To think the more ridiculous and inconsistent these rules get the less likely people will follow them

[FruitLikeAPeach]

Further to the tightening in northern England today...

AIBU to think the more ridiculous and illogical the rules get the less people will follow them. It seems utter madness to me that you can visit a pub, there is about to be an incentive next week to get people to 'eat out, help out', you can go out to a shop to browse for clothes etc... but apparently sitting in your mum's garden for a cup of tea 2m apart is too dangerous.

I feel like this is just going to get people fed up to the point they just won't bother with the latest lockdown, not as strictly anyway and I can't even blame them anymore.

Yes, I don't think that pub with everyone sitting down socially distanced in one household is at all representative. Certainly neither the three Wethwrspoons nor the posher" pubs in my city are at all like that if you walk or drive past - even early evening.

I was at a very fancy restaurant a few weeks ago and from the edge of our table to the edge of the next table was probably about 50cm.

The tables absolutely were not 2m apart.

I went to a pub yesterday and sat outside and the tables were so so close together. I understand the risk is lower if you’re outside but even so - there was no social distancing. When I went into the pub there was a lot of people there, walking to and fro the bar, tables close together etc etc

I imagine a lot of pubs are like this bar the odd few.

I dread to think what it’s like on a Friday or Saturday night....

But nowhere near as risky as your uncle's garden, obviously.

@PiataMaiNei

But nowhere near as risky as your uncle's garden, obviously.

Obviously... Makes perfect sense!

Also I think people are very naive if they think lots of pubs are effectively social distancing. There's been photos all over the place of drunk customers hugging and shouting and sitting all together outside of their groups. Just driving past our locals shows that it isn't being policed in a lot of places.

@PiataMaiNei
Interesting photo of Manchester City Centre last night at the link below. I wonder if all these people live together?

mobile.twitter.com/HannahAlOthman/status/1289307245520576512

Reading that thread is a simple demonstration of how confused everyone is. The message throughout, has been don't do this, unless you do that, but you can't do that unless you do this.

Ridiculous to think that a quickly changing situation needs a quickly changing response. It should all have been planned far more carefully...

... or some such twaddle.

We just have to get used to checking the covid news each morning. We've had a fair few months practice we should be used to it now.

No such thing as personal responsibility or accountability anymore....alot of people would love it of the government wiped their own arses for them quite frankly.

@cyclingmad

No such thing as personal responsibility or accountability anymore....alot of people would love it of the government wiped their own arses for them quite frankly.

Well you can't really talk about personal responsibility or accountability when they are being told they are not allowed to make common sense decisions about sitting in a family members gardens... But when it comes to the pub it's all 'personal responsibility'.

What's the difference? We are either personally responsible (and that includes meeting family) or we aren't.

Just put a barrel of beer in your garden and call it a beer garden, then you are ok. lol

I understand that the rise in cases has been linked to certain communities. The way those communities socialise is inside people's houses rather than pubs and restaurants. So if those communities are having a disproportionate amount of cases it seems sensible to limit the amount of social contacts that that community has by limiting the activity that facilitates the most contacts.

It would make no sense to close pubs or non essential shops or restaurants because that community don't tend to socialise in that way, especially as its Eid. The only way to limit contacts is to stop people going to other peoples houses. Plus this has little impact on businesses and the economy.

It's common sense really. Look where transmission is occurring and limit the opportunity for transmission by reducing or removing the social contacts in that community.

I also think that whilst pubs etc might appear busy "most" people aren't actually in them. It's a very small % of the population who are in the pub regularly, rather than for an occasional treat, whereas most people are/were visiting friends and family at home.

I’m in the northern hotspot and people are really cross here. We’d much rather close the pubs and still be able to meet in gardens.

And the childcare thing is ridiculous.
The guidance actually says that you should find a childminder or nanny and if all else fails your children can be looked after by family or friends in a local park. So 9-5 in a local park. In the rain. Do these people have no concept of looking after a child?

What’s pissing us off more though is the complete non-enforcement. Most people I know will follow the new rules but we all know that chances of a knock on the door by police is about zero. Meanwhile the pubs near me were still heaving last night and pretty sure people were not only socialising with their household. No practical way of enforcing this so the misery will continue for much longer for the rest of us who are following the rules.

9-5 in the park where the toilets are still locked, presumably?

@Frouby

I understand that the rise in cases has been linked to certain communities. The way those communities socialise is inside people's houses rather than pubs and restaurants. So if those communities are having a disproportionate amount of cases it seems sensible to limit the amount of social contacts that that community has by limiting the activity that facilitates the most contacts.

