Cycling Mikey sure gets around these days, doesn’t he?

At the weekend, the live blog season ticket holder was, once again, the star of an in-depth feature in one of the big national newspapers, as the Sunday Times asked (link is external), ‘What’s driving Cycling Mikey, Britain’s most hated cyclist?’

That headline… Yeesh.

Setting aside what Jeremy Vine (another live blog stalwart) described as an “iffy headline”, in the article the Times’ Nick Rufford accompanied Mikey on one of his rides seeking out phone using motorists, to ascertain whether he’s a “road safety hero or just a darned nuisance”.

Of course, despite Vine’s praise for the article and its rather balanced approach to its subject, Rufford’s piece is still inevitably peppered with some classic anti-cycling bingo phrases: the writer notes that Van Erp is viewed by some as a “self-righteous snooper”, while he and Vine are described as “helmet-cam warriors”, and those spotted by Mikey using their phones as “victims”.

An incident recounted in the article, in which Mikey reports an ambulance driver for using their phone, has also divided opinion on social media, as well as on the road.cc forum (an argument on the forum? Get out of here!).

However, it’s the inclusion of yet another live blog favourite, Mr Loophole himself, Nick Freeman, that has perhaps caused the biggest stir online.

Freeman, a lawyer who specialises in getting phone drivers off the hook, told the Sunday Times that the police appear to be “actively encouraging” activists like Cycling Mikey, arguing that the outcome will be even greater mistrust between cyclists and motorists.

“Using a mobile phone in a car is dangerous and it is right that it’s prohibited. But I don’t think we want to live in a snitch society. I’m not saying the public don’t have a role to play but, really, isn’t that the role of the police?” Freeman asked.

“It’s an industry now and in my view it’s wrong. And there’s no relevant legislation that properly deals with cyclists who cycle dangerously. So the law is all over the place.”

Freeman then argued that fixed traffic cameras are more than adequate to pick up law-breaking drivers.

He continued: “The police could say to cyclists, thank you very much for your help but we no longer need it. Please don’t do it.”

A lawyer who earned his nickname by getting law-breaking motorists off the hook on technicalities arguing against members of the public supplying additional evidence of this law breaking? Whatever next?!

“Cycling Mikey does a brilliant job,” wrote one. “But I am not impressed by Nick Freeman saying ‘I don’t think we want to live in a snitch society’; if we don’t report crime, our society will be a criminal free for all. ‘Snitches’ is prison talk and not helpful.”

Naturally, Van Erp disagreed with good ol’ Nick, arguing that with the dwindling number of traffic police to enforce road laws, camera cyclists are the best hope of deterring drivers.

“My goal is to give people the perception they might be caught,” he said. “It’s the certainty of detection that’s the best deterrent.”

Cycling Mikey, Jeremy Vine, and Mr Loophole all in the one live blog story? Do I win a road.cc medal or something now?

https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-21-august-2023-303365#live-blog-item-48553

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> Cycling Mikey sure gets around these days, doesn’t he?
>
> At the weekend, the live blog season ticket holder was, once again, the
> star of an in-depth feature in one of the big national newspapers, as the
> Sunday Times asked (link is external), ‘What’s driving Cycling Mikey,
> Britain’s most hated cyclist?’
>
> That headline… Yeesh.
>
> Setting aside what Jeremy Vine (another live blog stalwart) described as
> an “iffy headline”, in the article the Times’ Nick Rufford accompanied
> Mikey on one of his rides seeking out phone using motorists, to ascertain
> whether he’s a “road safety hero or just a darned nuisance”.
>
> Of course, despite Vine’s praise for the article and its rather balanced
> approach to its subject, Rufford’s piece is still inevitably peppered
> with some classic anti-cycling bingo phrases: the writer notes that Van
> Erp is viewed by some as a “self-righteous snooper”, while he and Vine
> are described as “helmet-cam warriors”, and those spotted by Mikey using
> their phones as “victims”.
>
> An incident recounted in the article, in which Mikey reports an ambulance
> driver for using their phone, has also divided opinion on social media,
> as well as on the road.cc forum (an argument on the forum? Get out of here!).
>
> However, it’s the inclusion of yet another live blog favourite, Mr
> Loophole himself, Nick Freeman, that has perhaps caused the biggest stir online.
>
> Freeman, a lawyer who specialises in getting phone drivers off the hook,
> told the Sunday Times that the police appear to be “actively encouraging”
> activists like Cycling Mikey, arguing that the outcome will be even
> greater mistrust between cyclists and motorists.
>
> “Using a mobile phone in a car is dangerous and it is right that it’s
> prohibited. But I don’t think we want to live in a snitch society. I’m
> not saying the public don’t have a role to play but, really, isn’t that
> the role of the police?” Freeman asked.
>
> “It’s an industry now and in my view it’s wrong. And there’s no relevant
> legislation that properly deals with cyclists who cycle dangerously. So
> the law is all over the place.”
>
> Freeman then argued that fixed traffic cameras are more than adequate to
> pick up law-breaking drivers.
>
> He continued: “The police could say to cyclists, thank you very much for
> your help but we no longer need it. Please don’t do it.”
>
> A lawyer who earned his nickname by getting law-breaking motorists off
> the hook on technicalities arguing against members of the public
> supplying additional evidence of this law breaking? Whatever next?!
>
> “Cycling Mikey does a brilliant job,” wrote one. “But I am not impressed
> by Nick Freeman saying ‘I don’t think we want to live in a snitch
> society’; if we don’t report crime, our society will be a criminal free
> for all. ‘Snitches’ is prison talk and not helpful.”
>
> Naturally, Van Erp disagreed with good ol’ Nick, arguing that with the
> dwindling number of traffic police to enforce road laws, camera cyclists
> are the best hope of deterring drivers.
>
> “My goal is to give people the perception they might be caught,” he said.
> “It’s the certainty of detection that’s the best deterrent.”
>
> Cycling Mikey, Jeremy Vine, and Mr Loophole all in the one live blog
> story? Do I win a road.cc medal or something now?
>
> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-21-august-2023-303365#live-blog-item-48553

