When will this shit end?

[PolygonWindow]

8 minutes ago, mikegday said:

Yes. Because these two things are completely different. I think everyone has forgot the bit about keeping distant, even in someone’s house.

I think the government are aware that inside someone’s house people arnt keeping distant, the hope is that they’re the much more likely to keep a bit of distance in a restaurant or pub - that’s my take on it anyway.

Yes but much more difficult to actually enforce the rule to prevent people from visiting houses. Might as well ban people from going to the pubs if the numbers are rising again, that way you can actually enforce the rule by shutting the pubs no?

edit - or better yet, do both? 

Edited July 30, 2020 by PolygonWindow
Edit

[Ozanne]

3 minutes ago, mikegday said:

Doing whatever you want anywhere (within reason) is fine, as long as you keep distance. 2 couples sat over a table in a pub drunk - I still think will keep more distance than if they were sat in one of their houses. Because despite being drunk you’d still be aware it’s not normal, the staff would be acting different, you’d be ordering drinks in a different way. At home - you’d going the fridge as normal - things would be all like normal times again, and I think that’s when social distance goes out the window.

Bollocks. If you think people at a pub after several beers will still give social distancing as much thought then you are deluded. 
My point was about people breaking the rules at home, if they are doing that purposely then they’ll still meet in a pub with more than one household.

[squirrelarmy]

1 minute ago, Simsy said:

Yes, because the "target audience" for these restrictions generally don't go to the pub or get drunk.

So the government has pretty much specifically targeted 1 religious community for these new restrictions. 
 

Reminds me of a point in history where another government did a similar thing. I don’t like how this is going. 

[mikegday]

1 minute ago, PolygonWindow said:

Yes but much more difficult to actually enforce the rule to prevent people from visiting houses. Might as well ban people from going to the pubs if the numbers are rising again, that way you can actually enforce the rule by shutting the pubs no?

edit - or better yet, do both? 

Enforcement shouldn’t be the goal. By now we all know the virus spreads from passing to one person to the other, the closer you are the more chance it’ll ‘jump’ to you. We can’t enforce it - people just need to apply their own common sense. Also you risk jobs by closing a pub, you don’t by saying don’t visit someone’s house. 

[PolygonWindow]

Just now, squirrelarmy said:

So the government has pretty much specifically targeted 1 religious community for these new restrictions. 
 

Reminds me of a point in history where another government did a similar thing. I don’t like how this is going. 

Eid Al-Adha tmo.

Gov are well aware of rising numbers all week.

They are dying for a scapegoat, they know what they are doing.

[Zoo Music Girl]

8 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

In my view about 80% of social distancing is dead. I don’t really see it observed anywhere other than a bloody Tesco or a shop.

people have got bored and sick of this now and it’s going to be really hard going forward to try and enforce it even further.

Got to agree with this. I don't even see it in shops any more. Only place I've seen it being actively followed was in hospital in recent times.

[Simsy]

3 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

So the government has pretty much specifically targeted 1 religious community for these new restrictions. 
 

Reminds me of a point in history where another government did a similar thing. I don’t like how this is going. 

A government led by a man who's already made his opinion on that religion clear (letterboxes anyone?) and still got voted in.

[mikegday]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Bollocks. If you think people at a pub after several beers will still give social distancing as much thought then you are deluded. 
My point was about people breaking the rules at home, if they are doing that purposely then they’ll still meet in a pub with more than one household.

I think people are MORE likely to social distance in a pub than they are drinking at home. I’m not saying everyone in a pub will, like you say those who set out to do what they want will - but I 100% believe more will keep distance. If you had 100 lots of 2 couples meeting up, I think you’d have more success keeping distance if you drank in a pub than in each other’s house. I stand by that and I that’s why I don’t think banning gatherings in a house is equal to banning it in a restaurant/pub.

[Zoo Music Girl]

1 minute ago, PolygonWindow said:

Eid Al-Adha tmo.

Gov are well aware of rising numbers all week.

They are dying for a scapegoat, they know what they are doing.

Yeah it does seem that way. In fact that's been the policy for the past week hasn't it? It's Spain! It's fat people! It's Muslims!

[whitehorses]

2 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

Yeah it does seem that way. In fact that's been the policy for the past week hasn't it? It's Spain! It's fat people! It's Muslims!

Avoid fat Spanish Muslims at all costs 

[squirrelarmy]

1 minute ago, PolygonWindow said:

Eid Al-Adha tmo.

Gov are well aware of rising numbers all week.

They are dying for a scapegoat, they know what they are doing.

 

1 minute ago, Simsy said:

A government led by a man who's already made his opinion on that religion clear (letterboxes anyone?) and still got voted in.

This will end up causing massive disruptions in the local community. Bradford specifically has a very mixed population of all nationalities and religions. There will be increased tensions throughout the city because of this. 

[Ozanne]

9 minutes ago, mikegday said:

I think people are MORE likely to social distance in a pub than they are drinking at home. I’m not saying everyone in a pub will, like you say those who set out to do what they want will - but I 100% believe more will keep distance. If you had 100 lots of 2 couples meeting up, I think you’d have more success keeping distance if you drank in a pub than in each other’s house. I stand by that and I that’s why I don’t think banning gatherings in a house is equal to banning it in a restaurant/pub.

