When will this shit end?

[Mr.Tease]

3 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

I didn't need one for rabies, but my yellow fever certificate came for free.

I think you get a free one for yellow fever at the time, but if you lose it you have to pay. I gave my mum mine for safe keeping, then she lost it, then found it immediately upon me returning with my new one that I had just had to pay for, after denying she had ever had it (oh the mind games she used to play! 😂) 

[steviewevie]

Got to agree with those against banning outdoor exercise, I think you get little gain from it, but a lot of harm...lots of people live in small flats and have no outdoor space, they need a breather..

Edited January 8, 2021 by steviewevie

[Copperface]

17 minutes ago, FestivalJamie said:

I’m also surprised as the police should only be fining people for breaking the LAW. What the girls did wasn’t breaking any laws- and a lot of people who are breaking the law suffer no consequences. There is a debate about whether the two girls walking broke the “guidance” but they should not have been giving a £200 fine when they didn’t actually break any laws.

Theory only, but they would not have been given an FPN if they accepted advice and left. Bet they kicked off  - primary strategy has always been to engage, explain and encourage. Enforcement in cases like these is last resort.

The very fact that several police units were on scene might go to show that there was a particular problem there.

They can dispute the FPN and go to court. The court decides the interpretation law, not the police or the two women, or you.

What they did was clearly contrary to guidance.

I think you mentioned parties earlier on. Yep, that is being enforced as well across the country.

These two can get in the sea.......or reservoir.

[FestivalJamie]

Just now, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

You can't have your cake and eat it though - do you want harsher rules in place or don't you? 

 

My post isn’t arguing for harsher or lighter rules. I’m explaining to you the difference between law and guidance and that the girls did not break the law.

If you think driving for exercise is unreasonable and in your opinion “not local” then the government needs to shut heritage sites down, shut coffee shops down, shut gardens centres down, shut the range down. 

If driving for exercise isn’t allowed, then the government need to state as a legal requirement “exercise must start and finish from your household” and not facilitate meeting of a friend in public. It’s not fair to criticise their or anyone else’s actions when it’s not actually illegal and also I would say what they did is not irresponsible given the lockdown rules either. I actually think them going for a socially distant walk in a secluded area is more sensible than in a crowded city street.

 

[Mr.Tease]

1 minute ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

I checked and I was exaggerating - it was actually £225 for two jabs. Thing is you're really unlikely to get it, so it is a major cost for a small risk! But I just thought fuck it.

£225 sounds like the price I'd put on my life--I think what put me off is if you get bitten, you still have to have another injection to avoid dying, but it buys you a bit more time to get it (or something) - it did not seem like value for money! 

[Copperface]

1 minute ago, FestivalJamie said:

My post isn’t arguing for harsher or lighter rules. I’m explaining to you the difference between law and guidance and that the girls did not break the law.

If you think driving for exercise is unreasonable and in your opinion “not local” then the government needs to shut heritage sites down, shut coffee shops down, shut gardens centres down, shut the range down. 

If driving for exercise isn’t allowed, then the government need to state as a legal requirement “exercise must start and finish from your household” and not facilitate meeting of a friend in public. It’s not fair to criticise their or anyone else’s actions when it’s not actually illegal and also I would say what they did is not irresponsible given the lockdown rules either. I actually think them going for a socially distant walk in a secluded area is more sensible than in a crowded city street.

 

The government’s definition of this is stated as ‘your village, town or the part of a city where you live’,” 

[Paul ™]

29 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Financial Times statistician - is respected...

 

 

12 minutes ago, Copperface said:

Have a look at this as well.

Long document but all in there.

https://www.efestivals.co.uk/forums/topic/233675-when-will-this-shit-end/?do=findComment&comment=6065301

 

Cheers folks, much more useful, will have a read. 

[FestivalJamie]

1 minute ago, Copperface said:

Theory only, but they would not have been given an FPN if they accepted advice and left. Bet they kicked off  - primary strategy has always been to engage, explain and encourage. Enforcement in cases like these is last resort.

The very fact that several police units were on scene might go to show that there was a particular problem there.

They can dispute the FPN and go to court. The court decides the interpretation law, not the police or the two women, or you.

What they did was clearly contrary to guidance.

I think you mentioned parties earlier on. Yep, that is being enforced as well across the country..

