Coronavirus - the killer flu that will wipe us out? (Vol. 8)

[markyb_lcy]

bodhi said:

MOTORVATOR said:

I reiterate I would not be having Markby in my shop.

So if someone has a medical exemption where they do not have to wear a mask - you would refuse them entry to your shop?

Are you sure that's entirely legal?

(Narrator - it isn't).

Are we sure about that? (Got a source?). I’m not doubting it as such, but..,

My understanding is that private businesses reserve right of entry for any or no reason, though I consider that on medical grounds might be an exemption as it could come under the disability discrimination act.

[MOTORVATOR]

bodhi said:

MOTORVATOR said:

I reiterate I would not be having Markby in my shop.

So if someone has a medical exemption where they do not have to wear a mask - you would refuse them entry to your shop?

Are you sure that's entirely legal?

(Narrator - it isn't).

Where have I said that?

It is Mark that brazenly states he does not wear one because of his beliefs.

A 'reasonable excuse' under the regulations would not be "I am a bit of a left wing troll and I hate Hancock because he hasn't personally provided me with every bit of evidence I require before deciding whether to follow the law or not"

On that basis I believe I would have every right to refuse him entry and would actually take great pleasure in doing so .

[bodhi]

markyb_lcy said:

bodhi said:

MOTORVATOR said:

I reiterate I would not be having Markby in my shop.

So if someone has a medical exemption where they do not have to wear a mask - you would refuse them entry to your shop?

Are you sure that's entirely legal?

(Narrator - it isn't).

Are we sure about that? (Got a source?). I’m not doubting it as such, but..,

My understanding is that private businesses reserve right of entry for any or no reason, though I consider that on medical grounds might be an exemption as it could come under the disability discrimination act.

My understanding is that retailers have to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people under the Disability Discrimination Act of 1995.

https://www.equalityni.org/Footer-Links/News/Emplo...

So sounds like if you were to do this, you would be opening yourself up for a world of pain through the courts for refusing access based on an inability to wear a face covering.

[bodhi]

MOTORVATOR said:

Where have I said that?

It is Mark that brazenly states he does not wear one because of his beliefs.

A 'reasonable excuse' under the regulations would not be "I am a bit of a left wing troll and I hate Hancock because he hasn't personally provided me with every bit of evidence I require before deciding whether to follow the law or not"

On that basis I believe I would have every right to refuse him entry and would actually take great pleasure in doing so .

Which would potentially put you on an enormously sticky wicket if you refused him entry, then he came back to you with a genuine medical reason.

Probably best just to leave people to it, eh?

[vaud]

bodhi said:

My understanding is that retailers have to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people under the Disability Discrimination Act of 1995.

https://www.equalityni.org/Footer-Links/News/Emplo...

So sounds like if you were to do this, you would be opening yourself up for a world of pain through the courts for refusing access based on an inability to wear a face covering.

Apologies if we are talking about NI specifically but:

1) that’s a link to Northern Ireland law
2) DDA 1995 was updated in the mainland UK to Disability Discrimination Act 2005.

[MOTORVATOR]

bodhi said:

markyb_lcy said:

bodhi said:

MOTORVATOR said:

I reiterate I would not be having Markby in my shop.

So if someone has a medical exemption where they do not have to wear a mask - you would refuse them entry to your shop?

Are you sure that's entirely legal?

(Narrator - it isn't).

Are we sure about that? (Got a source?). I’m not doubting it as such, but..,

My understanding is that private businesses reserve right of entry for any or no reason, though I consider that on medical grounds might be an exemption as it could come under the disability discrimination act.

My understanding is that retailers have to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people under the Disability Discrimination Act of 1995.

https://www.equalityni.org/Footer-Links/News/Emplo...

So sounds like if you were to do this, you would be opening yourself up for a world of pain through the courts for refusing access based on an inability to wear a face covering.

I doubt anyone that had a valid exemption to wearing a face covering would spend too much time arguing about it on the internet as the regulation does not apply to them does it?

[markyb_lcy]

MOTORVATOR said:

bodhi said:

MOTORVATOR said:

I reiterate I would not be having Markby in my shop.

So if someone has a medical exemption where they do not have to wear a mask - you would refuse them entry to your shop?

Are you sure that's entirely legal?

(Narrator - it isn't).

Where have I said that?

It is Mark that brazenly states he does not wear one because of his beliefs.

A 'reasonable excuse' under the regulations would not be "I am a bit of a left wing troll and I hate Hancock because he hasn't personally provided me with every bit of evidence I require before deciding whether to follow the law or not"

On that basis I believe I would have every right to refuse him entry and would actually take great pleasure in doing so .

You’re out of order again here motorvator.

I’ve hardly been “brazen” about mentioning it. I thought it best to be honest and open, that’s about it. If you think I’m proudly displaying my colours then you’ve got me all wrong. Again.

Calling me a “left wing troll” is really quite unfair. I’m not trolling, nor am I particularly “left wing”. On this issue, I’m more right-wing libertarian, actually. You throw these terms around but you lack any real understanding of them in the context of the debate.

You never answered my previous question by the way...

Have you ever broken a speed limit, ran a red light, or parked somewhere illegally?

[markyb_lcy]

MOTORVATOR said:

I doubt anyone that had a valid exemption to wearing a face covering would spend too much time arguing about it on the internet as the regulation does not apply to them does it?

Is that a suggestion that I’ve said I have such an exemption?

