12gauge82

Got to be honest, I think some teachers are too used to having a day off at the first sniff of anything. There's risks in many jobs, take the armed forces, they get sent to face bullets, sometimes with a very high probability of death, yet you very rarely here them complain, I know that's not a direct comparison as they sign up for it, however schools are going to need to reopen, there's no guarantee of a vaccine and I'd take being a teacher over a supermarket employee everyday of the week under the current crisis. What's teacher's thoughts on if a vaccine doesn't materialize, never go back to school again?

I haven't watched it either. I still don't see what Greta has to do with Cummings ignoring his own advice?

That's not quite right, they messed the charge up, but a police officer has every right to ask where someone is going, if they believe that you have broken the lock down rules, (failure to answer isn't going to help that cause I would suggest) they can fine you, at which point, failing to give your details could get you arrested.

Read the link I've posted, it would appear the courts think differently.

I did a bit of googling to prove my point and I found this https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/coronavirus-fine-police-lockdown-travel-newcastle-marie-dinou-a9444186.html Which also shows how clueless you are. I don't necessarily agree or disagree with the Corona virus powers, the point is, they are law. Telling people misinformation and that they don't need to give details when asked is dangerous and could land them in alot of trouble.

The point is, why is anyone speaking to her in a professional capacity about Corona virus, I might as well ask my dogs what they think.

I still haven't watched the clip, but from what you've said the copper in fact had every right to ask the person's details. 1.on account of the ticket, an 2. if he believed an offence was being committed, he can ask for the person's name, d.o.b, place of birth and address, failure to give those details and if it met the necessity test, he would actually carry the power of arrest.

Simple solution, do more lamping 👍😂

And that's the problem I was talking about, so many employers take the absolute Micky with their staff, when the boots on the other foot, many employees feel no sense of loyalty towards them at all, and who could blame them!

If it were me, I would approach it from a common sense and reasonable standpoint. In my very humble opinion, due to the current crisis and the fact many employers are struggling (although a few are actually doing very well out of it, so advice differs if her employer is one of them) I can understand them needing people to take half their holiday now, so the whole workforce isn't off when things hopefully return to normal and the employer can start getting back on their feet. If they'd said she needed to take her entire Holiday entitlement in that period I would say they were being unreasonable. It's the way I used to work with employees, give and take, I always found I got alot more back by being reasonable, unfortunately there are so many bad employers these days coupled with very poor protection for employees I think it's become a bit of a negative spiral with both sides becoming entrenched nit-picking over the letter of employment law and contacts.

I haven't watched the clip, however I do know that the railway by-laws are very far reaching and totally different to normal acts of parliament, so he probably is acting well within his powers.

Generally I think that's what they do, but as redington has said, sometimes from the perspective of the person stopped, it would seem random. Take your analogie of the burglar's with the red car, criminals will often switch cars straight after a get away, picture the scene, it's 2a.m a violent robbery just aken place, the cops might not have enough evidence to make stops on vehicles that look suspect immediately around that area in the hope of locating them, what they can do is stop any vehicle they wish to ask for documents, but what they're really up to is looking for the robbers. The person stopped isn't necessarily going to know that. I very much doubt there's virtually any cops who go around stopping random cars for nothing, speaking to some cops I know, it sounds there aren't enough officers as is. Besides, it's MPs that set law, the cops simply follow it, going back to your argument, simply put anyone driving a motor vehicle can be stopped for nothing more than they want to check their driving docs.

Could be heat stroke. I'd consider the vet asap if he doesn't improve rapidly or gets any worse.

Also very true, some forces have overstepped the legislation, I believe they were heavily criticized by parliament.

They can't carry on using Corona law if parliament abolishes the act, as it's on a time limit and needs reviewing regularly. I think most cops are doing their best to balance freedoms, whilst investigating and preventing crime, within the law. It's not an easy task, you can't please everyone.

Yes that's what I said, they can request your driving docs. But if you refused to provide your name ect then you could be liable for arrest. There'd be nothing to stop them asking where you were going when stopped and if they believed you were braking lock down rules they could fine you. I'm not saying I agree with that, just saying it as it is.

They definitely don't and refusing to provide those documents could be a reason for arrest.

Police can already pull anyone over in a vehicle and insist they provide them their driving docs, there'd be nothing stopping them from asking where you were going or why you were out while they did it.

I get why you feel like that but I think this is over sensitive, the government aren't likely to mention every single possible hobby/job that can be done and shooting is undertaken by a relatively small section of society.

No bee in my bonnet, just makes me laugh when I see rubbish like jdog being posted like it's fact. I bet he doesn't get many guest round for lunch anymore.

Dogs are not robots and just like people, will come with all sorts of issues, the point is, you can have a well trained dog who is also a pet. My dogs are very well behaved, although I'm no oracle, my mate I mentioned earlier is exceptional and his dogs have won many competitions, they are also family pets. I'll certainly agree with that.

Everyone who has a dog is a dog trainer, or should be anyway, that's why there's so many dogs with issues, but that's for another thread. The point to this thread is can you have a new, well trained gun dog and also have it as a pet, you think you can't, which is utter rubbish.

I'm sure you do. The point is, so are mine and yet they're pets first, they're like that without the need for all the misery, but then maybe your not as good a dog trainer as you think?

No worries, everyone has an opinion. However, once a dog is trained, as long as it's kept up, they soon learn the difference, I've never had a problem with several dogs, I also have a mate who trains labs, his dogs are used on large shoots and are pets to.

You sound a right bundle of joy, get a grip! To the op, Dogs ain't daft, if your half decent at training, your dog will soon learn the difference between being out with you and what's expected of it and it's home/family time.