‘Fuck the Covid rules.’ Really?

[Yellownotblue]

To all the posters (there have been many) saying they don’t plan to abide by the new rule of 6 - is your attitude specific to Covid, or do you generally don’t care about acting illegally?

For instance would you drink and drive ‘because you have a good reason’?

Or park illegally or drive without a seatbelt?

Would you drop litter on the streets?

I’m genuinely confused by the admission that so many posters see law-abidance as a “nice to have”, rather than some basic standard of life and morality in a society.

Explain? . We do it because the alternative is impossible

I sometimes think I live in a parallel universe.

@Ginorwine30 - the lockdown did work. Cases have risen since coming out of lockdown.

@Mayhemmumma - no. It was everyone pitching in and doing their bit, realising that inconvenient or unpleasant things had to be done or endured.

Another risk assessor. Do your dc go to school and would you prefer to see it stay open?

I don't have dc in school but used to work in them - I think they'd have a greater chance of staying open if secondary schools were open on a rota basis with social distancing and some online learning. There's a lot of overcrowding in schools. (In an ideal world, primary schools too, but childcare issues make that impractical.)

Well one or two of your guests won't be going, if they're 'more cautious' or choose not to break the law

That would be completely up to them. Just as I'm choosing not to eat at busy restaurants, even though it's not against the rules, because that's too much unnecessary risk in my opinion.

Surely there is a pretty big spectrum between 'fuck the Covid rules, I'm going to have a big family get together with 15 people from 4 households' to 'As a family of 5 we will turn my dad away at the door if he shows up with my mum as we are sticking to the 6 people rule'?

I can't see many arguing that the former is / should be as socially unacceptable as 'I can drive just fine after 2 or 3 pints'.

I think the debate is whether sticking to the letter of the law at the other end of the spectrum is necessary.

I think the rules are confused but they do send a message: this isn't over, we still need to limit social contact and be very careful. I think they will stop 95% of the big gatherings.

Overall I think they will bring the average frequency and size of bigger gatherings down quite significantly and that's a success.

Let's not get tied in knots about 6 or 7 people at a time. That's not the fight to be having.

But we can’t stay like this forever, can we? Eventually they will have to say, we’ve tried our best, if you’re vulnerable stay home as much as possible, if you’re healthy then go out, spend money, support the economy, the travel industry etc. the vast majority of people recover from Covid, more people die of cancer etc.

@Ginorwine30

But we can’t stay like this forever, can we? Eventually they will have to say, we’ve tried our best, if you’re vulnerable stay home as much as possible, if you’re healthy then go out, spend money, support the economy, the travel industry etc. the vast majority of people recover from Covid, more people die of cancer etc.

This really annoys me. How self centered do you need to be to advocate that vulnerable children and adults should be denied, education, work, medical care, exercise or limited social interactions so that others can get together with 7+ mates?

I can understand the fuck it attitude.

I play rugby, we’re training as normal and we’re having matches as normal. So I can get in a scrum and essentially wrestle a group of men, but I can’t be sat inside with them.

I will stick to the rule, but it is a stupid and ineffective rule.

Dominic Cummings is to blame for the fuck the rules attitude.

For a lot of it, I'm sure. Not because he broke the rules, but because of the response. Even if we take the most charitable interpretation - he was genuinely a concerned father doing what he thought was best. There were so many stories of families suffering, trying to find solutions that fit within the rules despite it being very difficult, not seeing loved ones who were ill or needy. Heartbreaking stories from people who were trying to do the right thing and follow the rules to the letter.

Then we're told that actually the rules are open to interpretation and Cummings was just doing what any good parent would do.

Either Cummings is special and can do whatever he wants while us plebs have to follow rules unthinkingly, or we can all use our own judgement a bit.

*Let's see. They were outside. Many did distance, wore masks, were young, fit and healthy, may have been single, lived in small huseholds and so very many more variables.

That and we don't know enough about covid to be certain about its variances. We act on what we do know and update that knowledge as times goes by.*

That's a lot of assumptions, yet people on this thread are being ridiculed for making their own assessment or not following the 'new rules'.
So people were outside unless they were travelling in to London by tube, train and bus. Many did not distance, or wear masks. Cities were the most affected, and are the most diverse often with multi generations of people living together.

So if the protest were ok, and still are allowed, then why can't groups of people safely meet outside from monday, and social distance/wear masks and what not? There wasn't a huge spike in deaths or infections from all those mass gatherings, but meet more than 6 people and there will be?

I'm not a fan of the government in any way shape or form, I think they are diabolical actually.

However, I don't necessarily blame 'eat out to help out' and 'go back to work' on the rise. The locations where these incentives are happening have generally employed social distancing measured.

The issue is that people are no longer social distancing enough. In a nutshell really. In houses, pubs, gardens, wherever.

I’m just being realistic. You can’t screw over the whole world for years and years because of a virus which most people recover from. There’s no way people will put up with this into next year as well.

On the question of how long they’ll probably give a vaccine a fighting chance then if worse comes to worse and no vaccine reassess way forward

@Ginorwine30

I’m just being realistic. You can’t screw over the whole world for years and years because of a virus which most people recover from. There’s no way people will put up with this into next year as well.

How is limiting social gatherings to six people screwing over the whole world? Slight hyperbole there

@Ginorwine30 but the vulnerable have to put up with it? Living alone I see virtually nobody now. I'm 36 and want to be out with my friends and seeing my colleagues at work and going to restaurants and bars, but it's too risky for me still

Because it’s killing off whole industries, live music venues, sports events, clubs, social events etc. The travel industry, hospitality industry, people who work in events, the economy 🤷‍♀️ It will be too risky for vulnerable people regardless, they still have a chance of catching it in the same way that you can catch any virus. It’s never going to be eradicated.

EDSGFC

It is not the law
It is guidance.

Someone please explain how living like this for god knows how long is the best thing for the majority of people?

It's not is it. I dont understand why people are shocked that figures are rising, it was a given wasnt it when the kids started going back to school. We just need to crack on and live with it, the virus is going nowhere.

Dominic Cummings is to blame for the fuck the rules attitude. Bollocks! He's just the excuse many use for continuing with the fuck it attitude they had before... and others as a lame excuse for being too bored to bother now!

He's a symptom, not the actual disease!

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

EDSGFC

It is not the law
It is guidance.

Sorry, what isn't the law?

No more than six people in a group is law from Monday

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

EDSGFC

It is not the law
It is guidance.

It will be from Monday.

As PP said, this is a new step, one they have been extremely reluctant to take before and you have to wonder what underlies it! What we do not yet know...

He's a symptom, not the actual disease!

You sure about that?

@EveryPlanetHasAYorkshire

He's a symptom, not the actual disease!

You sure about that?

Not entirely, no

If my toddler can go to nursery with 20 others in her class all shoving the same things in their mouths, and my DH can work the whole way through the lockdown mixing with hundreds of families per day, then I am going to a mates with 8 friends. Yes, screw it.

God everything has become so Orwellian. Everyone blaming everyone else, each calling the other selfish. It is a virus. It is doing what viruses do and it's no-one's fault.