The new "rule of six" -- and the absence of an SI
Discussion
Countdown said:
Admittedly I'm a simple man but these are the "facts" as I see them;
There is currently a worldwide pandemic
CV19 spreads as a result of people being in close proximity
The spread of CV19 is a negative on society
Stopping people from meeting in large groups to minimise Cv19 transmission makes sense
We have an Opposition and a Free Press - neither of whom are kicking up a strom about infringement of civil liberties
TL:DR Is it really that big a deal?
You have been duped. Listen to the Oxford Professor of Evidence Based Medicine on last Saturday's Today programme. Calmly considered, the risks from Covid are tiny. Covid has been used by cynical authoritarians who set no value on democracy or the rule of law to stage a power grab. Covid will also afford a convenient excuse for the economic car crash that the same cynical authoritarians are deliberately steering the UK towards next year. There is currently a worldwide pandemic
CV19 spreads as a result of people being in close proximity
The spread of CV19 is a negative on society
Stopping people from meeting in large groups to minimise Cv19 transmission makes sense
We have an Opposition and a Free Press - neither of whom are kicking up a strom about infringement of civil liberties
TL:DR Is it really that big a deal?
This Government rules as the Tudors did, by Proclamation, and without regard to most of the Constitutional principles developed with difficulty since the Tudor era.
Those who go along with this by saying "Oh, it's a very scary and dangerous disease, and being safe from an (in fact miniscule) risk is worth sacrificing our principles for" are aiding the erosion of democracy and the rule of law. That erosion is not something that is happening by accident.
Breadvan72 said:
You have been duped. Listen to the Oxford Professor of Evidence Based Medicine on last Saturday's Today programme. Calmly considered, the risks from Covid are tiny.
I suspect that you are one of the Activist Lawyers that needs to get with the programme. I think you'll find anything that's 'led by the Science' or 'Science based' trumps mere evidence. sospan said:
If it’s a law then how/who will enforce it?
Is it the police? Will it be left to local authorities to put Covid Enforcement officers on the streets?
Ultimately it is the public who will either obey or disregard depending on their attitude, as with mobile phone usage in cars.
Basically a sensible law but not easy to police well.
I can understand the desirability to change things due to the varying pandemic issues but would want proper scrutiny of keeping measures in check when no longer needed. Perhaps a cross party committee to oversee the process?
COVID enforcement officers apparently have no power to enforce.Is it the police? Will it be left to local authorities to put Covid Enforcement officers on the streets?
Ultimately it is the public who will either obey or disregard depending on their attitude, as with mobile phone usage in cars.
Basically a sensible law but not easy to police well.
I can understand the desirability to change things due to the varying pandemic issues but would want proper scrutiny of keeping measures in check when no longer needed. Perhaps a cross party committee to oversee the process?
The police want nothing to do with it & have better things to do.
It will be an honour system.
It’s a stupid law & impossible to police
carinaman said:
I suspect that you are one of the Activist Lawyers that needs to get with the programme. I think you'll find anything that's 'led by the Science' or 'Science based' trumps mere evidence.
But does Scottish science trump English science? And where does Welsh science fit in?As all the 'scientists' come up with different answers, it doesn't sound very scientific to me!
It's enough to make people wonder if King Boris and supine parliamentarians have misappropriated Science.
Science by definition isn't exact so any misappropriation of Science by politicians couldn't be that bad.
And anyway they've only misappropriated Science for our own good as they know what's best for us.
Science by definition isn't exact so any misappropriation of Science by politicians couldn't be that bad.
And anyway they've only misappropriated Science for our own good as they know what's best for us.
ESD1711 said:
The sooner folk do as they are told and stop taking this piss with this, the sooner we get normality back.
They did. They were told all last month to get out and spend, spend, spend. Eat out to help out. Help our town centres. Get back to your workplace.Now we are at fault for doing what we were told.
It's all utter nonsense, every single bit of it.
