Phones & Insta & Driving Bans…
It may not be as instantly catchy as his dad’s original new wave classic, but indie musician Baxter Dury was provided with some unlikely inspiration for a new single earlier this year – after he was caught using his phone at the wheel by Jeremy Vine and subsequently banned from driving.
Dury, the son of funk-punk pioneer and Blockheads frontman Ian Dury, revealed that he lost his licence after the broadcaster and safe cycling advocate spotted him scrolling through Instagram while sitting in traffic in London.
The 53-year-old was driving back from north London, where he was recording his new album Allbarone with producer Paul Epworth, to his home in the west of the city when he was caught by Vine’s bike camera, Dury admitted in an interview on BBC 6 Music’s Roundtable last week.
Asked about his experiences of travelling to Epworth’s studio to record the album, Dury – who has released nine LPs of his own during a 23-year career – told presenter Huw Stephens: “Do you know what? This is a tragic story, but I drove there for the first half and then lost my licence.”
He continued: “I got caught in a traffic jam, and Jeremy Vine took a film of me looking at Instagram, which he deserves to, I’m not arguing about [it].
“Shouldn’t probably say that publicly. He’s probably in the other room, isn’t he?”
Responding to Dury’s revelation, BBC and Channel 5 presenter Vine told the Daily Mail that the situation was “very unfortunate”.
“I would like Baxter to know that I love his dad’s music,” Vine said, resisting the attempt to exclaim ‘what a waste’.
“I’m afraid mobile phone use in cars in London, particular the posher parts, is an absolute curse. So, I am quite tunnel-visioned about it.
“We have 1,700 road deaths a year. Sorry to be serious about it. Best wishes to Baxter.”
The broadcaster has been cycling with a camera for years, using it to share videos from his commutes and other rides around London on social media, often featuring instances of poor, dangerous, or careless driving around him and other cyclists.
These clips regularly attracted millions of views and thousands of comments, providing the basis for multiple news stories here on road.cc and national newspapers’ websites.
However, last month Vine announced that he will stop sharing these cycling clips because, he admitted, the “the trolling just got too bad” and “the anger they generate has genuinely upset me”.
Vine posted that his bike was stolen from outside his home in April, telling his 765,000 Twitter followers that the theft had “made me think” about whether, when he gets a new bike, he wants to “go back into the trolling furnace”.
Outlining the extent of the abuse further, the broadcaster revealed there are “at least two death threats” against him currently being investigated by the police and that every new cycling video “would make my phone physically heat up in my pocket”.
“I enjoy debates but not abuse,” he explained at the time. “It’s strange that getting interested in road safety can actually endanger a person. I see other cyclists facing the same and wonder how they deal with it. So when I get my new bike I’ll stay vigilant but won’t share my adventures.
“The trolling just got too bad. They have had well over 100 million views but in the end the anger they generate has genuinely upset me.
“My aim was only to get all of us who drive to think about the dangers of trying to move around cities on a pushbike. I know I’ve sometimes got a little cross when a driver has, say, pulled out without looking, but I only ever uploaded the film to show the danger.
“I never made a penny from my videos, by the way. They have gone completely crazy at times.”
The decision to stop sharing the videos on social media perhaps didn’t come as much of a surprise, after Vine recently told the road.cc Podcast that he faces “trolling” every time he posts about cycling, which can be ”exhausting”.
“When I put stuff on social media, invariably, without exception, I’m told that I had done something wrong that put me in danger,” Vine said. “Or I shouldn’t have been on the road anyway, because I don’t pay road tax.
“But the trolling has got to me a bit, and I feel like I might rest up, so drivers can relax. There’ll still be CyclingMikey and the others, but I might have a break, because it’s got a bit exhausting.
“If you’re reversed over by a van in a cycle lane, it cannot be your fault – but 95 per cent of the people who replied to my video said it was my fault. So I suppose it’s a bit wearing. My wife says to me, ‘put down the phone, it’s blowing up’.”
