Posted 17th Oct 2020
cliffs:
* cycles around looking for people using there phones in traffic
* reads their messages and records it all
* goes to police with footage
* people get 6 points and £200 fine
* cycles around looking for people using there phones in traffic
* reads their messages and records it all
* goes to police with footage
* people get 6 points and £200 fine
Community Updates
Discussions Top
Top Merchants
42 Comments
sorted byThis guy is doing something about it, fair play to him.
If this ‘snitch’ gets someone banned from driving that’s one less idiot on the road. (edited)
Why would you be against this sort of activity - which ultimately makes the roads safer - unless you are a criminal or a supporter of criminals?
At no point have I said he is a hero, the bottom line he has got at least 5 people disqualified. 5 people that could have potentially seriously hurt someone or worse.
A cyclist runs a red light more than likely they’re going to get hurt. Using a phone is proven to cause devastating results hence the harsh fines.
Cyclists can be a menace too but selfish drivers have a greater impact.
I guess it’s good he’s not in SA?
What was "good" about that? Idiot chats nonsense about guy who stops law breakers. Wow!
Touch wood, I've been able to avoid them but it would be good to be able to prove that it was their fault if an accident occurred.
"In 2019, there were 637 casualties on Britain's roads - including 18 deaths and 135 serious injuries - in crashes where a driver using a mobile was a contributory factor."
Sadly he is not so keen on upholding the law with his 2 wheeled friend's.
On several of his "wrong side of the central reservation" videos cyclists do exactly the same yet he never stops a single one.
Also many of his videos show cyclists running red lights. He can easily catch-up and speak to them but never does.
While I am not condoning what the drivers have done. If he is going to play the "Hero" he needs to be less selective on who he picks on.
Bet he never did this back in South Africa. You go sneaking up to people's cars you are likely to get yourself shot.
The Met Police, unlike other forces, do advise people of the outcome of reports from uploaded video. They do take their time though, if you watch some of his more recent videos you'll see the event date is from 12months ago.
Those that say he shouldn't be doing it, will they be saying the same if a friend or relative is KSI'd by a driver distracted by using their mobile phone?
1) he is from zimbabwe
2) he had a family killed by a negligent driver which partly motivates his actions
3) there is not enough policing forcing individuals to submit evidence themselves
4) just because it seems like they are not currently causing harm in these videos is not a justification for their actions. The stats are there that people using their phones stationary are still high risk. They pull away without being aware of their surroundings putting vulnerable road users at risk. More likely to have a fender bender or run red lights. Can’t be bothered to post link, but this is not contestable.
5) would you feel the same way about “snitching” if someone reported someone who got in a car to drive home when over the limit? Driving distracted is very similar in terms of reaction times etc to driving drunk.
ps these points are not just directed to you who are clearly not completely against his actions, but more to the OP and some the replies.
Anyway, people are so quick to slate and slag off cyclists for doing something wrong, but when the ball is on the other foot, they are called 'the biggest snitch', ironically.
Disqualification is 12 points or 6 for new drivers.
If new drivers are being banned for phone use fool them.
12 points is potentially 4 offences of 3 points, so again fool them. Drivers are disqualified for a reason.
It’s his channel he can do as he pleases if he picks on some people breaking the law and not others that’s on him.
Either way he has done some good for the community, everyone has their own opinion you have yours that’s pretty much it.
I know, why don't we make speeding legal too? I mean, it's only a problem if someone actually gets hurt, right?
Unsure if trolling or uneducated... but here you go legislation.gov.uk/uks…ade
Really?! There is clearly no "valid context" defence here - it's very clear that the law applies equally when you're waiting in traffic, and you don't summon emergency help by sending an email. And reading or writing an email is prima facie use of an interactive communication function, as it counts as sending or receiving oral or written messages.
Assumes the mother of all assumptions, No wonder we are where we are with certain drivers, this geezer openly advocating violence on him, I think what he's doing is brilliant, come across this behaviour many times cycling to work and back, yep good and bad on both sides , hope he keeps it up
Using Currently
cycliq.com/bik…463
and this
techalogic.co.uk/pro…ra/
I've got 2 x 1080p Crosstour Action Cams on my bike, one on the front fork and one on my seat post. They are quite cheap and effective. It is amazing what you capture on them.....
Well equally he has got 5 people disqualified that have not actually hurt anybody. Most of his work is done on people say in traffic not moving. The emissions from the car is the biggest risk.
I think if I run over a cyclist that has run a red light and kill them it's going to be pretty devastating for me! But cyclists only see it from their perspective.
As you have just said there are bad apples from both communities. But if you were making videos to prove a point why would you not treat everyone equally?
No he is no longer in SA, he also seems to pick on cars of lone drivers in nice areas.
He never picks on Audi A3s which are four up south of the river!
I have been using one of these on my helmet: amazon.co.uk/gp/…XTY
Partly because it's cheaper than a GoPro, slightly less sticky-outy, and the battery lasts about 5 hours.
I'm already looking for a fixed rear camera after two cheap "action cameras" vibrated themselves to death when fixed to my pannier rack. I'm only a fair weather cyclist at the moment, so one solution I was considering was just using a normal car dashcam, plugged into a USB battery pack in the pannier bag! Battery management seems like such a faff when you start adding cameras, especially those ones where the batteries only last a couple of hours. Knowing my luck, I'd get home to find "the" incident happened about 30 seconds after the battery ran out
AFAIA he's running GoPro cameras with the camera used for recoriding incidents like this set at the highest possible resolution, 4K@60FPS
Some police forces have sensibly realised that it's important to inform the reporter of the outcome, otherwise it discourages further reporting if there is an assumption that nothing happened as a result.
Sadly, some police forces are still at the other end of the spectrum and do not even accept dashcam/headcam footage at all!
Two points , one the driver actually wasn't at the time of being filmed driving ( slightly dodgy ground but a valid defence if there is context added) and secondly the video and guy who took video clearly states she was checking emails so using internet - currently that is NOT illegal you can argue it's a loophole but I assure you that defence is completely correct to use.
The issue is the law which you so kindly linked states this very annoying phrase "interactive communication function" the government is currently in the process of updating the law after a normal consultations .
So no I am not "trolling" nor uneducated (he wrote surrounded by law books)
my dude I'm really not going to get into a legal term back and forth with you, assuming you didn't just google primia facie , you know its not that clear cut and possibly the worst argument you could have made. as "on FIRST appearance" the driver was using her phone, but again she was using the internet so and again not illegal. ( something you could have easily checked yourself instead of googling something to reply with ). Also your use of primia facie was incorrect in a legal context.
If you are actually in the legal profession /world/student/armchair ally mcbeal then you'd know I was right so not sure what your final goal is here?
I mean there's literally as i started an amendment going through to stop the exact loophole I explained as i said earlier .
What is there to elaborate?
You obviously got larruped all the time at school and developed a predictable fondness of wrong'uns as a consequence.
It is what it is so you are what you are.
bbc.co.uk/new…607
Cyclic rear camera. Go pro helmet mount or bat mount.
Cheers, that's the kind of thing I was looking for, now I just need something cheaper!
I've got a knock off gopro type cam but it's too bulky for my already crowded bars and Id never put anything on my front forks as has been mentioned.
i doubt very much the driver accepted anything, she wasn't breaking the law
...except she was?
what law was she breaking?
Ok bud
Clearly still traumatised from having been bullied at school, mercilessly for years no doubt
Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you mean by quoting that text and your comment. Could you elaborate?