To scream if I read 'the spirit of the lockdown' one more time

LolaSmiles · 14/04/2020 09:55

You may leave your home for limited reasons including shopping, medical reasons, caring, work you cannot do from home or daily exercise. The law, in a very simplified nutshell. That's all you need to know.

The thing is some people are absolutely desperate to twist the law into whatever they want.
The law says we can go shopping as infrequently as possible, yet there's thread after thread of people asking if they're exempt, why their entirely non-essential journey is technically essential because "who decides what essential is", thread after thread of people arguing that they are totally reasonable to go to the shops every time they fancy a magazine, chocolate or beer because "what if that treat is essential to me?"

There's thread after thread of people justifying why others should be ignored having a BBQ in their garden with people they don't live with and countless posters claiming anyone objecting to this behaviour are minions in a police state.

There are some busybodies, but miserable busybodies don't place me at greater risk when I need to shop. Selfish arseholes popping out whenever they see fit do put me at higher risk so I will continue to declare their stupid chocolate trips selfish.

MamaBearLockdown · 14/04/2020 10:06

Yes and No.

The rules have to be the same for everyone. There should also be some common sense.

You can see why Susan from London cannot be allowed to drive her SUV to the beach 3 hours away for her daily walk. However, Bob who lives opposite same beach now completely deserted is hurting no one by taking a 4 hour walk when he meets exactly 0 people.

Yes, shopping should be as seldom as you possibly can, but people are translating instructions as "my daily walk allows me to go and buy some make-up from Boots".

There could be a spirit of the lockdown if so many people were not either thick as a plank or inconsiderate and selfish. Sometimes both.

Original poster

QuimJongUn · 14/04/2020 10:06

The thing is some people are absolutely desperate to twist the law into whatever they want

Yes - including by claiming that going to the shops five times a week is against the 'spirit' of lockdown and so forth.

I would suggest that busybodies reporting things which are perfectly within the law to the police do put others at risk - they're wasting resources and making a difficult situation even more so for many.

You may not want to go out for a bar of chocolate or beer or a magazine - so don't. The shops that sell them are open because they are recognised as essential shops and nothing they sell is off limits. You cannot control the actions of others, especially so if they're acting within the law.

OP posts:

BogRollBOGOF · 14/04/2020 10:10

So if there is no "spirit of the lockdown" do we now have a totalitarian government who have taken away or civil liberties on a scale not seen since WW2 or the 17th Century, just because they are on a power trip?

The "spirit of the lockdown" is to minimise and manage (not eliminate) the spread of Covid 19. That is its entire purpose.

So if I fancy popping down the shops and handing money over to the cashier because I "need" a chocolate bar and it's my 3rd trip out of the day, no that's not "in the spirit of lockdown" even though it's not strictly illegal. If I live up the arse end of nowhere in the countryside and go out for the second walk of the day breaking guidence but not law, and there is no one there to meet (and kill as has been lauded on previous threads ) then yes, it is in the keeping of the spirit of lockdown because you are not transmitting the virus.

To me it's not about justifying doing what the hell I want, it's about logically risk assessing what I do. In "the spirit of lockdown" I am switching to my rural running routes where it is easier to do social distancing and just far easier to avoid people completely. It is still perfectly legal and within the guidelines for me to run in the opposite direction through suburbs, urban streets and parks, but as that carries a higher chance of contact and transmission, I consider that legal choice "not to be in the spirit of lockdown".

WhyCantIThinkOfAGoodOne · 14/04/2020 10:12

Well there is a spirit in which the law was intended e.g. going for a run or cycle close to home Vs going on an all day hike 2 hours drive from your house and stopping for a picnic. Both could be counted as exercise but the latter wasn't really what was intended.

Shopping for essentials could include a once a week shop for most families (others may have to go more often because they don't have storage or are working and can't get everything they need in one go). Some people interpret that as going out every day to get their preferred brand of jam which wasn't available yesterday.

TriangleBingoBongo · 14/04/2020 10:14

To me it's not about justifying doing what the hell I want, it's about logically risk assessing what I do. In "the spirit of lockdown" I am switching to my rural running routes where it is easier to do social distancing and just far easier to avoid people completely.

Exactly.

MamaBearLockdown · 14/04/2020 10:16

You may not want to go out for a bar of chocolate or beer or a magazine - so don't.

WHERE did you see that it's acceptable? it's not even in the spirit, it's written in black and white not to. You are willingly confusing buying food with making unnecessary TRIPS to get your treat.

the rules are pretty clear:

You should only leave the house for very limited purposes:
shopping for basic necessities, for example food and medicine, which must be as infrequent as possible.

I am confused, what is not clear in that message that you think it's fine to pop to the shop to grab a bar of chocolate?

