National News Covidiots.....

[MC Yellow]

Infinitely less. You think 90% or more of drink driving didn’t stop after the law was brought in? Do you really think drink driving wouldn’t go up enormously if the law was suddenly scrapped and people got to choose for themselves if it was okay? People are fools. They need the deterrent. No law is 100% effective, it’s about cutting down on offences as much as humanly possible. I know we live in a tribal world where everything is black and white, but surely we haven’t got to the point where any law that doesn’t step every last person is poo-pooed? I’m genuinely stunned that anybody could fail to see the basic principle here. It’s astonishing.

Beaches wouldn’t have tens and hundreds of thousands of people on them if those in charge told people they weren’t allowed to go there. Would a few hundred show up regardless? Yes, and then you deal with them. But you enormously reduce the impact, and all it takes is one little rule to wipe out the overwhelming majority of issues. They could literally say it any moment. This could all end tomorrow if the people in charge said “You will not go to the beach, they are closed, and if you’re caught there the police will fine and even arrest you if they so wish.” Suddenly 100,000 people on the beach would become 100, who would carry almost no threat and could easily be cleared off.

Unbelievable how many people cannot grasp this.

So if BJ said go jump off a cliff you are effectively saying people would do it because there is no law against it?

We can’t keep making excuses for selfish knobheads.

 

[Scotchegg]

Do you remember the days when people were demanding that the Government treated them like adults. "Give us the information and let us decide" they screamed.

Now the very same people are saying that its the Governments fault that these adults have chosen to ignore the advice.

And does anyone honestly think that the actions of Dominic Cummings a month or two ago had any impact on the thinking of those on the beach, or on BLM demo's, or in front of the Liver building??

The reality is (as was evident by one interview on Bournemouth beach) that for a huge number of people under the age of 30, they haven't known anyone who have been ill, or those that have been ill are often much older with underlying health conditions. They have weighed up the risk and decided that a day at the beach, on a demo or celebrating their team winning is a risk worth taking. No amount of Government guidance would have changed this.

Boris and co. have got plenty wrong, and deserve criticism, but on this I think the blame sits entirely with those who ventured out.

 

[Maurice Earp]

Do you remember the days when people were demanding that the Government treated them like adults. "Give us the information and let us decide" they screamed.

Now the very same people are saying that its the Governments fault that these adults have chosen to ignore the advice.

And does anyone honestly think that the actions of Dominic Cummings a month or two ago had any impact on the thinking of those on the beach, or on BLM demo's, or in front of the Liver building??

The reality is (as was evident by one interview on Bournemouth beach) that for a huge number of people under the age of 30, they haven't known anyone who have been ill, or those that have been ill are often much older with underlying health conditions. They have weighed up the risk and decided that a day at the beach, on a demo or celebrating their team winning is a risk worth taking. No amount of Government guidance would have changed this.

Boris and co. have got plenty wrong, and deserve criticism, but on this I think the blame sits entirely with those who ventured out.

Well said. But as the saying goes "You can't teach stupid".

 

[greatunclekip]

I think the red flags are there and it’s pretty obvious to anyone with an ounce of intelligence that this is a dangerous situation that requires people to use their heads.

If BJ said go jump off a cliff I would expect many to spot the dangers regardless of whether ther was a red flag flying on the edge.

Yep. Its more than a red flag even, it cant be any clearer than "there is a killer virus which is super contagious, please for goodness sake keep your distance" - and the utter brain donors in our society still fail fo take the hint.

 

[ZeroTheHero]

I think I agree mostly with RB on this one.

I am sure that in the 'good old days' people were quite happy to have a drink or three before driving. 'I know when I've reached my limit', 'I've never had an accident when I have had a couple' and 'I did it because I wanted to and everyone else does it as well, it's very convenient when I want to go for a drink' were doubtless trotted out.

The law against doing so was introduced because drink driving was killing people - and by no means only those who were doing it. Other road users and pedestrians were also being killed.

Safety belt legislation was introduced for the benefit of drivers themselves - people were NOT responsible enough to use that fairly unobtrusive proven life saver when left to their own devices.

Now there were of course vast amounts of people who did not drink and drive and loads of people who did use their safety belts without being made to - but for a significant number, the threat of a fine and trouble with the police was needed.

You may nor be able to 'teach' stupid, but you can certainly 'make' a lot of them toes the line.

 

[Scotchegg]

I think I agree mostly with RB on this one.