Breadvan72 said:
You have been duped. Listen to the Oxford Professor of Evidence Based Medicine on last Saturday's Today programme. Calmly considered, the risks from Covid are tiny. Covid has been used by cynical authoritarians who set no value on democracy or the rule of law to stage a power grab. Covid will also afford a convenient excuse for the economic car crash that the same cynical authoritarians are deliberately steering the UK towards next year.
This Government rules as the Tudors did, by Proclamation, and without regard to most of the Constitutional principles developed with difficulty since the Tudor era.
Those who go along with this by saying "Oh, it's a very scary and dangerous disease, and being safe from an (in fact miniscule) risk is worth sacrificing our principles for" are aiding the erosion of democracy and the rule of law. That erosion is not something that is happening by accident.
I'm not sure how to square the idea that the risks of COVID-19 are minuscule with the evidence of overwhelmed hospitals in Northern Italy back in March, the death toll of nearly a million people world wide despite the lockdown, not to mention the countless more who survived but suffered life changing effects from the disease. It's a highly contagious disease when left to spread wildly. I'll guess I'll hunt out that interview. This Government rules as the Tudors did, by Proclamation, and without regard to most of the Constitutional principles developed with difficulty since the Tudor era.
Those who go along with this by saying "Oh, it's a very scary and dangerous disease, and being safe from an (in fact miniscule) risk is worth sacrificing our principles for" are aiding the erosion of democracy and the rule of law. That erosion is not something that is happening by accident.
The showers of s
t in charge are dictatorial, but I'm not sure they're necessarily authoritarian. Corrupt, selfish, stupid, incompetent are words I'd use to describe them, but I think they're to much about the free market, selling off the country and making a quick quid to dive into real authoritarianism. At least I hope so. Regardless, they were given dictatorial power to destroy Parliament nearly a year ago, parliamentary democracy sacrificed on the alter of Brexit. If one voted for them back then, and disagrees with whats been happening since... one has oneself to blame. (Generally speaking, rather than aimed at anyone) For me, should I get the opportunity again, I'll be voting for Starmer. I just hope the usual tabloids won't have convinced their readers that he is Stalin's heir by then.
Countdown said:
fat80b said:
Hard to disagree.
I can't get away from my feeling that a new law for this even a temporary one is a step too far. I think it is interesting that all the press reporting seems to talk of it as a rule rather than a law...As I understand it, this is different to everything that has come before.
If you separate it from the whole COVID thing, it must be the biggest attack on personal freedom / responsibility that I can think of - What has the world become when a UK Conservative government is creating a law banning small groups of people getting together.
Admittedly I'm a simple man but these are the "facts" as I see them;I can't get away from my feeling that a new law for this even a temporary one is a step too far. I think it is interesting that all the press reporting seems to talk of it as a rule rather than a law...As I understand it, this is different to everything that has come before.
If you separate it from the whole COVID thing, it must be the biggest attack on personal freedom / responsibility that I can think of - What has the world become when a UK Conservative government is creating a law banning small groups of people getting together.
There is currently a worldwide pandemic
CV19 spreads as a result of people being in close proximity
The spread of CV19 is a negative on society
Stopping people from meeting in large groups to minimise Cv19 transmission makes sense
We have an Opposition and a Free Press - neither of whom are kicking up a strom about infringement of civil liberties
TL:DR Is it really that big a deal?
Current stats:
An estimated 39,700 people (95% credible interval: 29,300 to 52,700) within the community population in England had the coronavirus (COVID-19) during the most recent week, from 30 August to 5 September 2020, equating to around 1 in 1,400 people (95% credible interval: 1 in 1,900 to 1 in 1,000).
The most recent modelled estimate suggests the number of infections has increased in recent weeks.
In recent weeks, there has been an increase in the number of people testing positive for COVID-19 aged 17 to 24 years and 25 to 34 years whereas the number of people testing positive for COVID-19 aged 50 years and over appears to be stable or declining.