--
Spike

Steve K | 1677 posts | 1 hour ago
3 likes

This Nick Freeman bloke who doesn't think cyclists should be video-ing other road users? Is he in any way related to this Nick Freeman?

QUOTE: Shot this video from passenger seat of cyclists flouting Highway Code ie R59 should wear helmet & light/fluorescent clothing.R 66 Should never ride more than single file on narrow/busy roads & when riding around bends. ENDS

https://twitter.com/TheMrLoophole/status/1466474327541436420

What is this "flouting the Highway Code?
Is it the law to wear a hat and bright clothing?
Is it illegal to ride in pairs?

I thought Arsehole was a legal expert?

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> Steve K | 1677 posts | 1 hour ago
> 3 likes
>
> This Nick Freeman bloke who doesn't think cyclists should be video-ing
> other road users? Is he in any way related to this Nick Freeman?
>
> QUOTE: Shot this video from passenger seat of cyclists flouting Highway
> Code ie R59 should wear helmet & light/fluorescent clothing.R 66 Should
> never ride more than single file on narrow/busy roads & when riding around bends. ENDS
>
> https://twitter.com/TheMrLoophole/status/1466474327541436420
>
> What is this "flouting the Highway Code?
> Is it the law to wear a hat and bright clothing?
> Is it illegal to ride in pairs?
>
> I thought Arsehole was a legal expert?

Mr Arsehole’s words were precisely correct, whereas your interpretation of
them isn’t.

You see, you’ve linked the second two questions to your first one, without
any justification for doing so.

Or, to put it another way, you’re piling supposition upon supposition.

--
Spike

> https://twitter.com/TheMrLoophole/status/1466474327541436420
>
> What is this "flouting the Highway Code?
> Is it the law to wear a hat and bright clothing?
> Is it illegal to ride in pairs?
>
> I thought Arsehole was a legal expert?

Sebastian Teague 📷🏳️‍🌈🌹
@SebastianTeague
·
Dec 3, 2021
I'd like to see how you pass hazards. You seem like the sort of person who has a go at cyclists then pass with less than 1.5m between you and then accelerate past a horse

They are cycling lawfully, plus in a group it makes them easier and safer to overtake than a long line.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> https://twitter.com/TheMrLoophole/status/1466474327541436420
>>
>> What is this "flouting the Highway Code?
>> Is it the law to wear a hat and bright clothing?
>> Is it illegal to ride in pairs?
>>
>> I thought Arsehole was a legal expert?
>
> Sebastian Teague 📷🏳️‍🌈🌹
> @SebastianTeague
> ·
> Dec 3, 2021
> I'd like to see how you pass hazards. You seem like the sort of person
> who has a go at cyclists then pass with less than 1.5m between you and
> then accelerate past a horse
>
> They are cycling lawfully, plus in a group it makes them easier and safer
> to overtake than a long line.

Ah, I see you’re beginning to recognise when someone is piling supposition
upon supposition; that was a typical example.

