93%

[treetree]

46 minutes ago, Mice! said:

I'll put this here, I'm getting my lads hair cut and another young bloke late teens early 20s has just come in, needs his hair cut as he's going to Bowness for a meal tonight so from tier 3 to tier 2, what's people's thoughts on that?

 

I hope his hair looks nice and he has a good time out tonight.

[Yellow Bear]

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

The best way to stay safe is to look after yourself - and that probably means doing as much isolating/distancing as you reasonably can consistent with what has to be done in life.

This - we are like this but some of the selfish make it more difficult.

[JohnfromUK]

We have little or no enforcement, but some places take it a bit more seriously!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9017719/North-Korea-publicly-executes-citizen-firing-squad-breaking-Covid-restriction-rules.html

Whilst I'd like to see any law made here properly policed and enforced (otherwise the whole process of law, policing and law enforcement is brought into disrepute) - a firing squad is a little extreme!

[Gordon R]

Some people I know seem to enjoy the creative aspect of getting around the tier rules. North Korean enforcement is probably the only way to get it to work.

I don't believe the system will stop the spread, but will dent the economy. There will be a day of reckoning when the full economic price is laid bare. Mungler has raised this, but I don't think the public fully grasp the scale of endless furlough schemes and the associated fraud, let alone the impact on businesses.

I would scrap the system, carry on with the vaccine and take sensible precautions for quite a long time.

[AVB]

2 hours ago, Mice! said:

I'll put this here, I'm getting my lads hair cut and another young bloke late teens early 20s has just come in, needs his hair cut as he's going to Bowness for a meal tonight so from tier 3 to tier 2, what's people's thoughts on that?

And there is no chance he is having the vaccine. 

Perfectly legal. 

[JohnfromUK]

Tier 3 rules on travel

Avoid travelling outside your area, including for overnight stays, other than where necessary

In a Tier 3, you should avoid travelling outside of your area.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tier-3-very-high-alert#travel

[AVB]

3 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Tier 3 rules on travel

Avoid travelling outside your area, including for overnight stays, other than where necessary

In a Tier 3, you should avoid travelling outside of your area.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tier-3-very-high-alert#travel

‘Avoid’ Not ‘must not’. It also states “you can continue to travel to venues or amenities which are open, but should aim to reduce the number of journeys you make where possible”

Edited December 4, 2020 by AVB

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, AVB said:

‘Avoid’ Not ‘must not’  

If people continue to ignore advice and use every loophole they can find - these rules will simply end up going on for longer for everyone.  Going out to another (lower numbered) tier for a meal is to be avoided.

[Mice!]

17 minutes ago, AVB said:

Perfectly legal. 

But is it? If it is then the tier system is a waste of time.

This was added to Lancs live yesterday,  it doesn't say its illegal but they are saying it's an unnecessary journey??

If you can legally travel from a higher tier to a lower then there isn't much point in them when people will obviously just do as they please.

Apparently the lad has some mates up there who have rented a house, so it's gone from a  meal out to a possible party.

 

[AVB]

Just now, Mice! said:

But is it? If it is then the tier system is a waste of time.

This was added to Lancs live yesterday,  it doesn't say its illegal but they are saying it's an unnecessary journey??

If you can legally travel from a higher tier to a lower then there isn't much point in them when people will obviously just do as they please.

Apparently the lad has some mates up there who have rented a house, so it's gone from a  meal out to a possible party.

 

And a classic example of the police making up their own rules. Wouldn’t stand up if taken to court. 

[Mice!]

4 minutes ago, AVB said:

And a classic example of the police making up their own rules. Wouldn’t stand up if taken to court. 

The local mp for Skipton was saying last week,  don't travel here, it's on the border of West Lancs and if everyone decided to pop for a meal or go the shops I doubt it would be long before the rates shot up there, hardly fair on them.

1 hour ago, Gordon R said:

Some people I know seem to enjoy the creative aspect of getting around the tier rules. North Korean enforcement is probably the only way to get it to work.

I don't believe the system will stop the spread, but will dent the economy. There will be a day of reckoning when the full economic price is laid bare. Mungler has raised this, but I don't think the public fully grasp the scale of endless furlough schemes and the associated fraud, let alone the impact on businesses.