I have not done so.

I am knowingly breaking the law.

Still waiting for your answer on speeding / red lights and parking....

[bodhi]

MOTORVATOR said:

bodhi said:

markyb_lcy said:

bodhi said:

MOTORVATOR said:

I reiterate I would not be having Markby in my shop.

So if someone has a medical exemption where they do not have to wear a mask - you would refuse them entry to your shop?

Are you sure that's entirely legal?

(Narrator - it isn't).

Are we sure about that? (Got a source?). I’m not doubting it as such, but..,

My understanding is that private businesses reserve right of entry for any or no reason, though I consider that on medical grounds might be an exemption as it could come under the disability discrimination act.

My understanding is that retailers have to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people under the Disability Discrimination Act of 1995.

https://www.equalityni.org/Footer-Links/News/Emplo...

So sounds like if you were to do this, you would be opening yourself up for a world of pain through the courts for refusing access based on an inability to wear a face covering.

I doubt anyone that had a valid exemption to wearing a face covering would spend too much time arguing about it on the internet as the regulation does not apply to them does it?

Speaking as someone with an exemption I'd say yes. Yes they would.

If people only argued on the internet about things that applied to them, your average internet forum would be a VERY quiet place

[markyb_lcy]

MOTORVATOR said:

On that basis I believe I would have every right to refuse him entry and would actually take great pleasure in doing so .

Honestly I’m super gutted that you’ll refuse me entry to the shop that only exists in your imagination and even worse that you’ll derive such pleasure from doing so

This just proves to me this, for you, is as much political and philosophical as it is out of any concern for public health.

[MOTORVATOR]

markyb_lcy said:

MOTORVATOR said:

I doubt anyone that had a valid exemption to wearing a face covering would spend too much time arguing about it on the internet as the regulation does not apply to them does it?

Is that a suggestion that I’ve said I have such an exemption?

I have not done so.

I am knowingly breaking the law.

Still waiting for your answer on speeding / red lights and parking....

Yep and didn't fire up the internet immediately afterwards to make proclamations the law is an arse and I should be handed evidence before making the laws about red lights.

Well done on breaking the law mate, you're my hero.

[markyb_lcy]

MOTORVATOR said:

Yep and didn't fire up the internet immediately afterwards to make proclamations the law is an arse and I should be handed evidence before making the laws about red lights.

Well done on breaking the law mate, you're my hero.

So when you break the law it is ok but when I do it, you see fit to criticise and ridicule me?

[LimJim]

Back on topic....

[MOTORVATOR]

markyb_lcy said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Yep and didn't fire up the internet immediately afterwards to make proclamations the law is an arse and I should be handed evidence before making the laws about red lights.

Well done on breaking the law mate, you're my hero.

So when you break the law it is ok but when I do it, you see fit to criticise and ridicule me?

You are ridiculing yourself.

If I were to break the law by going the odd lepton faster than I should or a similar occasional act, I for one wouldn't be bragging about it nor would I be trying to justify myself continuing to do so on an internet forum.

[i4got]

MOTORVATOR said:

You are ridiculing yourself.

If I were to break the law by going the odd lepton faster than I should or a similar occasional act, I for one wouldn't be bragging about it nor would I be trying to justify myself continuing to do so on an internet forum.

So just to be clear. It's not the law-breaking you have an issue with? It's the talking about it on the internet?

[markyb_lcy]

MOTORVATOR said:

markyb_lcy said:

MOTORVATOR said:

Yep and didn't fire up the internet immediately afterwards to make proclamations the law is an arse and I should be handed evidence before making the laws about red lights.

Well done on breaking the law mate, you're my hero.

So when you break the law it is ok but when I do it, you see fit to criticise and ridicule me?

You are ridiculing yourself.

If I were to break the law by going the odd lepton faster than I should or a similar occasional act, I for one wouldn't be bragging about it nor would I be trying to justify myself continuing to do so on an internet forum.

I’m not “bragging” about anything. You’re misrepresenting me to say that I am.

Perhaps though if you want to occupy the moral high ground and criticise people who break laws, you should set your speed limiter to 70 the next time you’re on the motorway?

[MOTORVATOR]

markyb_lcy said:

I’m not “bragging” about anything. You’re misrepresenting me to say that I am.

Perhaps though if you want to occupy the moral high ground and criticise people who break laws, you should set your speed limiter to 70 the next time you’re on the motorway?

There's plenty of speed cameras out there to ensure that happens whether I agree with the imposition of speed limits or not, now be a good chap and try to comply with the law yourself without whining quite so much about it.

[survivalist]

MOTORVATOR said:

markyb_lcy said:

I’m not “bragging” about anything. You’re misrepresenting me to say that I am.

Perhaps though if you want to occupy the moral high ground and criticise people who break laws, you should set your speed limiter to 70 the next time you’re on the motorway?

There's plenty of speed cameras out there to ensure that happens whether I agree with the imposition of speed limits or not, now be a good chap and try to comply with the law yourself without whining quite so much about it.

In exactly the same way there are police, covid marshals, security guards etc. Apart from in your opinion, there is no difference between the two.

When speeding one chooses to ignore the law because:

I know better

Or

The chances I being caught are minimal

Or

I don’t care

Or all of the above


When I ignore the law/rules/guidance it’s because:

I know better

Or

The chances I being caught are minimal

Or

I don’t care

Or all of the above

[survivalist]

[redacted]

[survivalist]

[redacted]