Yes that well known fact that if you’re drunk you are more strict with social measures, unlike when you go visit Aunt Ethel on her 86th birthday where you’ll all lick the fridge door handle. 

Edited July 30, 2020 by Ozanne

[Zoo Music Girl]

2 minutes ago, whitehorses said:

Avoid fat Spanish Muslims at all costs 

That actually made me chuckle 

[whitehorses]

@Zoo Music Girl 😂 phew! Could’ve gone either way...

[LJS]

7 minutes ago, mikegday said:

I think people are MORE likely to social distance in a pub than they are drinking at home. 

You must drink in some terribly dull pubs.

[LJS]

 

 

[mikegday]

6 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Yes that well known fact that if you drunk you are more strict with social measures, unlike when you go visit Aunt Ethel on her 86th birthday where you’ll all lick the fridge door handle. 

You’re absolutely more likely to inadvertently have closer contact, to touch things, to forget about Covid etc. with your Aunt Ethel in her house than you are if you booked a table in a restaurant where things are a bit ‘not normal’ and there are social distancing reminders everywhere. We went to a restaurant last week and I didn’t once stop being reminded that things weren’t normal, I wouldn’t have had these reminders in me dads house.

Edited July 30, 2020 by mikegday

[Ozanne]

Just now, mikegday said:

You’re absolutely more likely to inadvertently have closer contact, to touch things, to forget about Covid etc. with your Aunt Ethel in her house than you are if you booked a table in a restaurant where things are a bit ‘not normal’ and theirs social distancing reminders everywhere.

You clearly have no idea what happens in most pubs in this country.

[mikegday]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

You clearly have no idea what happens in most pubs in this country.

Less contact is happening in pubs in this country at the moment than in people’s houses. Why are you fighting me on this? It’s blatantly obvious, pubs are not normal right now. Houses are. Hence if you’re going to say don’t visit houses, that’s not the same as saying don’t visit pubs. The pub I’ve been to last week was far from bloody normal.

[Ozanne]

Just now, mikegday said:

Less contact is happening in pubs in this country at the moment than in people’s houses. Why are you fighting me on this? It’s blatantly obvious, pubs are not normal right now. Houses are. Hence if you’re going to say don’t visit houses, that’s not the same as saying don’t visit pubs. The pub I’ve been to last week was far from bloody normal.

Because you fail to see that when people have had several drinks they aren’t going to pay as much attention to social distancing, the guard will be down it’s just natural after drinking. Plus they are around more people. If you really think that after a session of drinking someone is still going to be more careful then if they are at their Grandparents then I don’t know what else to say. 

[mikegday]

Just now, Ozanne said:

Because you fail to see that when people have had several drinks they aren’t going to pay as much attention to social distancing, the guard will be down it’s just natural after drinking. Plus they are around more people. If you really think that after a session of drinking someone is still going to be more careful then if they are at their Grandparents then I don’t know what else to say. 

You keep bringing in different scenarios, you’re comparing apples to oranges. So to be clear you have 2 couples drinking in a pub, and the same 2 couples drinking in one of their houses. I genuinely 100% believe that more distance will be kept if they were drinking in the pub situ rather than in one of their houses. 

It’s sounds like you’re then trying to confuse things by saying people drinking in a pub vs. Someone visiting their grandad. Obviously that’s two different scenarios. If you were to compare more similar scenario,  say going for a bday meal with your grandad in a restaurant or going to celebrate his birthday in his house - again I’d say more likely distance would be maintained in the restaurant than in his house.

[Ozanne]

1 minute ago, mikegday said:

You keep bringing in different scenarios, you’re comparing apples to oranges. So to be clear you have 2 couples drinking in a pub, and the same 2 couples drinking in one of their houses. I genuinely 100% believe that more distance will be kept if they were drinking in the pub situ rather than in one of their houses. 

It’s sounds like you’re then trying to confuse things by saying people drinking in a pub vs. Someone visiting their grandad. Obviously that’s two different scenarios. If you were to compare more similar scenario,  say going for a bday meal with your grandad in a restaurant or going to celebrate his birthday in his house - again I’d say more likely distance would be maintained in the restaurant than in his house.

Take a pub on a Saturday evening, they aren’t going to be filled with nice civilised couples sitting enjoying a quiet drink. They are going to be filled with people after hours of drinking, that won’t be as socially distanced because they’ve been drinking. It’s the drinking that’s the main part and a busier (than a home) pub. As I said if you can’t see that drinking alcohol will make people less likely to socially distance then I don’t know what else to say. 

[shoptildrop]

Latest 

 

 

[Ozanne]

Just now, shoptildrop said:

Latest 

 

 

As long as the guidance is clear, no one will ever breach it. 

[FestivalJamie]

I personally think two households mixing at home is far safer than going to a pub, where there are external factors to consider, such as other groups behaviour etc.

Im seeing my aunt on the weekend and have full intent on social distancing, in a pub social distancing is NOT possible within your group due to the seating set up, and you also have to worry about others invading your space from other tables too.