5 ms·

In fairness to the two women caught here, the UK has made near zero effort to actually enforce any of the restrictions. People routinely don't wear masks in sup

In fairness to the two women caught here, the UK has made near zero effort to actually enforce any of the restrictions. People routinely don't wear masks in supermarkets or on public transport, no one washes their hands, work places are taking no measures to stop spread. So it is fair to be surprised they were caught. Hopefully this is an actual crackdown and not just bored cops. We really need one as we're on the verge of collapse of medical services.

madjam002 6y ago
Not sure about two people going for a walk out of town though, is that really a big issue? It’s not breaking any of the legislation and they were fined as what they did “wasn’t in the spirit of the lockdown”... what?!
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  The legislation says it's up to the police if your action is reasonable. Police decided they could have walked closer to home. If they want, they can go to court and try and convince the magistrate/jury the police were wrong. I wish them luck (honestly). The issue we have is we haven't enforced the very important stuff. So now we're fucked. So now we have to enforce the lot, even if this particular event (2 people arriving separately etc) seems small. As far as I'm concerned, the more people see enforcement, the more lives will be saved. So it's a good thing whether either of these women actually transmitted and actual covid etc...
  - HappyDreamer 6y ago
    If they enforce the legislation far away in the forests or countryside, whilst ignore people walking in crowds in London on Christmas Eve [1], then I'm thinking this will lower the trust in the police and make people inclined to ignore the rules. Meaning, I think what the police did here, damages the trust in the legal system and covid response, slightly changing things for the worse. [1] London Christmas Lights Walk 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz7wJZln6Kw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz7wJZln6Kw
    - LatteLazy 6y ago
      I don't think compliance can get much lower tbh. I hope I'm right about that but it's just my jaded opinion. I completely agree we have a massive issue that the government created themselves: they've encouraged non-compliance in every imaginable way. It's criminally poor. Now they're stuck: they need to turn it around and do so quickly. So they'll arrest these women having allowed crowds to fill tube trains. The only problem is they're doing the right thing. We need compliance and we need it now. It's not fair to these women. After this is over Bojo should be arrested. But right now, its necessary. Salus populi suprema lex esto (The public safety is the highest law)
      - HappyDreamer 6y ago
        > they've encouraged non-compliance in every imaginable way > Now they're stuck: they need to turn it around and do so quickly Situation about the same here where I live (also in Europe). Thanks for having written a bit more about how you're thinking.
lhorie 6y ago
I still remember the reporting when the epidemic started in Wuhan and thinking how incredibly draconian they were being with a complete shutdown of an entire city; stores, roads, everything. Now in hindsight, I pause to wonder if it isn't more draconian to keep enforcing these half-assed rules for months on end - and being clearly ineffectively, if reports of ICU capacity are any indication...
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  I agree. I don't understand why we couldn't have closed the borders, had 2months of hardcore super lockdown and then been covid free. That's basically what happened in Melbourne. They had to do it twice because some idiot mixed with newly arrived travellers and spread it. But they're in a much better place than we are. Almost everything is open again.
  - salmon30salmon 6y ago
    I've said it many times, Australia and New Zealand are both islands, this makes restricting ingress far easier than land borders controlled by many different authorities. Furthermore, many countries have laws that prohibit house arrest, which is essentially what you are suggesting here. Finally, unless the entire world did the same, we would not be "covid-free". As soon as one person with covid entered the country post-lockdown, cases would grow. If Australia had actually beaten covid, then they could welcome people back. But they didn't beat it! That isolated themselves from the world and continue to do so. That isn't beating it at all. You may be right that almost everything is open again, but there are also leaving thousands of their citizens stranded abroad. This is an absurd payoff for a virus that, at worst, kills .5% of people who contract it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/australia-coronavirus-stranded-quarantine-travel/2020/12/10/6d990c60-2e0d-11eb-9dd6-2d0179981719_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/australia-...
    - LatteLazy 6y ago
      Sorry, I should have clarified: I'm a limey brit so closing our (my) border is almost as easy as it is for the aussies. Similarly, we have no constitution or bill of rights, so a house arrest law is easy and quick to pass. The issue with the .5% figure is that 5% of covid patients would die if they didn't receive care. So the death rate is only 0.5% until your last hospital bed / ventilators / nurse is busy. Then it's 5%. We've fucked about letting more and more people get it. Which is fine because 0.5% and because we're following the "herd immunity" strategy. Unlike Aus that went for eradication. But now, so many people are sick the hospitals are full. London expects to run out of beds within 2 weeks. Rest of the UK in 3 weeks. Given the 5-6 day incubation period, that means we need to reduce the R number below 1 by Monday in London (where people are densely packed and rely on public transport). You have 7 more days for the rest of the place. Or we accept the 5% marginal death rate. 5% is pretty fucking high. Look around your office, your sports team, your family and fields. Pick 1 in 20 to die. And that's 5% across the board. It's higher for your grandparents, your sick cousin etc. Plus you have people permanently disabled and "Long Covid" to factor in. So having encouraged people to go out, having let people test the rules and find them unenforced, and having done all the easy cheap shit (office worked wfh), the government finds it has to get very strict, convince people it means it this time, and get them to stay home, all in the next few days. Oh, and the current government was elected by the people most likely to die of this. And the current leader is dumb and lazy. And he's spent the last year promising his party no more lockdowns...

madjam002 6y ago

Not sure about two people going for a walk out of town though, is that really a big issue? It’s not breaking any of the legislation and they were fined as what they did “wasn’t in the spirit of the lockdown”... what?!