During the most recent week (30 August to 5 September 2020), we estimate there were around 0.58 (95% credible interval: 0.38 to 0.84) new COVID-19 infections for every 10,000 people per day in the community population in England, equating to around 3,200 new cases per day (95% credible interval: 2,000 to 4,600).
Evidence suggests that the incidence rate for England has increased in recent weeks.
During the most recent week (30 August to 5 September 2020), we estimate that 1,200 people in Wales had COVID-19 (95% credible interval: 300 to 2,800), which is around 1 in 2,600 people (95 % credible interval: 1 in 10,900 to 1 in 1,100).
TX.
Rivenink said:
...
The showers of st in charge are dictatorial, but I'm not sure they're necessarily authoritarian. Corrupt, selfish, stupid, incompetent are words I'd use to describe them, but I think they're to much about the free market, selling off the country and making a quick quid to dive into real authoritarianism. At least I hope so.
Regardless, they were given dictatorial power to destroy Parliament nearly a year ago, parliamentary democracy sacrificed on the alter of Brexit. If one voted for them back then, and disagrees with whats been happening since... one has oneself to blame. (Generally speaking, rather than aimed at anyone) For me, should I get the opportunity again, I'll be voting for Starmer. I just hope the usual tabloids won't have convinced their readers that he is Stalin's heir by then.
I agree with you, mostly, but I do detect authoritarian instincts in the likes of Johnson, Gove, Cummings et al. They do not appear to have any intellectual or emotional commitment to democracy or the rule of law. They are venal, amoral, unprincipled, you name it, but amongst their almost limitless vices authoritarianism looms, I think,quite large. I'd gladly be wrong about that, but look at what these sThe showers of s
t in charge are dictatorial, but I'm not sure they're necessarily authoritarian. Corrupt, selfish, stupid, incompetent are words I'd use to describe them, but I think they're to much about the free market, selling off the country and making a quick quid to dive into real authoritarianism. At least I hope so. Regardless, they were given dictatorial power to destroy Parliament nearly a year ago, parliamentary democracy sacrificed on the alter of Brexit. If one voted for them back then, and disagrees with whats been happening since... one has oneself to blame. (Generally speaking, rather than aimed at anyone) For me, should I get the opportunity again, I'll be voting for Starmer. I just hope the usual tabloids won't have convinced their readers that he is Stalin's heir by then.
tbags do and how they do it. I'm already seeing plenty of "we're OK, we're in a support bubble together" comments on social media as if it's some kind of acceptable workaround to the 6 limit.
Personally I think the only time any if this will be actively enforced is when people make a dinner reservation or book tickets for something.
Someone mentioned school kids above, a group of 20 or so high school kids were all walking home together today, I fully expect they'll do the same on Monday with no consequences.
It seems more like an attempt to shift the blame for any rise in numbers onto the masses rather than the government.
I'll conform though, I hate people anyway.
Personally I think the only time any if this will be actively enforced is when people make a dinner reservation or book tickets for something.
Someone mentioned school kids above, a group of 20 or so high school kids were all walking home together today, I fully expect they'll do the same on Monday with no consequences.
It seems more like an attempt to shift the blame for any rise in numbers onto the masses rather than the government.
I'll conform though, I hate people anyway.
Edited by thetapeworm on Friday 11th September 19:14
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
sebdangerfield said:
On a side note, I reckon Monday morning starts at 00:00 am, not 00:01. The clue’s in the numbers starting at 00:00 for a new day 
Well, if we're going for accuracy, surely the 'am' in your post is superfluous?Breadvan72 said:
I agree with you, mostly, but I do detect authoritarian instincts in the likes of Johnson, Gove, Cummings et al. They do not appear to have any intellectual or emotional commitment to democracy or the rule of law. They are venal, amoral, unprincipled, you name it, but amongst their almost limitless vices authoritarianism looms, I think,quite large. I'd gladly be wrong about that, but look at what these stbags do and how they do it.
Silver lining... they might be just as incompetent at authoritarianism as they are at everything else... tbags do and how they do it. Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff