Also, every single time I see a complaint about cyclists, it neatly ignores that a dangerous cyclist would be orders of magnitude more dangerous driving a car. Based on mass alone, stopping distance will be much higher as well as incurring more serious injuries (including much more likely death) and property damage. Every time I bicycle instead of drive, I'm doing drivers and pedestrians a favor. Of course, I stay off the sidewalks and try to do the safest things possible.
It is striking how much safety is dependent on pedestrians accomodating distracted drivers. It seems quite unreasonable that so much responsibility is placed on users who are are no risk to anyone. And any pedestrian that does not comply is treated as if they are introducing the danger themselves. Classic victim blaming.
In addition to the phone-related dangerous behavior, I would encourage people to count the number of unsignaled turns that happen at an urban intersection. As a pedestrian and a bicycle commuter in Chicago, I have to operate under the assumption that cars will jump in any direction at any moment (especially after having once been hit by a truck making an unsignaled right turn).
People who ride bikes in the city seem to attract extra scorn from the public for their supposedly higher rates of scofflawism. Cyclists do not have true impunity because they are in constant danger, whereas drivers have de jure and de facto impunity. A drunk driver in Chicago received no jailtime for actually killing a cyclist last year, for example. The rulebreaking of the cyclist is always taken as less acceptable. For motorists, there is no strong social expectation to follow the rules. I hope this will change as bicycle commuting gets more popular.