Cycling Mikey doesn't deserve the hate he's getting

[ByDandyTurtle]

He's not putting fumes in people's lungs from his car and sees people doing illegal activities that kill others or make our premiums go up.

Your eyes still need to be on the road. And focused and processing what's happening. Can't do that playing with Ur phone

It was probably all the unnecessary hyperbole that threw that poster off.

That's kind of her point. People who are talking on hands free and talking to other passengers are often not focused on the road.

Really badly written. Took me a few goes. Did you pass English GCSE? You just sound really bitter at a man upholding the law. He sends the evidence to the police and they prosecute.

You can talk to passengers. Just need to keep eyes front. Hands free phones. Use Ur voice. But eyes front.

The police happily take his evidence and prosecute. It's perfectly fine.

It's not about that you can and can't do, it's about even legal behaviours such as using hands free can be dangerous.

They’ll take any snooper’s or vigilante’s evidence.

What does he do with footage that doesn’t show lawbreaking, and what’s his explanation for intruding into people’s cars when they’re doing nothing wrong?

I still want to know why cyclists are able to stare into cars safely but drivers must at all times have their eyes on the road and what’s around them, even when stationary.

"what’s his explanation for intruding into people’s cars when they’re doing nothing wrong". They are doing something wrong. They are on their phone when they legally are not allowed and are causing a danger to others.

Public interest.

If something is legal and dangerous maybe they should have a review to the law.

If something is illegal and dangerous, definitely don't do it. Have full control of your car. Follow the highway code. How hard is that?

🤦‍♀️

He will film people who aren’t on their phones. Because he can’t know until he films. So what does he do with that footage?

And the public interest is in snooping, is it? Seems rather dangerous and anti-social to me.

I've watched the videos. He'll spot someone with his eyes and then he'll go in for a closer look with the camera to get the evidence to send to the police.

It is in the public interest..bad driving kills.

But that's the same for every dash cam, cctv camera, helmet cam, doorbell cam...

Are you seriously trying to say that he’s never snooped into a car where the driver’s doing nothing wrong? Sorry, I call bullshit of the stinkiest sort.

So what does he do with such footage? And what’s this justification for surveillance of private spaces? Does it extend to bugging or spying on homes suspected of drug taking or, maybe, watching the BBC without a TV licence?

No, it’s not. Those cameras aren’t directed into private spaces. Unless the helmet cams are used to peer into cars, like Vigilante Mikey does.

Home cctv that intrudes into others’ private land are liable for data protection enforcement against them, including financial damages.

It's not illegal to film people in their cars in a public place without their consent, as there's no reasonable expectation of privacy in public settings.

Someone inside a car does have a reasonable expectation of privacy. It won’t be complete, because some of the car is open to public view. But that’s not the same as filming intrusively into it. Are you suggesting that a woman driver wouldn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy to not have her thighs and legs filmed by a cyclist with a helmet cam?

‘Reasonable expectation of privacy’ is a flexible term. I suspect you know nothing about it.

No, you're wrong, someone inside a car doesn't have a reasonable expectation of privacy if they're on a public place like a road, and you're not harassing or stalking someone.

Given Cycling Mikey has sent hundreds of those videos to police and the police have got many convictions as a result of Mikey's footage, don't you think the police would have told what he was doing was illegal?

So it's you that knows nothing about it.

Even if he does so what? None of his footage suggests that though, so don't make things up.

It's not a private space. You're in public. Tue law is on Mikey's side anyway. As it's been used to prosecute many people.

No, I’m right. Public spaces are not inevitably open to all recording or reporting. The most obvious example is a public lavatory. Even secretly recording and publishing what’s said by people talking privately in a pub would be a breach of privacy rights.

If you think cyclists can go around filming women’s thighs in cars because there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy, I can only say that you’re weird.

You're very very wrong. A toilet is a private area within a larger public space. Do you have a brain?

Also you know the magistrates court use the evidence. Never once (at least to my knowledge) has someone got off because the evidence (Mikey's recording) was illegally obtained (invasion of privacy) they get off if they argue that the recording doesn't show enough phone use to justify an offence

What he does is perfectly legal, given the fact the courts use his evidence.

You really don’t get it, do you?

His defence to snooping on and publicly showing people who are using phones in cars is the public interest in revealing ‘wrongdoing’.

But he obviously does intrusively film people who haven’t done wrong, but that this warrior for justice just suspected of doing wrong. So what does he do with the intrusive footage of those people?

More importantly, police powers or other statutory authorisation is needed for surveillance of people suspected of crime. What’s Vigilante Mikey’s authorisation? What codes and data rights does he work to?

The Police use HGVs to film drivers so they can better view into cars.
They can't film in toilets.

Completely different scenarios.

Quite simple.. if you don't want to be fined breaking the law, don't break the law.

No, you're wrong and you're desperately trying to convince yourself otherwise.

All your nonsensical diversions to toilets and women's thighs don't hide that you're wrong.

Again, given Cycling Mikey has sent hundreds of those videos to police and the police have got many convictions as a result of Mikey's footage, don't you think the police would have told him what he was doing was illegal?

He "obviously does", where's your evidence for it? Don't make baseless accusations.

He doesn't need any special powers to record obvious wrong doing and send it to the police.