Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder when complying with the law became optional?

132 replies

AlexaShutUp · 21/09/2020 22:35

I know lots of people disagree with the various covid restrictions, and I understand that position, but that isn't what this thread is about.

Rather, I'm really surprised by the number of people who say that they have no intention of complying with the law simply because they don't agree with it. They are not protesting against the restrictions, just ignoring them.

I always thought that people in the UK generally had respect for the rule of law, but it is as if people now think it's just a matter of personal choice/preference?

I know I shouldn't really be surprised. Our PM seems happy to break international law and his senior advisers freely ignore their own government guidance, so on one level, I don't blame people for thinking fuck it, I'll do what I want. But still, I'm surprised by the number of people who seem to regard obeying the law as optional.

AIBU to think that the law is still the law, whether we like it or not?

OP posts:
myworkingtitle · 22/09/2020 10:03

You can’t always follow the law just because it’s the law, IMO. Had you lived in South Africa between 1927 and 1985 would you have followed the Immorality Act? It was the law after all...

zoemum2006 · 22/09/2020 10:03

Since it became

BabyLlamaZen · 22/09/2020 10:04

@swashbucklecheer

When you drive to Barnard Castle for an eye test
As much as I disagreed with his actions, the response and understand the public's reaction at the time, it doesn't really fly anymore. Rule of 6? Nahhh, Barnard Castle. Distance from friends? Barnard Castle. Don't cough all over your granny? Nah, Banard Castle.

I don't give up this shit for Boris. I do it because I know it's right and don't want to be in an even bigger mess. Confused

terrywynne · 22/09/2020 10:05

They do make sense to those who pass them through the process of making them legal. These people are much more likely to have the knowledge and expertise to decide if it make sense then people who don't even have an A level in the related field.

So that would be why various solicitors/barristers I know are complaining about the current treatment of the law... Laws being announced in the newspapers before they are made, issued via special ministerial powers, no parliamentary scrutiny, sloppy wording. And then the clear attacks on the legal system a pp outlined. And top civil service lawyers resigning (ok that's over Brexit but is a sign of the government attitude towards laws). Personally, I would not assume the government know better than legal professionals... (And they are known to want to reform the civil service and the resignations are rolling in so I am having less and less faith in the supposedly impartial advisors helping them)

BluFox · 22/09/2020 10:06

Because the law can be wrong and harmful. Especially when it’s not properly scrutinised.

To the people saying they always abide by the law, what would you have done if you found yourself in Nazi Germany? Would you have informed on your neighbours? After all, it was the law.

Kate139 · 22/09/2020 10:09

Dominic Cummings thinks he is above the law and Boris Johnson thinks nothing of breaking international law and we are supposed to listen an adhere to new laws made up on the back of a fag packet by these utter clowns?...umm no!

terrywynne · 22/09/2020 10:09

Just to be clear, I am following law/guidance, am able to work from home etc etc because I don't want to contribute to exponential growth of Covid-19. But the government needs to persuade people to be careful and not risk becoming superspreaders (and show they understand the economic pressures that people face) not just except them to follow poorly written laws that they themselves have been shown to disregard.

tornadoalley · 22/09/2020 10:10

My neighbour runs every morning despite being official quarantined due to returning from a country on the quarantine list. He doesn't think it applies to him

SpaceRaiders · 22/09/2020 10:11

There’s a huge difference between law and guidance I think many are getting confused between the two.

Hingeandbracket · 22/09/2020 10:14

Dom’s trip to his castle
Made me smile - I assume you know it’s not “his” and it’s a town?

CrunchyNutNC · 22/09/2020 10:14

Sorry "but Barnard Castle" is the excuse of a dick and they should admit that they simply didn't want to follow the rules and are using DC as an excuse.

Plenty of examples those with influence breaking rules without it making everyone else suddenly think it's fine. Nobody thinks it's ok to have inappropriate relationships with under aged girls because Prince Andrew appears to have done so.

If DC had gone to Barnard Castle having been drinking would we all now be saying that we weren't going to abide by the law about drink driving? No.

RepDom21 · 22/09/2020 10:15

I’m not surprised though OP... lead by example and all that.

UK is not very strict on enforcing rules hence why we are still at the stage we are. It’s a shambles but I hold Borris accountable for that... pretending he doesn’t know why infection rates have gone up.

RockingMyFiftiesNot · 22/09/2020 10:20

@CrunchyNutNC

Sorry "but Barnard Castle" is the excuse of a dick and they should admit that they simply didn't want to follow the rules and are using DC as an excuse.

Plenty of examples those with influence breaking rules without it making everyone else suddenly think it's fine. Nobody thinks it's ok to have inappropriate relationships with under aged girls because Prince Andrew appears to have done so.

If DC had gone to Barnard Castle having been drinking would we all now be saying that we weren't going to abide by the law about drink driving? No.

I agree with you - and none of my personal decisions have been affected by DC being a twat. But as a nation, it has had a massively negative impact. Re had be been drink driving - of course the majority of people wouldn't use that as an excuse to drink & drive, but I can only assume that in that case the police would have pressed charges. We'll never know. It wasn't that he did it so much as that BJ, the person telling us all what to do, took no action when one of his own ignored the rules. As said, I've continued to follow the rules, but it has had an adverse impact on the country as a whole.
Shamoo · 22/09/2020 10:24

@Hingeandbracket - yes obviously I am.

Shamoo · 22/09/2020 10:25

*aware

CrunchyNutNC · 22/09/2020 10:27

rockingmyfifties It has had a negative impact because it's given a group of society, who have insufficient critical thinking skill to see what will happen if we all behaved like them (or who don't care) a get-out. These people are still, in the main, dicks though.

PamDemic · 22/09/2020 10:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CorianderLord · 22/09/2020 10:33

Well I guess because it's not a blanket law passed due to general public opinion. When martial-style law is enforced humans have always pushed back

MorrisZapp · 22/09/2020 10:34

Most people ignore the road speed laws, in fact you can be done for holding up the flow of traffic if you abide by them.

Likewise mobile phone use when driving. I can count five trades vans in a row using their phones while driving, they obviously don't respect or fear the law.

It's impossible to police the nations private behaviour, we can only go for majority compliance. Full compliance was never expected.

Ihatefish · 22/09/2020 10:36

When the individual became more important than society.

Idiots that try and justify their own selfishness because someone else went for a drive are invariably hashtag lemmings.

Bluntness100 · 22/09/2020 10:37

I think the other issue is that people don’t believe the statistics. The 50,000 a day is seen as highly improbable. And is coming in for much questioning. So if people don’t believe the case for action it’s difficult to get them to comply.

Also if you read the letter the scientists wrote the government, they raise some excellent points. Exactly what is our objective here? What are we trying to achieve. Because it was flatten the curve and protest the nhs. Now it seems to be just suppress the virus at all costs. Which is so damaging and not feasible.

So when you have uncertainty of what we are trying to achieve and you couple that with suspicion over the case for action in the first place, you end up with millions of people thinking this is ridiculous. And not complying.

The government needs to articulate their strategy clearly, gain buy in, and present a reasonable likely scenario that will occur. Presenting implausible worst case and no strategy just knee jerk reactions is not going to work.

Basically yesterday’s conf with witty and valance was ill conceived. Because too many scientists are standing up and saying publicly “you’re maths is wrong and that’s highly implausible”

loobyloo1234 · 22/09/2020 10:38

I comply with most laws. Always have done. Never been in any trouble with the police. When I think a law is worth following, and makes a difference, im happy to abide

They've gone too far though now

BJ said 12 weeks to start with. This has rolled into 6 months. At every turn there is a backtrack or new 'law' to cover their arses. Most of us have had enough of these crap laws that make no sense

Requinblanc · 22/09/2020 10:41

I think you have answered your own question...

Government has lost all credibility. Advisers/politicians don't follow the Covid rules themselves and the rules they come up with seem nonsensical in the first place.

Plus, we have a prime minister who also thinks it is fine to break international law to suit his needs.

No wonder many people have lost faith and have simply stopped listening to advice that does not even seem to be working anyway.

If our so called leaders don't follow the law, why should anyone else?

RockingMyFiftiesNot · 22/09/2020 10:44

@CrunchyNutNC

rockingmyfifties It has had a negative impact because it's given a group of society, who have insufficient critical thinking skill to see what will happen if we all behaved like them (or who don't care) a get-out. These people are still, in the main, dicks though.
Oh I couldn't agree more. But the end result is that we are where we are now precisely because of that. I didn't say it was right!
ApolloandDaphne · 22/09/2020 10:45

I don't agree with everything Boris and his team have said or done, however I plan to adhere to any laws or guidance that is brought in as I am a decent citizen who does not wish at any time to be responsible for passing on the virus to others. I could not live with that. So whatever Nicola (I am in Scotland) and Boris bring in today I will be willing to comply. I might not like it but I will do my part whatever it is.