--
Spike

mpdouglas replied to Steve K | 120 posts | 44 min ago
0 likes

That's him. Mr PoopHole. Forever spouting total excrement. Is reporting any crime a problem for him (child abuse, robbery, people trafficking, sexual abuse etc etc), or is it just the crimes that he and his clientele routinely engage in whilst driving?!

QUITE - HYPOCRISY INCARNATE.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> mpdouglas replied to Steve K | 120 posts | 44 min ago
> 0 likes
>
> That's him. Mr PoopHole. Forever spouting total excrement. Is reporting
> any crime a problem for him (child abuse, robbery, people trafficking,
> sexual abuse etc etc), or is it just the crimes that he and his clientele
> routinely engage in whilst driving?!
>
> QUITE - HYPOCRISY INCARNATE.

I think there’s a touch of PKB in there.

--
Spike

Avatar
Muddy Ford | 395 posts | 11 min ago
0 likes

Dont want to live in a snitch society? What an absolute pile of dog turd that Loophole is. Would he advocate that all of society refuses to give evidence to help convict criminals, or is it only when cyclists are injured or killed? One can only hope that karma comes to him and he is smashed into by a texting lorry driver.

It's because of dickhead statements like his that so many drivers think it's not an issue to drive on the motorway whilst staring into their laps where their phone is. Perhaps he should try and convince the husband of that family that were wiped out on the A34 that cyclists who report mobile phone users are snitches. I'd fully expect and support that husband thumping his stupid smug smile of his face.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> Avatar
> Muddy Ford | 395 posts | 11 min ago
> 0 likes
>
> Dont want to live in a snitch society? What an absolute pile of dog turd
> that Loophole is. Would he advocate that all of society refuses to give
> evidence to help convict criminals, or is it only when cyclists are
> injured or killed? One can only hope that karma comes to him and he is
> smashed into by a texting lorry driver.
>
> It's because of dickhead statements like his that so many drivers think
> it's not an issue to drive on the motorway whilst staring into their laps
> where their phone is. Perhaps he should try and convince the husband of
> that family that were wiped out on the A34 that cyclists who report
> mobile phone users are snitches. I'd fully expect and support that
> husband thumping his stupid smug smile of his face.

What a well-crafted and thoughtfully-delivered argument. Not.

--
Spike

LeadenSkies | 125 posts | 2 hours ago
2 likes

What I don't like is the fact that every time I dare to cycle on the road, I put my life in the hands of people who illegally play with their mobile phone whilst driving because they decide that posting on X or some other social media platform is more important than driving safely. As others have already pointed out, they don't just do this in stationary traffic, they do it while driving and the distraction caused by doing it lasts for 30 seconds plus afterwards and is impairment of a similar level to drink driving.

> That's him. Mr PoopHole. Forever spouting total excrement. Is reporting any crime a problem for him (child abuse, robbery, people trafficking, sexual abuse etc etc), or is it just the crimes that he and his clientele routinely engage in whilst driving?!

There are signs at rest stops on freeways openly encouraging reporting drunk drivers. Supposedly your confidentiality is even protected but the words "privacy" and "California" should never appear in the same discussion. Maybe a burner phone would work. Maybe.

In the U.S. anti-snitch talk is a way to signal that you aren't an activist.. They are hoping the mob will leave them alone. This is the libertarian "pseudo citizen" Jefferson said should be quarantined like anyone else with a disease.

To be sure, almost like a court limiting its own jurisdiction, a smart activist is dedicated, careful in what issues to take if only to not muddle his message. That way you can limit your exposure while ripping the opposition to shreds. In the U.S. they try to end run that strategy by sending someone by your house.

It would be interesting to know if it's significantly different in the UK.

"Nothing is more deplorable than the American journalist's attack on thought."

-- Tocqueville

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> LeadenSkies | 125 posts | 2 hours ago
> 2 likes
>
> What I don't like is the fact that every time I dare to cycle on the
> road, I put my life in the hands of people who illegally play with their
> mobile phone whilst driving because they decide that posting on X or some
> other social media platform is more important than driving safely. As
> others have already pointed out, they don't just do this in stationary
> traffic, they do it while driving and the distraction caused by doing it
> lasts for 30 seconds plus afterwards and is impairment of a similar level to drink driving.

I feel much the same about pavement cyclists.

--
Spike

On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 6:10:19 PM UTC+1, Bret Cahill wrote:
> > That's him. Mr PoopHole. Forever spouting total excrement. Is reporting any crime a problem for him (child abuse, robbery, people trafficking, sexual abuse etc etc), or is it just the crimes that he and his clientele routinely engage in whilst driving?!
> There are signs at rest stops on freeways openly encouraging reporting drunk drivers.