LatteLazy 6y ago
The legislation says it's up to the police if your action is reasonable. Police decided they could have walked closer to home. If they want, they can go to court and try and convince the magistrate/jury the police were wrong. I wish them luck (honestly). The issue we have is we haven't enforced the very important stuff. So now we're fucked. So now we have to enforce the lot, even if this particular event (2 people arriving separately etc) seems small. As far as I'm concerned, the more people see enforcement, the more lives will be saved. So it's a good thing whether either of these women actually transmitted and actual covid etc...
- HappyDreamer 6y ago
  If they enforce the legislation far away in the forests or countryside, whilst ignore people walking in crowds in London on Christmas Eve [1], then I'm thinking this will lower the trust in the police and make people inclined to ignore the rules. Meaning, I think what the police did here, damages the trust in the legal system and covid response, slightly changing things for the worse. [1] London Christmas Lights Walk 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz7wJZln6Kw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz7wJZln6Kw
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    I don't think compliance can get much lower tbh. I hope I'm right about that but it's just my jaded opinion. I completely agree we have a massive issue that the government created themselves: they've encouraged non-compliance in every imaginable way. It's criminally poor. Now they're stuck: they need to turn it around and do so quickly. So they'll arrest these women having allowed crowds to fill tube trains. The only problem is they're doing the right thing. We need compliance and we need it now. It's not fair to these women. After this is over Bojo should be arrested. But right now, its necessary. Salus populi suprema lex esto (The public safety is the highest law)
    - HappyDreamer 6y ago
      > they've encouraged non-compliance in every imaginable way > Now they're stuck: they need to turn it around and do so quickly Situation about the same here where I live (also in Europe). Thanks for having written a bit more about how you're thinking.

lhorie 6y ago

I still remember the reporting when the epidemic started in Wuhan and thinking how incredibly draconian they were being with a complete shutdown of an entire city; stores, roads, everything. Now in hindsight, I pause to wonder if it isn't more draconian to keep enforcing these half-assed rules for months on end - and being clearly ineffectively, if reports of ICU capacity are any indication...

LatteLazy 6y ago
I agree. I don't understand why we couldn't have closed the borders, had 2months of hardcore super lockdown and then been covid free. That's basically what happened in Melbourne. They had to do it twice because some idiot mixed with newly arrived travellers and spread it. But they're in a much better place than we are. Almost everything is open again.
- salmon30salmon 6y ago
  I've said it many times, Australia and New Zealand are both islands, this makes restricting ingress far easier than land borders controlled by many different authorities. Furthermore, many countries have laws that prohibit house arrest, which is essentially what you are suggesting here. Finally, unless the entire world did the same, we would not be "covid-free". As soon as one person with covid entered the country post-lockdown, cases would grow. If Australia had actually beaten covid, then they could welcome people back. But they didn't beat it! That isolated themselves from the world and continue to do so. That isn't beating it at all. You may be right that almost everything is open again, but there are also leaving thousands of their citizens stranded abroad. This is an absurd payoff for a virus that, at worst, kills .5% of people who contract it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/australia-coronavirus-stranded-quarantine-travel/2020/12/10/6d990c60-2e0d-11eb-9dd6-2d0179981719_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/australia-...
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    Sorry, I should have clarified: I'm a limey brit so closing our (my) border is almost as easy as it is for the aussies. Similarly, we have no constitution or bill of rights, so a house arrest law is easy and quick to pass. The issue with the .5% figure is that 5% of covid patients would die if they didn't receive care. So the death rate is only 0.5% until your last hospital bed / ventilators / nurse is busy. Then it's 5%. We've fucked about letting more and more people get it. Which is fine because 0.5% and because we're following the "herd immunity" strategy. Unlike Aus that went for eradication. But now, so many people are sick the hospitals are full. London expects to run out of beds within 2 weeks. Rest of the UK in 3 weeks. Given the 5-6 day incubation period, that means we need to reduce the R number below 1 by Monday in London (where people are densely packed and rely on public transport). You have 7 more days for the rest of the place. Or we accept the 5% marginal death rate. 5% is pretty fucking high. Look around your office, your sports team, your family and fields. Pick 1 in 20 to die. And that's 5% across the board. It's higher for your grandparents, your sick cousin etc. Plus you have people permanently disabled and "Long Covid" to factor in. So having encouraged people to go out, having let people test the rules and find them unenforced, and having done all the easy cheap shit (office worked wfh), the government finds it has to get very strict, convince people it means it this time, and get them to stay home, all in the next few days. Oh, and the current government was elected by the people most likely to die of this. And the current leader is dumb and lazy. And he's spent the last year promising his party no more lockdowns...