I would scrap the system, carry on with the vaccine and take sensible precautions for quite a long time.

It would be great if this was possible but like you say many folk will do whatever is needed to get around the system, lads in work have been phoning around asking what food they have to order in order to get in the pubs, then its 7 tables booked, I'd personally be happy going out for a meal and a couple of pints, but the 20 somethings don't want that and before you know it any sensible precautions have gone out the window.

I agreed with the tier system but its only effective if its enforced. 

[AVB]

10 minutes ago, Mice! said:

The local mp for Skipton was saying last week,  don't travel here, it's on the border of West Lancs and if everyone decided to pop for a meal or go the shops I doubt it would be long before the rates shot up there, hardly fair on them.

It would be great if this was possible but like you say many folk will do whatever is needed to get around the system, lads in work have been phoning around asking what food they have to order in order to get in the pubs, then its 7 tables booked, I'd personally be happy going out for a meal and a couple of pints, but the 20 somethings don't want that and before you know it any sensible precautions have gone out the window.

I agreed with the tier system but its only effective if its enforced. 

I’m not saying that it is sensible to go from area to area but allowing to police or an MP to make up rules that suits them is very dangerous. What if the MP said, during normal times, don’t go shooting? Or the  chief police muppet didn’t like shooting and said it’s not necessary so don’t do it and if you do we will arrest you? The laws are there to protect us. 

[JohnfromUK]

10 minutes ago, AVB said:

The laws are there to protect us. 

Not disagreeing with that - but the advice is also there to protect us.

[AVB]

6 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Not disagreeing with that - but the advice is also there to protect us.

The law is that you have to wear a crash helmet when riding a motor bike. You are advised to wear a helmet when riding a push bike. The advice is there to protect us. Should the police interpret that advice as giving them to arrest people for not wearing a helmet on a push bike? Dangerous ground if you think they should. 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, AVB said:

The advice is there to protect us.

As is the law and we should follow the law - and also follow the advice (unless there is a very good reason why not).

It really isn't difficult.

If everyone says - it's only advice, so I'll ignore it and I have found a loophole that lets me avoid the intentions of the law, so I'll exploit the loophole as well - we will all be here for a very long time in and out of lock downs - and people and businesses will suffer as a result of the selfish attitudes of a few.

[AVB]

Just now, JohnfromUK said:

As is the law and we should follow the law - and also follow the advice (unless there is a very good reason why not).

It really isn't difficult.

If everyone says - it's only advice, so I'll ignore it and I have found a loophole that lets me avoid the intentions of the law, so I'll exploit the loophole as well - we will all be here for a very long time in and out of lock downs - and people and businesses will suffer as a result of the selfish attitudes of a few.

I agree that we should follow the advice. However it ISN’T the police’s job to enforce advice. Simple. If the police want to enforce something then it has to be law. 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, AVB said:

I agree that we should follow the advice. However it ISN’T the police’s job to enforce advice. Simple. If the police want to enforce something then it has to be law. 

With that - we are in agreement!

[Mungler]

Couple of thoughts:

1. This is the first medical / health emergency where the ‘well’ are locked down and are punished for wanting to live free

2. Of the 50,000 Covid deaths, only 4,500 had no ‘recorded’ underlying health conditions. That’s 0.006% of the population and we all know that the mean and median age of death is over 80 years of age. Pandemic? Discuss...

3. Given our ever increasing love of rules, government intervention in our lives and police powers, I now fully understand how ‘normal Germans’ ended up joining the SS and throwing levers in death camps.

4. People have been fed non stop fear since March and the results (blind ignorance and deep seated panic) are quite amazing. Don’t get me wrong, I’m washing my hands, keeping a distance, wearing a mask and can’t wait to get the vaccine but I don’t need the police / government to tell me to do any of this because I’m minding my business to protect me and if others don’t want to follow suit I fully respect their right to do so.

.

Edited December 4, 2020 by Mungler

[JohnfromUK]

4 minutes ago, Mungler said:

are punished for wanting to live free

meaning are punished for breaking the law.  No one is punished for what they want.  It's when they 'take' what is against the current rules they get punished.

 

5 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Don’t get me wrong, I’m washing my hands, keeping a distance, wearing a mask and can’t wait to get the vaccine but I don’t need the police / government to tell me to do any of this because I’m minding my business to protect me and if others don’t want to follow suit I fully respect their right to do so.

I'm sure you are right and behaving very sensibly (people who hold SGC/FAC (as I assume the vast majority here do) tend to be fairly level headed and law abiding by nature!), but sadly - loads of people cannot/will not behave sensibly unless compelled by law/enforcement - and some not even then.

We are all (in part anyway) paying the penalties for the few who can't/won't behave.  What's new!

[Mungler]

9 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

We are all (in part anyway) paying the penalties for the few who can't/won't behave.  What's new!

No we’re not. The evidence is transmission within care homes, hospitals and the home. 

Demonising anyone under 30 who wants to go down the pub or otherwise live what was commonly accepted to be a ‘free’ life is a very very slippery slope and notwithstanding the total lack of supporting medical evidence.

So we’re all on board with ‘substantial meal’ then as law? Tell me how Covid reduces with a meal? The government are making this up as they go along and without even parliamentary debate. How’s that for democracy?

I’ve already written to my local MP and cancelled my Conservative party membership - I’ll never vote for them again. Indeed, it’s none of the above. They just aren’t bright enough for the roles they are attempting to perform.

.

Edited December 4, 2020 by Mungler

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, Mungler said:

No we’re not. The evidence is transmission within care homes, hospitals and the home. 

I disagree (respectfully of course)  The evidence is that transmission occurs (most) when people are in close contact indoors for a longer period.  That does include hospitality settings.  Of the two couples I know who have definitely had Covid, one couple caught it in a pub/restaurant in late August as did several others - traced to asymptomatic staff.  The other couple - he caught it teaching in a school - and she (from the timing) caught it from him.  Fortunately all have made a recovery.

The substantial meal aspect is a nonsense I agree there - gathering indoors is the biggest risk.

As it happens I cancelled my Conservative party membership way back in Cameron's leadership!

[Walker570]

7 hours ago, Mice! said:

I'll put this here, I'm getting my lads hair cut and another young bloke late teens early 20s has just come in, needs his hair cut as he's going to Bowness for a meal tonight so from tier 3 to tier 2, what's people's thoughts on that?

And there is no chance he is having the vaccine. 

The whole deal has been very poorly thought through. The WISE ones in No 10 have litterally picked ideas out of the air.

I know of a B&B just inside a red area who cannot take any business other than 'workers' and eating out is banned. four miles down the road totally different regulations.  It really could not be made up but I believe it has been.  JohnfromUK makes the best point in his last paragraph, "the best way to stay safe is to look after yourself"  Common sense really.

Long journeys not allowed/warranted asks the question how long is long?   If I drive 20 miles in my car I will be safe, but if I drive 25 miles then the covid will grab me.   It's like meals in pubs, have a full meal and the covid will ignore you and will make a dash for the guy in the corner on his own eating a bag of crisps with his pint.

Who are these idots who dream up this stupid regulations?

[Mungler]

4 minutes ago, Walker570 said:

Who are these idots who dream up this stupid regulations?

Wrong question. We should be asking ourselves ‘Who are these idiots who blindly go along with the stupid regulations and want more and more police and local authority powers?...’

It does genuinely trouble me. Having been to Croatia a number of times and up in the mountains I wondered how life long neighbours could turn on each other and a country could effectively devour itself. I now can see how easy it is.

.

 

Edited December 4, 2020 by Mungler

[treetree]

5 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

If people continue to ignore advice and use every loophole they can find - these rules will simply end up going on for longer for everyone.  Going out to another (lower numbered) tier for a meal is to be avoided.

Wrong way round; if people keep going along with the nonsense that it is within a government's powers to decide who you hug or spend your Christmas with, then this goes on and on.

 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, treetree said:

Wrong way round; if people keep going along with the nonsense that it is within a government's powers to decide who you hug or spend your Christmas with, then this goes on and on.

 

We will, as usual have to agree to disagree.