This blind following of 'The Rules' is going to backfire when lockdown ends

[OtterPotter]

I have been really concerned at the attitudes I've seen on here and in RL of people's blind following of 'The Rules'.

The mentality I have seen here including outrage at people dancing in a park, or refusing to go for a picnic with their own children in a secluded spot because it's "AGAINST THE RULES!" demonstrates a complete inability to risk assess and interpret the guidelines.

What worries me is that same mentality will prevail when lockdown is lifted, and those same people will blindly follow the new rules and fail to appreciate that the risk is still real.

The day lockdown is lifted, the risk to yourself of catching it, and the risk of you spreading it to others remains exactly the same. The only thing that will have changed is that the government will have decided that the peak has passed, and the pressure on the NHS is lower - so they can allow YOU to risk catching it now. It can still kill you, it can still kill your family.

I'm deeply concerned that I'm going to have to have this battle with my rule obsessed family to try and convince them that they are still very much in danger.

Lilac, just read my comment. I said that it may be true that people will go to the pub every day once it's possible to do that again. I gave no opinion on whether that's a good or bad thing.

Really interesting thread. We will have to be more careful of.hygeine after lockdown ends for sure - but that's really all we can do.

I find it interesting that some of the major 'rules police' are acting like there has never been a virus before.

Germs relating to the actual flu, or a sickness bug, or a tummy virus...they're around us all the time. Things that can and do kill older and compromised people. This will become 'another' thing I'm sure. But I'm also sure that some people are very comfortable in their righteousness and won't give up for a while after lockdown ends.

Well it aint going away so my take on it is. If you have to work then take all precautions. Masks, gloves, on public transport.

At home continue to assume your footwear is contaminated, continue to assume you need to wash down shopping, continue to assume supermarkets are hot spots, continue to assume that when you go out you need to socially distance.

Personally I am not going pubbing, clubbing, eating out I just want to see my grand kids, if I am daft enough to start mixing indiscriminately with strangers my DILs are not going to let me visit.

"Common sense would have been enough if sense were common."
That is unfortunately what all this boils down to, and the biggest risk for most people will be when Lockdown is lifted.
Unless the time they spend shut in their homes helps develop a sense of reflexion.
Those who have some common sense will avoid the risks, and avoid the virus also, whether now or once we can do as we wish. Sad but true.

I gave up reading the thread on page 4 because I'd read enough posts that perfectly proved your point OP I've thought for years that a huge number of the population have become completely incapable of thinking independently or using common sense. Everything I've seen over the last few weeks has confirmed my opinion and frankly, it's far more frightening than any virus.

Thinking for oneself is a vanishing commodity I agree.

Depends if they are following rules because they are concerned about the virus in a way that also motivates critical thinking, or if they misunderstand the purpose of the rules and think the rules are all that is needed to protect them.
This ^

In fact it really irritates me that following the rules instead of whining like a petulant child is routinely being presented as a sign of lacking critical thinking, supporting a police state. It's not. I dislike the government and have questions on their handling of it, but part of being an adult is having the maturity to see the bigger picture.

I follow the rules because I want lockdown to end. I follow them because I'm a rational adult who is capable of understanding that my desire to go to the beach or the woods is secondary to slowing the spread of the virus. I'm following the rules because I'm not some spoilt child who has to go to the shop to buy my treats exactly when I want them and I have the foresight to add some treats in my trolley.

I've seen people on here justifying selfish actions and willingly ignoring the rules by saying "but if you have any technology at all then you can't challenge me without being a hypocrite because they're made in factories in Asia".

I follow the rules because whilst I know I'm capable of critical thought, common sense and compassion, it's abundantly clear that there's selfish arseholes who go through life thinking they're exempt from any rule they don't like and when the vast majority follow the lockdown rules the selfish idiots can be seen for what they are.

I really hope the people near me will understand that they need to keep up the social distancing for the sake of my own elderly family. What other people do is up to them, and they will take their own risks accordingly.

To me personally it's about holding out for as long as we can to give medical science the time to catch up and develop the best treatments possible to give us a fighting chance. The ideal for all of us of us I think is that we catch it, don't suffer, and are then immune so we can go about our lives safely. Continue to shield the elderly and vulnerable so that they can get vaccinated first.

If anyone has seen the film Contagion it gives an idea of what post-lockdown might look like. Those who are immune or vaccinated are given bar codes (in the film it is by wristband, but it could also be by QR code on your phone). The BBC have been featuring heavily the technological solutions that have been used in China and S Korea as well, which suggests to me that they are softening us up to get used to a similar system.

OP social distancing will be in place for ages.

You can only ever control your own actions, the sheer effort people are expending concerning themselves with what others are doing must be exhausting. Assess your risk and that of your household and base your actions on that. Accept that everyone outside your immediate sphere is an adult, with volition and allow them to make their own decisions.

It really is as simple as that. The mad vitriol at the behaviour of other people is far more destructive than any virus.

You can only ever control your own actions, the sheer effort people are expending concerning themselves with what others are doing must be exhausting.

Indeed. A bit like driving in which we all have to follow the law/highway code but there is then quite a bit of discretion on top of that in which we all apply whatever sense we have to try and keep everyone as safe as possible. The best any of us can do is follow our own moral code and try not to get angry at others for failing to do so.

ILikeyourHairyHands
It depends where the mad vitriol comes from.

Spending time being irate and spying on neighbours is probably endlessly time consuming.

Being annoyed that you have a vulnerable relative who family members have to shop for and support knowing people are popping out when they fancy a bar of chocolate is entirely justified in my opinion.

We can only control our own actions, that's true, and it would be unhealthy to spend the day festering, but I absolutely have no time at all for those defending doing what they like, trying to find loopholes, trying to find ways they can argue that taking the children to play in the park doing treasure hunts, going out for picnics is exercise, justifying why they need to go out to buy beer etc. Their actions place others at risk and I honestly don't know how they can continue to go about their business, hearing the death rate go up knowing that asymptomatic carriers can spread Coronavirus.

The mad vitriol at the behaviour of other people is far more destructive than any virus.

I totally agree with this. I think the real risks to society are the huge divides that have opened up over the last few years - which the outbreak is adding to - in which everyone seems to think that morality is binary and alligned along texactly to thier own beliefs.

I've seen people on here justifying selfish actions and willingly ignoring the rules by saying "but if you have any technology at all then you can't challenge me without being a hypocrite because they're made in factories in Asia".

As in, they might have virus on them because they are from Asia? That's bonkers!

The sheep like following the rules without taking into account why they exist is probably done by the same people who insist you must drive at 60 on an NSL road, regardless of any other factor.

Those of you who talk about following the actual rules in the way the guidelines clearly intended and that being classed as lack of critical thinking are missing the point completely, at least in this context. Those are not the people with whom I have an issue. I have a big problem with people who cannot grasp the rules, cannot apply them in a reasoned and sensible way, and still think they get to shout at the rest of us about ‘rules’ and ‘laws’ that patently do not exist.

I’ve done absolutely no whining. I’m perfectly happy - I’ve been hunkered down since well before the lockdown was even being talked about in any meaningful sense, and I’m perfectly content to stay that way for as long as I deem it necessary, regardless of what the government tells the mindless masses to do. I’ve done absolutely no ‘bending of the rules’ or breaking of the rules, or going against guidelines, in any way, shape or form. If other people don’t have the capacity to grasp the validity of my application of guidelines within the law then that’s really their problem. However they constantly want to make that my problem, and at that point I get hugely resentful. I don’t need to be policed by hard of thinking people, I certainly don’t need to be way-over-policed by the actual police, and whilst they all may be perfectly happy to relinquish all powers of self-determination in order to find an utterly misguided sense of safety and security, I am not.

I am on the 'vulnerable' list and haven't been anywhere except for one walk each day for the last 4 weeks. I honestly cannot care less who buys a chocolate bar or goes for a second walk a day or whatever. As long as they are doing so mindful of safety.

As in, they might have virus on them because they are from Asia? That's bonkers!
No, even more bonkers.
As in anyone pointing out that frontline workers are saying stay at home to reduce their risk of exposure can't say that if they own a smart phone because technological devices are made in factories in Asia, and if you aren't lobbying for worker's rights overseas then you have no grounds to say "listen to people in Tesco who don't want the shop full of people popping out for ice cream because they want a treat".

It was a bizarre moment in a thread. Other arguments included:

• stop inventing extra rules, it's not against the law... Oh, the law says as infrequently as possible, but...
• but maybe this treat item was totally essential because essential is subjective and maybe the magazine was absolutely essential and worthy of a special trip.
• Why is everyone saying nobody should ever buy anything nice, I bet you have items in your trolleys that I wouldn't consider essential... Oh, you're just saying people should shop as infrequently as possible and get their treats in their main shop...
• I can't get treats in my main shop because if they're in the house I have no willpower so will eat them quickly and then run out, so I have to go to the shop for treats
• I'm more than capable of deciding my risk... Oh you're expressing concern at all the additional interactions for supermarket staff? Well, if you have technology then you can't criticise me because you clearly don't care about workers anyway.

If all else fails then the usual references to the police state and Stasi get thrown around. It wouldn't do to acknowledge that it's perfectly possible not to make an additional trip for a treat.

I'm more than comfortable in my ability to risk assess, to read medical studies and understand them, and to plan outings etc accordingly.

I'm not particularly comfortable with the general population's ability to do the same. There's been more than enough displays of a complete lack of common sense to make me worry. If everyone does it, it simply doesn't work, and the more people that start 'interpreting' the guidance, the more will decide to do the same.

As soon as we start considering ourselves above the guidance we allow other people to do the same. I'm absolutely all for critical thinking, but sometimes a blanket position works better than allowing the population to 'risk assess' then act like absolute idiots because they've decided it's fine when they don't actually understand the first thing about the potential risks they are taking and increasing for other people.

The problem for me is, the guidance we've been given is terrible. It doesn't take into account the differences between rural and city living, doesn't make it clear when you can use your car and when you can't, and the politicians barely seem to understand it themselves.

As for the 'no risk of a car accident', in my area there have been two in the last two days. One overturned car, and one death from a motorcycle collision. They probably thought the same. It's very well and food deciding that the risk to you is minimal, but that's two ambulance call outs that could potentially have been avoided.

Well, if you have technology then you can't criticise me because you clearly don't care about workers anyway.

Oh, I see. Because of the working conditions and suicides etc.

TBF the whole suicide netting business is appalling - but a whole other topic.

Eloquently put @Ninkanink

Oops, hit post too early.

I do think, however, that the situation is generally shit all around, and the way people are becoming overly invested in their neighbours' lives and jumping on each other with 'YOU'RE BREAKING THE RULES' is ridiculous. We really don't need more virtue signalling nonsense right now.

You're framing it completely incorrectly by stating that people ‘believe they are above the guidance.’ People who think that are not relevant to this thread. This discussion is about people who do understand the guidance and how to apply it correctly, within the law.

The people who insist on going to the supermarket five times in a day for ‘essentials’ like a magazine don’t actually understand the guidance, nor the wider considerations. They are dumb, and they will likely get ill and/or spread it. Don’t conflate those idiots with those of who do understand the guidelines and how to apply them.

Breastedboobily i agree that the public health messages are shit. Someone above said 'just stay at home, it's perfectly clear' but actually it isn't, is it, because we are allowed out for exercise and food. Except if you happen to live near a London park and want to take your kids to stretch their legs - then you'll have a daily mail photographer waiting to shame you in a national paper for the baying masses. Or if you happen to walk your dog in a national park, miles from anyone, in which case Derbyshire police will use a drone to shame you for...for taking exercise, miles from anyone. So that's very clear. No possible room for confusion - stay at home, except when you go out. It's almost as if muddled public health messages give the government a chance to pass the buck for their own incompetence. Blame the general public - the fools.

I live rurally, our health board covering three counties has had two deaths up until the weekend. With 463 cases. We are still living as carefully as those who are sadly in the centre of a storm of cases and deaths. Perhaps we do not need to be as careful but are mindful of the advice given up till now. So many have not been tested, who knows what is out there.