I am sure that in the 'good old days' people were quite happy to have a drink or three before driving. 'I know when I've reached my limit', 'I've never had an accident when I have had a couple' and 'I did it because I wanted to and everyone else does it as well, it's very convenient when I want to go for a drink' were doubtless trotted out.

The law against doing so was introduced because drink driving was killing people - and by no means only those who were doing it. Other road users and pedestrians were also being killed.

Safety belt legislation was introduced for the benefit of drivers themselves - people were NOT responsible enough to use that fairly unobtrusive proven life saver when left to their own devices.

Now there were of course vast amounts of people who did not drink and drive and loads of people who did use their safety belts without being made to - but for a significant number, the threat of a fine and trouble with the police was needed.

You may nor be able to 'teach' stupid, but you can certainly 'make' a lot of them toes the line.

But what more could/should have been done to 'make' them toe the line without inviting civil disobedience?

 

[MC Yellow]

I think I agree mostly with RB on this one.

I am sure that in the 'good old days' people were quite happy to have a drink or three before driving. 'I know when I've reached my limit', 'I've never had an accident when I have had a couple' and 'I did it because I wanted to and everyone else does it as well, it's very convenient when I want to go for a drink' were doubtless trotted out.

The law against doing so was introduced because drink driving was killing people - and by no means only those who were doing it. Other road users and pedestrians were also being killed.

Safety belt legislation was introduced for the benefit of drivers themselves - people were NOT responsible enough to use that fairly unobtrusive proven life saver when left to their own devices.

Now there were of course vast amounts of people who did not drink and drive and loads of people who did use their safety belts without being made to - but for a significant number, the threat of a fine and trouble with the police was needed.

You may nor be able to 'teach' stupid, but you can certainly 'make' a lot of them toes the line.

So what about all these twats attending illegal raves? why are they not toeing the line?

 

[sarumox]

I think the drink driving analogy is possibly the wrong one here. It was an easy law to make to prevent needless deaths, however some still break it. How many laws would be needed to prevent the brain dead from gathering in large numbers where social distancing is impossible, guidelines are the only way. there are however measures which could be introduced such as closing car parks but even this would not be enough. The trains were packed according to pictures I have seen and there must have been standing room only. Should there be a law to make sure everyone washes there hands and has a bottle of hand gel on their person at all time. We would be on a slippery slope where the army and police would be side by side and civil disorder would be an everyday hazard. The governement have handled this in an appaling and incompetent manner and they continue to make mistakes. We can open pubs and not gyms. Can only see one way that is going.
As for Cummings, yes the guy is a grade A t**t who treats the general public with contempt, but to use that as an excuse for every body doing it is naive. If monkey see monkey do is the way forward we are in serious trouble.
A better analogy would be smoking. Just as we cannot make unenforceable laws to stop idiots so we cannot make laws to stop people smoking. We all know it is a killer, yet people still do it and still die. We are told how to eat healthily yet obesity and its consequences are visible everytime I watch the news and venture out.
Ultimately people have to make decisions for themselves based on both laws and advice, unfortunately huge numbers are unable to take the right path on both counts. Incidentally 2 high risk factors for not surviving Covid is obesity and poor health, so if we are not following simple easy instructions what difference would making even more laws do. We do not have to go to the pub, but police officers and nurses I know are absolutely dreading it.
To say we were following the advice until it changed from Stay home to stay alert is also incorrect. This was going wrong Easter week with far more road users than during the first 2 or 3 weeks. I know as I am key worker on the roads every day. It is not as simple as blaming the governement as much as most would like it to be so.

 

[Scotchegg]

The drink driving analogue isn't great. In 1965, the Government announced that they were introducing legislation to curb drink driving. This became law in 1967. In 1981, evidential regulations were introduced and this was ratified in 1983. Yet it took until the late 90's before drink driving deaths dropped to below 500 a year from over 1600 in the 60's (despite significant increases in the number of cars on the road).

So even with it being illegal to drink and drive for over 50 years, its only the last 20 years or so where it has become socially unacceptable to get behind the wheel after drinking.

But I guess we could have waited a few decades for prople to toe the line!

 

[ZeroTheHero]

So what about all these twats attending illegal raves? why are they not toeing the line?