55 thoughts on “Hit me with your driving ban: Ian Dury’s son loses licence after Jeremy Vine spotted him using phone in traffic, as broadcaster says phone driving is “absolute curse””
I’ve deleted my Twitter and
I’ve deleted my Twitter and Reddit accounts entirely a week or two ago. It’s just not worth the constant hatred, harassment, death threats and the occasional stalker coming to my flat. To be honest I’m not sure how long I want to stay in the UK with the way things have been going against cyclists lately. Surely there are countries I can ride my bike with my cat and not have people publically praying for my death.
I recall you posting a video
I recall you posting a video where you deliberately ran red lights which just seemed like your attempt to bait trolls which I thought was odd/unnecessary
Critical mass ride, was it?
Critical mass ride, was it?
That poor cat. The prick that
That poor cat. The prick that is that guy just does it for engagement farming and ‘look at me’ action. Utter bellend. I blocked him on my socials long ago. So glad at not seeing its shite in my feeds any more.
Nice one …
Nice one …
Is this ironic? It doesn’t
Is this ironic? It doesn’t come across clearly.
Given how much Brits hate
Given how much Brits hate cyclists I doubt we’ll ever get sensible laws here like in other places; where I’m from it’s perfectly legal to cycle through a red when you’ve got a green pedestrian light. Suggest this to Brits though and they lose their minds. I’m literally done talking about cycling with anyone in this country.
sigirides wrote:
The only reason we even have traffic lights is because of dangerous driving. Cyclists simply do not need them to not kill other road users.
sigirides wrote:
I don’t know about cats – and in fact there are quite a few people riding (with) their dogs there [on bikes] [by the side] – but I’d guess it’s pretty chilled otherwise if you go east from Harwich…
I had a great time on our
I had a great time on our trip to the Netherlands last year. I still had Brits spamming my videos, being angry about me going through red lights, not wearing a helmet and various other imagined offenses. People are so psychotic about cyclists here (see some of the comments in this thread already), I doubt the abuse would stop even if I left the country.
I used to sometimes see a
I used to sometimes see a woman riding her bike in Peterborough with a parrot on her shoulder. I think it enjoyed the mental stimulation. I read somewhere that they have the mental capacity of a 2 – 5 year old human and easily get bored.
Mr Blackbird wrote:
Has she got it some accounts on the internets yet?
Parrots are interesting creatures – some can live longer than people. They’re intelligent and can be social – but also as prey animals get nervous and freak out. And prone (like toddlers, and adults sometimes) to some very antisocial behaviours like screaming and shouting (they’re seriously loud, lived near one), vandalising things and scratching and biting. Probably better living parrot-focussed lives than as mostly-tamed pets.
chrisonabike wrote:
Has she got it some accounts on the internets yet?
Parrots are interesting creatures – some can live longer than people. They’re intelligent and can be social – but also as prey animals get nervous and freak out. And prone (like toddlers, and adults sometimes) to some very antisocial behaviours like screaming and shouting (they’re seriously loud, lived near one), vandalising things and scratching and biting. Probably better living parrot-focussed lives than as mostly-tamed pets.— Mr Blackbird
That reminds me of the most excellent short story by Ted Chiang (I love his writing) available to read here: https://electricliterature.com/the-great-silence-by-ted-chiang/
Thanks! Will take a look.
Thanks! Will take a look.
Super! And very thought
Super! And very thought-provoking.
I agree. We sometimes visit a
I agree about the parrot-focussed life. We sometimes visit and donate to a parrot sanctuary. Many of them have outlived their owners. Some have become difficult to keep (Cockatoos are loud and dusty, parrots can consider one person as their mate and attack anyone else who comes near – they have hard bites, which can crack Brazil nut shells). Some of them are real mental basket cases. Some have self mutilated.
It should not generally be allowable to have them as pets, unless they have company and can fly freely.
Classic quote from one of our
Classic quote from one of our lecturers when I was at university studying veterinary medicine.
“Carrots can be very dangerous to vets as their beaks can crush nuts”. 😂😂
Sorry to hear that. There’s a
Sorry to hear that. There’s a lot of hate out there for cyclists and some people with extremely strong opinions where animals are concerned (and overlook the fact a cyclist is an animal too!).
Spend the time you’ve got back by deleting those social media accounts out on the bike with the cat and avoid the idiots.
I sympathise with the abuse
I sympathise with the abuse you have received and from what I saw of it before I deleted Twitter some time ago a lot of it has indeed been horrific. You haven’t necessarily helped yourself by arrogantly abusing anyone, including me, who has politely raised genuine concerns about the safety of riding with a cat poorly secured in a front basket in the busiest London traffic where it could easily be injured in a crash (and indeed very nearly was when the moped rider crashed into you). Telling mad keen cyclists and animal lovers that they are trolls who hate cyclists and who hate animals because they politely and reasonably suggest that your activities are not necessarily a good idea doesn’t make you exactly a saint in the peace and harmony on social media stakes, does it?
Well the good news is, I don
Well the good news is, I don’t care if you think cycling is dangerous, I’m not interested in anyone’s opinions about cycling anymore. That ship has sailed.
sigirides wrote:
QED, I say I don’t think it’s a good idea to cycle with a cat poorly secured in a basket in central London in the busiest traffic and apparently that means I think cycling is dangerous and don’t want anyone to do it and am therefore anti-cyclist – this is what you said to me on Twitter some time ago. Quite absurd.
Since fit adult cats can
Since fit adult cats can withstand a two story drop without injury, I’m bound to wonder if the catists offended by this transport have thought it through. Probably imagining how they would not like a low speed RTI, and not considering the full cat capabilities.
lonpfrb wrote:
A cat falling out of the basket will probably be fine, provided the bike doesn’t fall on top of it. What happens afterwards though? In one of Travis’ own videos he is hit by a moped rider, Sigrid comes out of the basket and could very easily have been caught on the moped and dragged under its wheels (see screenshot). Cats can survive high falls because they are light boned and have a much lower terminal velocity than humans, that doesn’t help much when a car hits them as many bereaved owners can testify. If Travis was just riding around parks and trails where the only risk to Sigrid was falling out of the basket in a tumble I wouldn’t have a problem with that, what I have a problem with is that he chooses to ride her around some of the heaviest traffic environments in London where there is a high likelihood that in a tumble the cat could get hit by passing vehicles. In my opinion, putting the cat at that sort of risk for the sake of monetised TikTok videos, selling books and, dare one say it, satisfying Travis’s clearly substantial narcissistic need for attention, is not acceptable.
Those points go way beyond
Those points go way beyond transport so agree with you.
If this image is typical of Travis arrangements for the cat, I’m amazed that it would stay in the basket at all…
Shows a very “my cat my rules
Shows a very “my cat my rules” attitude towards animal welfare which is worrying.
Car Delenda Est wrote:
Precisely, seems to conflate “I’m entitled to ride my bike wherever it’s legal and put myself at whatever risk I want” – with which I and I would imagine most people around here would entirely agree – with “I’m entitled to put my cat at whatever risk I want” and then accuses people who disagree with that of being anti-cycling.
Car Delenda Est wrote:
I’m more of a dog person, but there’s some post that I’ve seen somewhere that equates cat ownership with being a lesson in consent. Also, there’s often dispute about who’s really in charge of a cat/person relationship.
Until it ends up under the
Until it ends up under the wheels of a bus.
Indeed, none of us would
Indeed, none of us would survive that. However I must pay tribute to London Bus driver professionalism.
On the one occasion that spilt oil in the bus lane got me, the bus behind did come to rest well clear so I had time to remove the bike and myself to the pavement for damage assessment.