First of all if what was said in the news is true, then they did nothing wrong. If they kicked off answered back got aggressive etc and that’s the reason they were given a fine, ok different, then it’s justified. But that’s detail we don’t know.

As for parties being “enforced across the country”. Nope. I know plenty of people who were having New Year’s Eve parties and suffered no consequences. I’m not saying these girls didn’t do further harm than what they say they did, just on the face of it the enforcement in this country is completely disjointed and there’s no consistency with enforcement at all. When we were in a shop the other day police were standing around having a chat- 50% of people not wearing masks and they didn’t say anything. We asked them why they weren’t enforcing and they said “it’s not our job to enforce masks”, so I’ve had quite a counter experience to what you’re saying.

 

[Mr.Tease]

1 hour ago, Chef said:

 

Short thread on what the Mayor is asking for, nothing seems unreasonable. I don't know a lot about this but isn't it effectively just a trigger to formally ask for more help from central government in bad circumstances? 

Face masks outside is a good idea anyways - it's freezing! I've started wearing mine to keep warm

[Zoo Music Girl]

1 minute ago, Mr.Tease said:

£225 sounds like the price I'd put on my life--I think what put me off is if you get bitten, you still have to have another injection to avoid dying, but it buys you a bit more time to get it (or something) - it did not seem like value for money! 

Yeah so if you get bitten and haven't had the initial jab you need to have four doses over the space of a month (instead of just two a few days apart). But you ideally need to start the treatment within few hours of being bitten if you haven't had the jab. Which isn't ideal if you are in the middle of nowhere which we would be. Basically I was being over cautious because I read up about the disease and got scared ha! 

[FestivalJamie]

1 minute ago, Copperface said:

The government’s definition of this is stated as ‘your village, town or the part of a city where you live’,” 

Unfortunately you’re not listening to my point. My point is if we don’t want people to drive to exercise then why are things like heritage sites facilitated to stay open. There’s a complete conflict between law and guidance set up here.

[xxialac]

1 minute ago, Mr.Tease said:

Face masks outside is a good idea anyways - it's freezing! I've started wearing mine to keep warm

Yeah, who knew they'd give you a warmth boost!

[Crazyfool01]

8 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Does this help?

https://www.royalmail.com/priority-postboxes

Cheers I got that link with the test kit ... it’s in my town centre so I’ve booked a collection ... thought I might be able to use a standard postbox but it appears not and I’m not keen on walking into town ... it’s going to be collected sometime tomoro ... I’m not going anywhere ... I currently think I’ve been pinged in error ... but will of course follow the process ... thanks @Zoo Music Girl 

[Copperface]

1 minute ago, FestivalJamie said:

First of all if what was said in the news is true, then they did nothing wrong. If they kicked off answered back got aggressive etc and that’s the reason they were given a fine, ok different, then it’s justified. But that’s detail we don’t know.

As for parties being “enforced across the country”. Nope. I know plenty of people who were having New Year’s Eve parties and suffered no consequences. I’m not saying these girls didn’t do further harm than what they say they did, just on the face of it the enforcement in this country is completely disjointed and there’s no consistency with enforcement at all. When we were in a shop the other day police were standing around having a chat- 50% of people not wearing masks and they didn’t say anything. We asked them why they weren’t enforcing and they said “it’s not our job to enforce masks”, so I’ve had quite a counter experience to what you’re saying.

 

Exactly......that's the details we don't know. But the EEEE policy is the same.

Parties are being closed down left, right and centre and massive fines imposed. Not quite how 120 thousand odd people are supposed to control every street in England.

I didn't mention mask wearing but seeing as you've mentioned it, it is the shops/premises job to ensure their premises are covid secure, not the police. So they are correct.

[Tranquility of Solitude]

My mum, who has been advised, time and again, to stay at home, yesterday drove and entered 3 separate garden centres seeking out salt/grit for her paths. This was after I had cleared her paths, but told her to stay at home as much as possible, and call me if she needed anything.

I am not justifying her actions, and to my mind she’s continuing to put herself and others at risk for what are completely unnecessary trips. Why are garden centres still open? We have had words over it, and she’s being pretty frosty over the phone, but as she lives alone, I worry about completely falling out with her over this. She’s stubborn beyond belief and there’s no telling her.

Not sure what response I’m expecting here but had to get that off my chest.

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

1 minute ago, FestivalJamie said:

My post isn’t arguing for harsher or lighter rules. I’m explaining to you the difference between law and guidance and that the girls did not break the law.

If you think driving for exercise is unreasonable and in your opinion “not local” then the government needs to shut heritage sites down, shut coffee shops down, shut gardens centres down, shut the range down. 

If driving for exercise isn’t allowed, then the government need to state as a legal requirement “exercise must start and finish from your household” and not facilitate meeting of a friend in public. It’s not fair to criticise their or anyone else’s actions when it’s not actually illegal and also I would say what they did is not irresponsible given the lockdown rules either. I actually think them going for a socially distant walk in a secluded area is more sensible than in a crowded city street.

 

That specific post isn't but many of your posts do. 

They didn't have to drive to go for a walk though, they chose to. Unless they were unfortunate to be stumbled on my a particularly over zealous police officer there is quite probably more to this story than meets the eye - the guidance to plod through as been the FPN is the last resort not the first tool in the armoury. 

Its not illegal to make shit music but people criticise it. 

[FestivalJamie]

Just now, Copperface said:

 it is the shops/premises job to ensure their premises are covid secure, not the police. So they are correct.

Well every time I’ve asked a shop Assistent why masks aren’t being enforced they say “its not their job to enforce it”.

I might be wrong about a lot of things but I’m sure I’m right about this: masks are legally enforceable by the police and it is not the shop keeper or assistants job to enforce this. Can someone else weigh in on this?

[steviewevie]

 

[RobertProsineckisLighter]

6 minutes ago, FestivalJamie said:

Unfortunately you’re not listening to my point. My point is if we don’t want people to drive to exercise then why are things like heritage sites facilitated to stay open. There’s a complete conflict between law and guidance set up here.

Because they are in some people's towns, villages etc...

[FestivalJamie]

1 minute ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

Unless they were unfortunate to be stumbled on my a particularly over zealous police officer there is quite probably more to this story than meets the eye. 

This is a very valid point!

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, FestivalJamie said:

Well every time I’ve asked a shop Assistent why masks aren’t being enforced they say “its not their job to enforce it”.

I might be wrong about a lot of things but I’m sure I’m right about this: masks are legally enforceable by the police and it is not the shop keeper or assistants job to enforce this. Can someone else weigh in on this?

its a bit of everything isn't it ? The job of the shop to be covid secure .... but the job of the police to carry out enforcement within those premises ? 

[Zoo Music Girl]

5 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

Cheers I got that link with the test kit ... it’s in my town centre so I’ve booked a collection ... thought I might be able to use a standard postbox but it appears not and I’m not keen on walking into town ... it’s going to be collected sometime tomoro ... I’m not going anywhere ... I currently think I’ve been pinged in error ... but will of course follow the process ... thanks @Zoo Music Girl 

I assumed that they had special collections for tests from those particular postboxes, to speed up time to testing centre, so if you used a normal one it will likely get mislaid.

Fingers crossed!

[alanr]

13 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Yeah, to be clear, I'm not suggesting it be kept exclusively to people that can afford £500. Just that after the vulnerable are done, it's open to those willing to pay £500 (as they're more likely to put money into the economy) and then after that it's free for anyway. Just you have to choose who goes first somehow, and this is one of those very, very, very rare occasions where letting those with money go first can actually be beneficial.

(Taking the idea to it's logical conclusion, it'd be far too complicated, but you'd do a reverse auction, so the price starts at £5000 for whoever will pay it, then keeps going down until it gets to £0)

I really do not understand this argument. Firstly vulnerability is not a binary condition, everyone is vulnerable to the virus. The vaccination target groups define the population in terms of their risk of serious consequences of contracting the virus.

The aim of vaccination is to achieve "herd immunity", any distribution method which relies on ability to pay will leave large areas short of the required immunity levels. So we would end out with the virus out of control in the most deprived areas of the country. This may suit the present government, but I consider it totally unacceptable

[Copperface]

Just now, crazyfool1 said:

its a bit of everything isn't it ? The job of the shop to be covid secure .... but the job of the police to carry out enforcement within those premises ? 

If it's being repeatedly breached, yes. But the premises have to put the measures and controls in place first.

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, Zoo Music Girl said:

I assumed that they had special collections for tests from those particular postboxes, to speed up time to testing centre, so if you used a normal one it will likely get mislaid.

Fingers crossed!

according to google its to prevent the virus spreading and to lower contamination ?!!