In the UK, it seems that if it's a cyclist that reports a drunk driver to the police it is seen as somehow "unfair" by the driving lobby for some strange reason.

On 22/08/2023 08:57 am, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 6:10:19 PM UTC+1, Bret Cahill wrote:

>>> That's him. Mr PoopHole. Forever spouting total excrement. Is reporting any crime a problem for him (child abuse, robbery, people trafficking, sexual abuse etc etc), or is it just the crimes that he and his clientele routinely engage in whilst driving?!

>> There are signs at rest stops on freeways openly encouraging reporting drunk drivers.

> In the UK, it seems that if it's a cyclist that reports a drunk driver to the police it is seen as somehow "unfair" by the driving lobby for some strange reason.

Says who (other than the vivid May Sun imagination)?

Quote:

Freeman then argued that fixed traffic cameras are more than adequate to pick up law-breaking drivers.

6.6 million UK drivers admit to using their mobile when driving (so who knows what the true figure is, but one has to assume considerably higher): in 2022 16,000 were caught. One doesn't want to accuse such a renowned road safety expert and top lawyer of talking bollocks, but catching 0.24% of offenders (and of course not all of them will have been caught with fixed traffic cameras) isn't what most people would describe as "more than adequate".

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> Quote:
>
> Freeman then argued that fixed traffic cameras are more than adequate
> to pick up law-breaking drivers.
>
> 6.6 million UK drivers admit to using their mobile when driving (so who
> knows what the true figure is, but one has to assume considerably
> higher): in 2022 16,000 were caught. One doesn't want to accuse such a
> renowned road safety expert and top lawyer of talking bollocks, but
> catching 0.24% of offenders (and of course not all of them will have been
> caught with fixed traffic cameras) isn't what most people would describe
> as "more than adequate".

So what’s the proportion of cyclists that get tickets for RLJing? Or
cycling on the footway?

--
Spike

Two observations on the Nick Freeman piece:

1. The guy clearly has little or no self awareness. He opines on rights and responsibilities whilst promoting himself as "Mr Loophole"

2. He needs to visit Specsavers - the road in the video is not a "narrow" road - it has space for two lanes.

True - also his little video makes no sense. The cyclists are not cycling in an 'inconsiderate' manner. They are perfectly obeying the rules. A tractor or other farm vehicle would be doing exactly the same.

On 22/08/2023 10:18 am, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> Quote:
>
> Freeman then argued that fixed traffic cameras are more than adequate to pick up law-breaking drivers.
>
> 6.6 million UK drivers admit to using their mobile when driving (so who knows what the true figure is, but one has to assume considerably higher): [ ... ]

I use mine. It ISN'T illegal.

Only idiots like you make the entirely incorrect assumption that it is.

On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 11:36:13 AM UTC+1, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> Two observations on the Nick Freeman piece:
>
> 1. The guy clearly has little or no self awareness. He opines on rights and responsibilities whilst promoting himself as "Mr Loophole"
>
> 2. He needs to visit Specsavers - the road in the video is not a "narrow" road - it has space for two lanes.
>
> True - also his little video makes no sense. The cyclists are not cycling in an 'inconsiderate' manner. They are perfectly obeying the rules. A tractor or other farm vehicle would be doing exactly the same.

They were also acting as a deterrent to dangerous driving.

All those cyclists riding on the wrong side of the road are disgraceful, drivers would never do that! . .

https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/11%2003%202022%20VN10VZZ%20pic.jpg

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> Two observations on the Nick Freeman piece:
>
> 1. The guy clearly has little or no self awareness.

This from a cyclist? ROFL!

> He opines on rights and responsibilities whilst promoting himself as "Mr Loophole"
>
> 2. He needs to visit Specsavers - the road in the video is not a "narrow"
> road - it has space for two lanes.
>
> True - also his little video makes no sense. The cyclists are not cycling
> in an 'inconsiderate' manner. They are perfectly obeying the rules. A
> tractor or other farm vehicle would be doing exactly the same.

--
Spike

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> All those cyclists riding on the wrong side of the road are disgraceful,
> drivers would never do that! . .
>
> https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/11%2003%202022%20VN10VZZ%20pic.jpg

What does the Highway Code have to say about the lane positioning of
cyclists when approaching a junction?

--
Spike

Benthic | 84 posts | 13 hours ago
4 likes

"...I don’t think we want to live in a snitch society."

Criminals always say that.

=====================
"Grassing up to the bizzies" as they say on Merseyside.