Perhaps it’s more of a “but
Perhaps it’s more of a “it doesn’t look wise now – but we could fix that though”?
Who else benefits from good-quality cycle infra? *Checks notes to see what we’re arguing about now* Cats benefit!
(Actually “everybody benefits including drivers, pedestrians, people with disabilities, the taxpayer …”! Oh, except for some folks keen to keep mass motoring at current levels and some political “purveyors of common sense” apparently).
lonpfrb wrote:
cat just needs a helmet
I am often quite surprised how much concern people have for other people’s pets. Anyone who has had a cat will know if it didn’t like being on that bike, then it wouldn’t flipping stay there! In some respects, securely strapping the animal down would be cruel as it couldn’t escape!
Quite frankly, nothing in life is risk free and if there were going to be an horrific collision, a cat is arguably far safer being able move about a bit. After all, a bike, unlike a car, does not offer any physical protection for its ‘occupants’.
The hand-wringing then ensues! Ban the cat cyclists! But then is it still ok to take your child to school on a bicycle?
What about letting cats out of the house to roam unattended – what if they get run over?! 😱
HoarseMann wrote:
Yes it’s okay to take your child to school on a bicycle, a school age child has a certain amount of resilience. Would you take a month old baby through the busiest traffic in London located in your front basket and held by a single tether long enough for them to fall out of the basket in the event of a crash? A cat and a month old baby are about equivalent in terms of size, weight and bone density.
Perhaps the Transport and
Perhaps the Transport and Mobilities group at the University of Westminster could do a study here? Do drivers behave more courteously if you cycling with some luggage, without, with a cat carrier or with a baby carrier?
(Obviously for ethical and practical considerations dummy cats and babies would be used).
Rendel Harris wrote:
You normally talk a lot of sense Rendel, but this is just a daft comparison.
A cat is extremely agile – it is far better for it to be untethered so it can use that agility. I have not seen many month old babies leaping from buildings and landing on their feet.
HoarseMann wrote:
When a cat or a baby falls from their basket and its head or spine is run over by a passing moped, is there going to be a lot of difference in the outcome?
In Sigrid’s case the cat is not untethered but on a single line tether that means that it can fall out of the basket into the path of oncoming vehicles but can’t actually use its agility to get away, so worst of both worlds.
A study of feline high-rise
A study of feline high-rise injuries seen in veterinary clinics in Hong Kong – they have many high rise apartments and cats sometimes jump out of windows after a bird – showed that injuries predictably got worse the higher the fall. Until about the 5th or 7th floor, I forget which, after which the severity actually decreased up to a point. The reason was that when cats start to fall they fall with their legs extended but when they stop accelerating and reach terminal velocity they go into a crouch, which is less aero so they actually slow down. Hence a lot of broken mandibles as they would smack it on the ground, but that’s easily repairable.
Not sure how they knew that the cats go into a crouch, hopefully no-one was chucking cats off tall buildings and videoing it 😬😬
Good science is difficult and
Good science is difficult and approval for proposed studies would likely have to pass ethical tests. Certainly medical trials all have to which is why observing damage or end of life events are very hard. People can’t chose to join a study that requires them to give up their legal rights, however much they might want to. That’s Ethical.
I don’t believe that cats have the same protection in law, but it’s fairly obvious that any perceived animal cruelty is a huge reputational risk to any organisation.
I’m not aware how endemic CCTV is in Hong Kong. In UK its normal for road traffic incident investigation to request all the CCTV footage in the area…
lonpfrb wrote:
Correction – in the UK it ought to be normal but it isn’t – at least when it was a cyclist! I believe there have been several reports here of people having to do that themselves.
… and sometimes the police make even less effort (plenty of stories reported or posted here). See eg. the Michael Mason case for some particularly troubling “lack of professional curiousity”.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Let’s not lose sight of the fact it’s not the cyclist on the bicycle with the cat carrying device that’s the threat, but the driver in the motorised vehicle with the cat crushing device.