LolaSmiles · 14/04/2020 10:18

You may not want to go out for a bar of chocolate or beer or a magazine - so don't.
The shops that sell them are open because they are recognised as essential shops and nothing they sell is off limits.
You cannot control the actions of others, especially so if they're acting within the law.
Yes they are open and I'd have zero issue in people buying chocolate etc. I do the same in my food shop.
The law says we should shop as infrequently as possible.
Going out because someone fancies a magazine is not as infrequently as possible. It is an additional trip.

NailsNeedDoing · 14/04/2020 10:20

I disagree. I think there is a spirit to the law because what one person considers genuinely essential will be irrelevant to another, so there is a grey area and people have to use some common sense.

Like, it’s legal for me to go shopping. Technically, it’s legal for me to go to Tesco, then Sainsbury’s, then stop off at the BP garage with a Marks and Spencer, then pop into the local farm shop, but that’s not within the ‘spirit’ of the law.

WhyCantIThinkOfAGoodOne · 14/04/2020 10:27

Yes - including by claiming that going to the shops five times a week is against the 'spirit' of lockdown and so forth.

But it clearly is against the spirit of the lock down. You should go to the shops "as infrequently as possible" for the vast majority of people that's once a week or fortnight. A very few people might need to go more often.

WhyCantIThinkOfAGoodOne · 14/04/2020 10:29

I don't think anyone can possibly claim going out for a magazine or bar of chocolate is allowed. It is unlikely that anyone is going to physically stop you but you are breaking the rules and being socially irresponsible.

qweryuiop · 14/04/2020 10:30

The new laws have been written for one purpose: to limit the spread of coronavirus without infringing on daily life any more than strictly necessary.

Thats why shopping every day is a bad idea - because shops involve a gathering of people and therefore may spread coronavirus easily.

Don't follow law for the sake of law. Follow law for the sake of saving lives.

Original poster

QuimJongUn · 14/04/2020 10:31

You should go to the shops "as infrequently as possible" for the vast majority of people that's once a week or fortnight

You're in a privileged position if you think this. Many people do not drive/are elderly/disabled/have limited funds/shop for others/need to go out to top up meters etc and need to shop far more often. Myself included. Not for the lols either - I have a medical condition which means if I catch it, it's likely to be severe.

OP posts:

MamaBearLockdown · 14/04/2020 10:45

so none of these people will want or be able to afford to waste money and a trip on a magazine or a bar of chocolate...

LolaSmiles · 14/04/2020 10:45

Many people do not drive/are elderly/disabled/have limited funds/shop for others/need to go out to top up meters etc and need to shop far more often.
Myself included
Which is precisely why the law is written to say as infrequently as possible!

The law accepts that not everyone can shop once a week. The law accepts that given current restrictions a larger family may need to shop more because there's limits on what people can buy. The law doesn't specify a number of trips precisely because there is a range of circumstances.

However, shopping as infrequently as possible doesn't mean nipping to the shops when you fancy some chocolate/a magazine/some beer because that's not as infrequently as possible.

The fact some people are going out of their way to justify why they have to have trips to the shops for treats is exactly what is pissing off the reasonable majority.

On one thread a number of us suggested buying treats with the food shop and then they're in the house for the week. One poster said they couldn't do that because they'd not last in their cupboard and they'd eat them all quickly and run out anyway. That's the issue we have at the moment, there are adults who are going to the shops whenever they like when they want treats because they don't want to regulate their access to the biscuit tin.

TheStoic · 14/04/2020 10:46

I absolutely believe in the ‘spirit’ of the lockdown.

MamaBearLockdown · 14/04/2020 10:48

There is one solution unfortunately, and it's a firm lockdown with clear rules and no possible interpretation. Some countries have done just that.

Why would anyone wants to go that far is beyond me.

TimeAintNothing · 14/04/2020 11:06

I don't think anyone can possibly claim going out for a magazine or bar of chocolate is allowed

For people living alone who may not have any friends/family they can phone, that walk to the paper shop on the corner for a Dairy Milk and a newspaper/magazine is probably invaluable to their mental health and helps them get through the rest of the day in lockdown.

TimeAintNothing · 14/04/2020 11:10

A lady at our autism support group is taking her adult son to the corner shop every day as his habit before lockdown was to buy a milkshake and a bag of crisps, it is better for him to continue this habit as the alternative would be a high level of distress, meltdowns, and risk to his (and her) wellbeing.

Macncheeseballs · 14/04/2020 11:13

I think boris must believe in the 'spirit', given his move to the country

TriangleBingoBongo · 14/04/2020 11:25

On one thread a number of us suggested buying treats with the food shop and then they're in the house for the week.

Me and my DH just gorge on the treats too not that we go out again for more, we accept that once it’s gone it’s gone!