Because they *are* thoughtless entitled twats. Even if there were regulations against doing things, *some* people would still do them (there are and they do!).
But this is only going one way. My mum (down in Cornwall) has said there are so many people down there that some of the shops (including major supermarkets) have abandoned all pretense of limiting numbers in them at one time, and social distancing in the seaside towns and villages is a memory. (She isn't going out, she was told this by a health worker who is helping her by doing her shopping for her - god bless her and people like her. The very opposite of the people we are talking about)
So I suspect that whether we agree or not about how the fkwits should be treated, it's a moot point. They've been let out of confinement and that's it. What will happen on Saturday when the pubs open I dread to think.

 

[RyanioBirdio]

I give up. It’s really not that difficult to my mind, but I’ve obviously failed in finding even the most basic of pure principle as to how laws and rules benefit society, and why they really matter. I thought it would be pretty commonly felt that making a firm rule and actively enforcing it means the vast majority of people stop in their tracks, because that’s how society works on almost every other level, but apparently not. Yes, a few won’t listen, but they then become policeable as their numbers are so modest and they stand out so are easier caught and identified. And for those who don’t stop no matter what, even with those rules in place, they can be removed from society completely as a last resort. You’ll never get 100% success rates, but you’ll drag it right down. It needs doing in all walks of life because many people are stupid, selfish and anything else in between. I’m shocked that what essentially amounts to the honesty system passes as an effective method for combating the worst pandemic in more than a century for some people, but if that’s the opinion... fair enough.

As for the individuals, they should be better, but they clearly aren’t. Once they show that they aren’t bothered on a regular basis, they stop being the fools and role is assumed by those who willingly allow them to flaunt it. Again, that’s how it works in basically every other walk of life. I am in no way saying people are completely blameless for their own actions, but they’re clearly not being responsible for them in growing numbers, which is where law and order then takes over. When that fails to happen, and there are no consequences forthcoming, the blame is at least shared between the individual breaking the rules and those who facilitate their behaviour by completely allowing it. I’m very surprised that so many people seem to think this is solely and purely for the individual and basically nothing what so ever to do with the people in charge of our society, but that’s fair enough, clearly far more people than I imagined think we are (or should become) a self-governing nation.

But I will say this. I really, really believe that if the government formally closed the beaches or told people they categorically cannot go there as it is now against the rules and they can be fined or arrested for doing so, 99% of the people flocking to them would stop overnight. I am utterly certain it would be that effective, that quickly. So given that could be done in the form of one press release circulated by the media, and a series of tweets, the question I would ask is... why not just do that? Why not just throw down the gauntlet and take a few short minutes to make it safer for everybody? What is the argument for not doing that?

If that constitutes blaming the government for everything - merely pointing out the quickest and simplest way that they could improve things even by a few percent - so be it. I merely consider it common sense.

 

[chuckbert]

So if BJ said go jump off a cliff you are effectively saying people would do it because there is no law against it?

We can’t keep making excuses for selfish knobheads.

Pretty sure there was an issue with people cliff jumping at Durdle door a few weeks ago, so ... yes.

 

[chuckbert]

Maybe the compulsory seatbelt law is more pertinent if people don’t like the drink driving one.
Regardless of that, I think Ryanio’s point is fine. If you want people to not do something, tell them not to do it. “Beaches are closed. Do not go there”. It really is that simple. Some people will go, but it will either be a policable number, or a mass civil disobedience.

Instead, the govt is acting like a manipulative partner: “If you don’t know what you did wrong, I’m not going to tell you.” “I know I didn’t say you shouldn’t go, but you should have known that I didn’t want you to”. “If you get injured it’s your fault”.

 

[Scotchegg]

There is absolutely no reason why ALL beaches need to close. Friends of mine went to Highcliffe beach last week, 20 minutes or so from Bournemouth. The place was at about 5-10% capacity with loads of space between families, with barely a crisp packet left behind.

Another friend lives just outside Exeter and has been on the beach most days with barely a soul around her. Equally Brighton and numerous other places were controlled.

Places such as Bournemouth were out of control, and existing legislation allows for mass gatherings to be dispersed. This wasn't enacted, but it was made clear that further action would be taken if repeated.

Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is being lost in the need to blame the Government, and that serves no purpose.

Edit- and the link to other similar legislations is entirely missing the point. Going to the beach, or open air spaces, or demonstrations, or celebrating your team winning the league one playoffs, are ALL perfectly safe to do IF you socially distance, wear ppe where social distancing isn't possible, and regularly wash your hands. Not wearing a seat belt puts EVERYONE who does it at greater risk of death or serious injury.