It would make no sense to close pubs or non essential shops or restaurants because that community don't tend to socialise in that way, especially as its Eid. The only way to limit contacts is to stop people going to other peoples houses. Plus this has little impact on businesses and the economy.

It's common sense really. Look where transmission is occurring and limit the opportunity for transmission by reducing or removing the social contacts in that community.

Those "certain communities " also do a greater number of jobs which put them at higher levels of risk. I notice you didn't mention that.

It’s an absolute joke. Our Government is so embarrassing.

The guidance actually says that you should find a childminder or nanny and if all else fails your children can be looked after by family or friends in a local park. So 9-5 in a local park. In the rain. Do these people have no concept of looking after a child?

See in this situation there would be absolutely no judgement from me if someone said sod it and let their family look after their kids at their home anyway.

At this point now I just think sod it I will make my own risk assessment.
Going to see my family. yes I will. and we all shower and put clean clothes on before we visit and are careful with hand washing. Go to a pub. No not at the minute.
Avoid hotspot areas. Limit supermarket visits.
All I can really do atm.
According to the government if theres a card reader involved its safe, well, no thanks I,ll continue using common sense and limiting my exposure in sensible ways without limiting my life down to nothing but work and home.

According to the government if theres a card reader involved its safe
Very good description of current government health policy!

@ilovesooty it's not relevant what job that community may or may not do. The rise in cases has been linked to socialising in private homes. Again possibly linked to cultural norms, larger families, multi generational homes, socialising based around mealtimes so large groups inside eating together.

That is why socialising inside homes has been restricted in certain areas to try and stem the rise in infections. It's unfortunate that it falls on a significant religious occasion. But the current rules everywhere in the country still remain 2 households only can meet inside and no gatherings about 30 people.

The last time I lived in an area with a high percentage of Muslim families celebrating Eid there were large parties up and down the road, households in and out of other houses, large gatherings inside, food being taken from house to house etc. Lovely to observe (and we usually benefited with plates of food gifted) in normal times, but not at present cos you know, global pandemic.

It is relevant what jobs people do, because many frontline workers catch it at work.

The government want people to think 'pub safe, work safe, house not safe' but the reality is none of it is more safe than the other if you don't observe distancing. They could have shut one or the other (pubs or houses) but only one generates income.

Also they are happy for people to blame what gets referred to above as 'certain' communities.

There are many frontline jobs though, that worked throughout the lockdown. Many still working now. But the increase in cases is in certain areas, which have been tracked down to certain communities. Which have been tracked further to certain behaviours. Those behaviours are causing an increase in cases, so those behaviours must temporarily stop.

The alternative is to lockdown fully, affect business and revenue, have a greater impact on peoples lives and the economy.

If the increase was linked to pubs, then pubs would close. If it was linked to restaurants, restaurants would close. If it was linked to BBQs then BBQs would have to stop.

People are looking for reasons to take offence at the measures because they target a BAME community. But the measures target a BAME community because the cases are higher within that community.

If the government did nothing and cases continued to rise and more deaths in that community they would be accused of ignoring the BAME community.

Stop saying 'certain communities' if you want to blame a section of the British population just say clearly who you blame.

The government want people to think 'pub safe, work safe, house not safe'

Exactly - this is why everything is just nonsense.

"They could have shut one or the other (pubs or houses) but only one generates income."

Apart from the fact that generating income is important, without it the NHS really is in trouble, the fact is that in the areas where infection rates have risen, a tiny % of people are regularly in the pub, compared to the numbers who would have been mixing in private homes this weekend.

I understand completely that it's unpalatable, I agree it's confusing and on the face of it makes no sense, but I do think there is some logic there.

@labyrinthloafer

Stop saying 'certain communities' if you want to blame a section of the British population just say clearly who you blame.

I don't blame anyone personally. Obviously the government advisers are targeting certain behaviours. They have to stop. Temporarily. For good reason.

And it is a community of people. I can call a community a certain community. I could call it the Muslim community. Or the Asian community. Or a BAME community. Or the Pakistan community. Or the British Pakistan community. Or various other things.

But when you do that you get people piling in and saying 'oh I'm Muslim and I don't do this'. Or 'my family are from Pakistan and we don't do this'. Or 'my neighbours are Asian and definitely don't do that'.

It's certain communities in certain areas who suffering a rise in cases. So, certain communities.