Not doing quarantine properly.

[irishheartenglishblood]

DH spoke to a friend earlier who arrived back from France at 4pm on Sat, so 12hrs after quarantine started.
Said friend and family are going to WFH, but are planning on daily trips to the park, a once weekly trip to the supermarket, and to meet up with family next week.
DF firmly believes their behaviour is within keeping of the quarantine rules.

I'm quite torn. On the one hand, it seems quite arbitrary. On the other hand, if everyone who is supposed to be quarantining does this then it probably increases risk. But then they may have been staying in areas where the infection rate was lower than here. I think that was the case for DH's friend.

Thoughts?

Also re you wanting the government to enforce the rules - really??? Do you really want that? Because it sounds a lot like a police state to me and I personally really, really do not want that and very much value my freedom and civil liberties

@Juststopswimming

So you're basically saying as things stand (social distancing being patchy, track and trace being a bit dodgy and mask wearing variable) - you think schools, shops, restaurants and pubs shouldnt be open??

And that these things should only be open if all of the measures you mention below are in place?

Can you show me where I said I don't want those places open? Oh that's right you can't because I didn't say it.

Government introduced rules in order to keep rates low. They unshielded us and said we could go back to work if workplaces were Covid safe but surprise surprise no one checks or enforces any of the rules so workplaces aren't Covid safe and rates of infection are rising.

It's an utter nonsense. As for police state - ok, maybe take your tin foil hat over there. Government have put laws and rules in place in order to protect everyone in society - they're pointless if they aren't going to be enforced. I do hope none of you are going to be back on here complaining if we go into a second wave or lots of schools close or someone close to you is affected because someone else broke the rules. In all of those cases I hope you remember that it was you who argued for exactly that.

Hearhoovesthinkzebras I think broadly speaking we all want the same thing.

A haphazard quarantine with no scientific backing won't keep you safe though, where the restrictions are ill thought out and too onerous people are less likely to comply.

If there was public backing for measures because they are scientifically proven then people are more likely to comply and the government would be more likely to enforce it.

What we are experiencing is knee jerk ill thought out punitive measures for people who went abroad. This does no favours to anyone.

Also re you wanting the government to enforce the rules - really??? Do you really want that? Because it sounds a lot like a police state to me and I personally really, really do not want that and very much value my freedom and civil liberties

That ship sailed when the Emergency Powers Act was passed.

No you didn't say it, but with this shitshow of a government in charge, the things you are (imo very reasonable!) to ask for/expect to happen are just unrealistic. So what options do we have? Don't open stuff or open stuff but without these measures?

Imagine if she'd had the money to pay for a first class Eurostar 12 hours earlier. The family would have been responsible for a huge outbreak in their local area, spreading it around, going to work, pubs, shops and school. Just be grateful they didn't manage to get the earlier crossing.

@Juststopswimming

No you didn't say it, but with this shitshow of a government in charge, the things you are (imo very reasonable!) to ask for/expect to happen are just unrealistic. So what options do we have? Don't open stuff or open stuff but without these measures?

Well, if you open stuff with no measures in place we'll be back to square one, and then what?

Are people this reckless in real.life? Do you all cross the road without.looking, leave your doors and windows wide open when you go out, leave your car keys in the ignition when you park.your car? I take precautions.in my life against all sorts of threats why.on earth wouldn't I take precautions against this?

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras have you always worn a mask during flu season?

[quote Treesofwood]@Hearhoovesthinkzebras have you always worn a mask during flu season?[/quote]
No, but I have the flu vaccine, I do my utmost to stay away from people as much as I can, I wash my hands properly including not wearing any rings so that I can wash my hands, use hand sanitizer etc.

Pretty reckless then, as the flu vaccine is often protecting against the wrong strains of flu. Masks would have protected you and others from spreading it. Especially a couple of years ago when it killed tens of thousands of people in the UK as was quite virulent.

@Treesofwood

Pretty reckless then, as the flu vaccine is often protecting against the wrong strains of flu. Masks would have protected you and others from spreading it. Especially a couple of years ago when it killed tens of thousands of people in the UK as was quite virulent.

What's the point in me wearing a mask? It doesn't offer me protection. I need everyone else to wear a mask in order to protect me, be that against flu or Covid. Pretty reckless of everyone else then not to wear a mask and risk infecting the vulnerable.

@Treesofwood

Imagine if she'd had the money to pay for a first class Eurostar 12 hours earlier. The family would have been responsible for a huge outbreak in their local area, spreading it around, going to work, pubs, shops and school. Just be grateful they didn't manage to get the earlier crossing.

This is a silly argument, all rule/policy changes start at some point, so yes there was a before and an after.

I can see why people are miffed after the much-touted air bridges we're basically dismantled by the government.

But moaning that there was acut off when a law changed seems an odd complaint.

the thing about trying to enforce quarantine and other covid regulations is there isn't enough police or whoever to enforce it. They set out the guidelines and restrictions and kind of have to hope for the best that people comply because there isn't the manpower to keep on top of it as there should be thanks to the massive cuts in public sector over the years.
I honestly hope that after all this the government realise how badly they have fucked up with all their previous cuts and more money is ploughed into our schools, NHS and emergency services

I honestly hope that after all this the government realise how badly they have fucked up with all their previous cuts and more money is ploughed into our schools, NHS and emergency services

I totally agree more investment is needed but from their own perspective this government haven't 'fucked up' they are fine with shit services.

I hope the ^electorate* will vote for greater investment in public services.

@latticechaos the point is that people with a higher disposable income managed to get back before the deadline. They are just as dangerous as those who came after. Just didn't sit in the queues as long. Is the issue "breaking the rules" or due to an actual risk.

[quote Treesofwood]@latticechaos the point is that people with a higher disposable income managed to get back before the deadline. They are just as dangerous as those who came after. Just didn't sit in the queues as long. Is the issue "breaking the rules" or due to an actual risk.[/quote]
Exactly.

I also dont understand why the measures are so strict and harsh either for (very likely healthy) returning travellers; when people who have received a positive covid test are left to their own devices with the hope that they will play by the self isolation rules.

Dont get me wrong - in no way do I think police should be turning up at peoples doors demanding to check that covid positive individuals are actually self isolating -but the two instances are at massive odds with each other; and the harsh rules on returning travellers is nothing but a political manouvere.

After all what would you prefer - covid positive person going for a walk with their dog; or healthy person who has come back from rural france going for a walk with their dog? Severe penalty for the latter; no consequences for the former.

[quote Treesofwood]@latticechaos the point is that people with a higher disposable income managed to get back before the deadline. They are just as dangerous as those who came after. Just didn't sit in the queues as long. Is the issue "breaking the rules" or due to an actual risk.[/quote]
Yes, I know. But this is like arguing about the rain. All laws have an implementation date.

You can argue the law was wrong.

You can argue the implementation date should have been set further in the future.

But imo it is not a remarkable occurence that there are some who came home before and some who came home after. That is just a feature of laws being introduced or changed.

After all what would you prefer - covid positive person going for a walk with their dog; or healthy person who has come back from rural france going for a walk with their dog? Severe penalty for the latter; no consequences for the former.

Neither of us know if either of those people have covid, so again this is just irrelevant.

The quarantine rules suggest all governments are getting twitchy about travelling as an activity.

But are we just looking at breaking the rules as an issue? Is there a danger? Or is it "cos its the rules"

If people break rules but it has no impact, like walking the dog alone at 6 then why do we care?

Especially when wealthier people don't even have to follow the rules. They bought their way out.

@latticechaos

After all what would you prefer - covid positive person going for a walk with their dog; or healthy person who has come back from rural france going for a walk with their dog? Severe penalty for the latter; no consequences for the former.

Neither of us know if either of those people have covid, so again this is just irrelevant.

The quarantine rules suggest all governments are getting twitchy about travelling as an activity.

I dont agree - I think the government scrabbled around for something to latch on to so they could put in place some arbitrary but extra tough rules and say - THERE, we are doing something to protect you all.

latticechaos other governments in Europe have not introduced the same punitive rules that have no scientific backing.

If the rules were reasonable and could be justified on a scientific or public health basis then more people would comply. Surely that is in everyones interests?

@cantdothisnow1

latticechaos other governments in Europe have not introduced the same punitive rules that have no scientific backing.

If the rules were reasonable and could be justified on a scientific or public health basis then more people would comply. Surely that is in everyones interests?

They are starting to, the difference appears to be the length of time between announcement and introduction.

I think there is increasing concern about 'travelling'.

I have asked this on another thread but no replies yet - can anyone tell me when quarantine from an exempt country to UK starts? Is it on the day or arrival or does the 14 days start from the following day? Thanks.