 

[Gary Baldi]

There is absolutely no reason why ALL beaches need to close. Friends of mine went to Highcliffe beach last week, 20 minutes or so from Bournemouth. The place was at about 5-10% capacity with loads of space between families, with barely a crisp packet left behind.

Another friend lives just outside Exeter and has been on the beach most days with barely a soul around her. Equally Brighton and numerous other places were controlled.

Places such as Bournemouth were out of control, and existing legislation allows for mass gatherings to be dispersed. This wasn't enacted, but it was made clear that further action would be taken if repeated.

Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is being lost in the need to blame the Government, and that serves no purpose.

Edit- and the link to other similar legislations is entirely missing the point. Going to the beach, or open air spaces, or demonstrations, or celebrating your team winning the league one playoffs, are ALL perfectly safe to do IF you socially distance, wear ppe where social distancing isn't possible, and regularly wash your hands. Not wearing a seat belt puts EVERYONE who does it at greater risk of death or serious injury.

We knew the weather was coming, so Bournemouth council had to get out there and publically request people to not come and move people on if they did. Bit like the BLM protests, the council know it's wrong to congregate in those numbers in a pandemic, but don't want to take punitive action to stop it.

Changing tone, it was interesting to read a short piece yesterday on the spike in cases in Florida - the infected average age group has dropped by 20 years from 50s to 30s, so the death rate will be an interesting watch. It looks like some of the cause of more cases is people travelling from other more infected areas...

 

[Scotchegg]

We knew the weather was coming, so Bournemouth council had to get out there and publically request people to not come and move people on if they did. Bit like the BLM protests, the council know it's wrong to congregate in those numbers in a pandemic, but don't want to take punitive action to stop it.

Changing tone, it was interesting to read a short piece yesterday on the spike in cases in Florida - the infected average age group has dropped by 20 years from 50s to 30s, so the death rate will be an interesting watch. It looks like some of the cause of more cases is people travelling from other more infected areas...

The problem with Bournemouth in particular is that the beach goes on for miles and us accessible for loads of places, so it was almost impossible to stop people coming down in huge numbers. The council/police should have restricted the numbers driving down. It was obvious early doors that they were going to be swamped and the decision to act was taken too late. However, that was the failing of the police and/or council in not responding to a very clear local issue. It wasn't the fault of the Government as some are desperate to prove.

 

[Gary Baldi]

The problem with Bournemouth in particular is that the beach goes on for miles and us accessible for loads of places, so it was almost impossible to stop people coming down in huge numbers. The council/police should have restricted the numbers driving down. It was obvious early doors that they were going to be swamped and the decision to act was taken too late. However, that was the failing of the police and/or council in not responding to a very clear local issue. It wasn't the fault of the Government as some are desperate to prove.

What they can do is manage the choke points for access to the beach and close the parking near to the beach. Let's face it, people are so lazy, so if they need to walk a mile to the beach with their stuff, they won't do it.

 

[Navegante]

It was obvious early doors that they were going to be swamped and the decision to act was taken too late.

How was it that obvious that B'mouth beach was going to be swamped, but Exeter & Brighton beaches (which you reference earlier as being more controlled) were not ? I assume blue skies and sunshine were forecast for the whole South Coast so on what basis would B'mouth be more at risk from roaming hoards of Covidiots?

 

[Scotchegg]

How was it that obvious that B'mouth beach was going to be swamped, but Exeter & Brighton beaches (which you reference earlier as being more controlled) were not ? I assume blue skies and sunshine were forecast for the whole South Coast so on what basis would B'mouth be more at risk from roaming hoards of Covidiots?

Because the beaches were already full by 10am, yet more and more people came down. This is when the intervention should have happened to redirect traffic away from Bournemouth.

 

[ZeroTheHero]

Going to the beach, or open air spaces, or demonstrations, or celebrating your team winning the league one playoffs, are ALL perfectly safe to do IF you socially distance, wear ppe where social distancing isn't possible, and regularly wash your hands.

Two things about that.
Firstly are you sure it is correct? Is a simple fabric mask enough to guarantee your safety? 100%? Because most people are NOT buying medical grade masks (and at one point were asked not to), even those who are sensible enough to wear one at all. How many of the beach goers were wearing masks, gloves etc?
Secondly, Social distancing at such events. People might well start off with the best of intentions, but it soon breaks down - just look at the pictures. I'd be willing to bet a pound to a penny that come Sunday morning we have images of crowded pubs and areas just outside pubs being shown around.
So while you *might* be right, those conditions simply will not happen.