTyDqqqds2g 7) People who knowingly break minor driving law will likely also break more serious laws. Strong policing of minor traffic offences has a strong effect on reducing collisions resulting in killed and seriously injured people. It's good to police these phone drivers. I'm really not interested in this nonsense of "it's not dangerous when stationary, because it clearly is and it's clearly still very appropriate to catch these drivers.

@@TamMcNeave What do you mean by "Roadsmart".

@@CyclingMikey Well Mickey, I spend my time fighting real important issues. I use my knowledge of the law to release people who have been unlawfully imprisoned. I'll bet you don't know what a legal fiction is. Why don't you get a life?

Mikey, not Mickey thanks. That's an issue that's important for sure, but so are the 1,800 deaths and 27,000 serious injuries and maimings caused by road violence. Just behave behind the wheel, and you won't risk prosecution, possible loss of licence and/or job.

How do you propose reporting a cyclist?