HoarseMann wrote:
I’m certainly not and as and habitue of this site you know that I’m hardly the world’s biggest motorcar fan. However, when we acknowledge that the problem is the driver in the motorised vehicle with a cat crushing device is it wise to then take a cat and put them in the middle of thousands of such devices? Saying “I didn’t bow down to the tyranny of the motorcar and I went wherever I wanted” isn’t much consolation if you have a dead cat on your hands.
Rendel Harris wrote:
If you take that view, then why put anything in the middle of such devices? It’s an argument for not cycling in traffic at all.
HoarseMann wrote:
I’d give a cat odds over a baby, but less than a human rider. And though the cat or baby may enjoy the ride the rider has the informed choice to be there or not.
Cats may land OK but may take major damage from falling bike and/or rider, will be less visible in the road and if tethered may not be able to escape.
Of course everyone is at risk in (less heavily controlled) motor traffic because “heavy motor vehicle plus possible high relative speed” (at point of collision the driver becomes irrelevant, pedant(s) ).
I think it’s just another argument for proper separated cat paths myself!
HoarseMann wrote:
Yes, that’s Travis’ argument, and I’m afraid it cuts no ice with me. There are degrees of risk in everything: I don’t think it would be a good idea for my 94-year-old mate to be riding his ebike in the middle of central London rush-hour traffic, nor do I believe that it’s a desirable environment for my neighbour’s four-year-old daughter on her bike with stabilisers. Does that mean I’m arguing that nobody should cycle there? Of course it doesn’t.
They don’t have nine lives
They don’t have nine lives though, so not comparing apples with apples!
This is going to be an agree-to-disagree one.
‘Liking’ this doesn’t seem
‘Liking’ this doesn’t seem right, so have a sad cat face instead.
😾
It’s interesting, Travis. I
It’s interesting, Travis. I still think there is progress to be made, though we’ll need a cultural revolution along the way. For example, 20mph default limits in Wales will be coming to England in time, as the evidence in favour is too strong.
On the social media, perhaps try Bluesky? Twitter is a far right cesspit.
On the politics, I think we can hope for improvement over the next decade, though I was sad to lose Louise Haigh.
One to watch are Reform County Councils – around my patch Lincs, Notts, Derbys and Staffs – which now control some Highways Authorities. And especially what they do to feed their supporters when they discover that the “DEI spending” they fantasise about, which they will cancel to save the world, is about 0.01% of budget.
I’m currently retooling my complaints letters to refer to discrinmination against mobility scooter users in particular.
Unfortunately, Kent is also
Unfortunately, Kent is also now led by Reform, however all the Active Travel infrastructure funded by Central government was long ago removed in response to the noisy minority of motons who object to fulfilling their legal and contractual obligations to drive with due care and attention, specifically the Hierarchy of Responsibility.
Since the Police Commissioner and local MP remain responsive, I shall continue to conduct Freedom of Navigation operations and keep an eye on KCC the Highway authority.
lonpfrb wrote:
“You have my sympathy”.
(sketchy tangent) I hope Ian
(sketchy tangent) I hope Ian Dury’s son as well as JV and other UK cyclists can find some reasons to be cheerful… (How about cycling in the sunshine?)
I can’t believe there’s so
I can’t believe there’s so much fuss about a cat on a bike.
But what if it were a
But what if it were a squirrel ?
Hirsute wrote:
I think that would mean you’d already fallen over and it had then got into the basket. Now your problem is getting it out!
Hirsute wrote:
The big problem with
The big problem with squirrels on the bike is going to be sock length. Easier to check with a cat, but sigi doesn’t seem to be wearing socks at all.
The worst is uneven length I
The worst is uneven length I think. This example: too high at the back here (although below the knee?), sockettes at the front. UCI (Union des Chats Internationale) say “non”.