Discussion
The idea of reporting someone for breaking the law and objections to doing so, seem to have come to the fore since the 'Rule of 6'
I hear 'Snitches get stitches' thrown around like we're in Goodfellas.
What is it that renders the concept morally abhorrent to the ordinary citizen?
If you were a pub landlord going to great lengths to adhere to social distancing rules while another in the area was a free for all, would you report them to the council to preserve your own livelihood, and potentially the lives of elderly relatives?
I hear 'Snitches get stitches' thrown around like we're in Goodfellas.
What is it that renders the concept morally abhorrent to the ordinary citizen?
If you were a pub landlord going to great lengths to adhere to social distancing rules while another in the area was a free for all, would you report them to the council to preserve your own livelihood, and potentially the lives of elderly relatives?
I think there it depends on how the situation unfolds.
If my direct neighbours obviously had a few people round, I wouldn't bat an eyelid. If they had one of their regular huge parties which involve swearing and shouting loudly in the back garden with music up to full until 3am, I probably would because they are being absolute a
holes (we have a lot of young children in nearby houses if anything else)
I imagine the new Covid wardens will be like the aforementioned kids in school that were the grasses and the snivelly types. The same ones that are mostly on the local council now.
If my direct neighbours obviously had a few people round, I wouldn't bat an eyelid. If they had one of their regular huge parties which involve swearing and shouting loudly in the back garden with music up to full until 3am, I probably would because they are being absolute a
holes (we have a lot of young children in nearby houses if anything else)I imagine the new Covid wardens will be like the aforementioned kids in school that were the grasses and the snivelly types. The same ones that are mostly on the local council now.
It's a slippery slope: I get on with my neighbours very well - always polite, helped me out numerous times with stuff like repairing storm damaged fence, feeding the cat when I was out etc. & I've helped them multiple times with their knackered car. They have an 8 year old boy who had an outdoor birthday party before the rule of 6 bks - happy kids having a great time. If they did the party today, it would of course be illegal, but I simply cannot imagine grassing them up. All those small, mutually beneficial things would be up in smoke forever. I will not have my friendship ruined by some idiotic, useless diktat from our incompetent leadership.
ks - happy kids having a great time. If they did the party today, it would of course be illegal, but I simply cannot imagine grassing them up. All those small, mutually beneficial things would be up in smoke forever. I will not have my friendship ruined by some idiotic, useless diktat from our incompetent leadership.It's a question of whether you agree or disagree that viruses are passed from person to person.
We are at the stage where life must continue. We need to go to work and our kids need to go to school. There's only so much we can limit that before our whole society fails.
We don't need large parties at home. We'd like them but we don't need them.
Limiting the number of people gathering together unnecessarily is designed to limit the transmission of the virus, where possible. Do you agree with that or disagree with that? If you agree with this then those who are flouting the rules are in the wrong. They are the people causing problems for our society (for their own neighbours and friends) by increasing the risk of transmission.
We are at the stage where life must continue. We need to go to work and our kids need to go to school. There's only so much we can limit that before our whole society fails.
We don't need large parties at home. We'd like them but we don't need them.
Limiting the number of people gathering together unnecessarily is designed to limit the transmission of the virus, where possible. Do you agree with that or disagree with that? If you agree with this then those who are flouting the rules are in the wrong. They are the people causing problems for our society (for their own neighbours and friends) by increasing the risk of transmission.
Biker 1 said:
They have an 8 year old boy who had an outdoor birthday party before the rule of 6 bks - happy kids having a great time. If they did the party today, it would of course be illegal, but I simply cannot imagine grassing them up.
The Covid loves an outdoor party but definitely won’t get them in the playground when they’re all at school together! It knows the difference you see, cunning little virus. ks - happy kids having a great time. If they did the party today, it would of course be illegal, but I simply cannot imagine grassing them up.I’m interested to know exactly what would happen if you did snitch in that type of circumstance. I’m guessing given their outstanding response times to burglaries etc The Police would be round like a shot handing out fines and breaking the kids apart.
BlackLabel said:
Definitely not an accurate poll, Lib Dems should be 100% for every single one 
vixen1700 said:
Think it goes back to an early age, the tell-tale grassy kids at school were always ghastly.
It's not for me, even more with the crap coming from this government.
I think they were portrayed as such by the bullies so the latter could do whatever they wanted without the Teachers finding out. And a lot of kids, being quite gullibe/impressionable at that age believed it,It's not for me, even more with the crap coming from this government.
If somebody is behaving like a t
t you either(a) Think their t
ttishness is acceptable and doesnt actually need reporting;(b) Know their t
ttishness isn't acceptable but are either too scared or CBA to do something about it;(c) Know their t
ttishness isn't acceptable AND decide to do something about it.anonymous said:
[redacted]
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
...its the thin end of the wedge...
Countdown said:
I think they were portrayed as such by the bullies so the latter could do whatever they wanted without the Teachers finding out. And a lot of kids, being quite gullibe/impressionable at that age believed it,
Exactly. There's quite a gulf between silencing your victim, and suppression of an entire population except many seem to conflate a gangland or playground code with the preservation of trust and freedom in society. That is of course assuming that people wouldn't distinguish a 7th person in a neighbour's garden from other crimes thus reporting neither.
I'd like to see that graph illustrating who'd call the police for a breach of COVID regulations, compared to other crimes. Perhaps one being an illegal large scale rave.
vixen1700 said:
Countdown said:
I think they were portrayed as such by the bullies
Nah, they were just ghastly. I wasn't a bully either by the way, just so you know
Where do you draw the line, swearing, taking pocket money, a good beating?
Goes back to my previous example of the rule of 6 v something more serious. If you'd ignore either I really can't imaging what you'd base that position on.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff