In all honesty. Do you think people will follow Mondays rule.. Honest truth

[DidSheReallySayThat20]

Everyone I have spoken to, or seen on SM have said how stupid it is and they will not be following the rule /law.

My dbs manager who owns the workplace. Was due to have a get together at home next sunday for their teens birthday.
They are now doing it at work. ( a garage.)
Has now said by doing it there and ' booking in the relatives cars for a visual inspection /safety check ' whilst waiting they could get together on forecourt spaced out, Because they would be 'customers' and they would be at work. And it's no different to it being random customers just because it's family.
So there would be 2 cars' booked in' one of. Which is a couple., one a family Of 3. Plus their own household of 4 (the teens work there weekends cleaning etc anyway)

Which made me think how silly the rule is. They can't do that in their garden but can on a forecourt (the garage is not on a main road or anything and out the way so unlikely to be seen)

@TheDailyCarbuncle, you are saying it all for me, and probably better than I would.

DMBL well I can’t make you, but I’m happy that you are in a different area, maybe with people who feel the same and you’ll all be ok with outcome.

I’m hoping the schools remain open. They seem pretty good here so far.

I really hate reading posts like this about people like your brother's boss. The object of the exercise isn't to mess about with the rules and think you're clever like some snotty school kid. The object is surely to try to keep things safe and manageable while trying to keep the economy going , schools open etc at the same time while we get through this.

It's a really difficult balancing act that requires some thought and effort from everybody. Every egotistical idiot who pretends they don't need to do anything, leaves it all up to others and then moans about it should hang their head in shame. They are frankly pissing all over the sacrifices already made, all over the NHS frontline staff who have to deal with the horror, and all over their own children's economic future.

Covid won't care where you are when you catch it and then spread it around to other people. It will just seize the opportunity and then get on with it, and the whole situation will just go on and on with appalling long term consequences. How proud he'll be if his friends and family catch it there. It clearly isn't the same as random strangers occupying the same space at a distance and I bet there'll be bugger all social distancing.

I have a very significant birthday tomorrow as it happens, and my husband had his in March We were planning on a really fantastic party with no expense spared, , and were also supposed to be travelling abroad for his mother's 90th in April. None of these significant birthdays can be celebrated in any meaningful way and it stinks, but that's just the way it is for now.

The trouble is our government are not following Sweden so they will impose further restrictions if numbers go up. We don’t get to make them switch tracks even if we want them to.

Here is where I think you're wrong.

Remember, this was 'three weeks to flatten the curve & save the NHS'.

Then six, then eight, and so on.

Now, we're in retrograde.

I do not support lockdown or social distancing measures to eliminate all possible C19 deaths, or really even to minimise them. There's a tranche of vulnerable people who are at risk every single winter, without some kind of democratic mandate the government cannot unilaterally impinge our ancient rights on a continuing basis to minimise the spread of an infectious disease.

If Johnson wants to establish a medium/long-term 'C19 zero' plan, then he needs to do this under scrutiny of Parliament.

@GeorginaTheGiant

I have zero intention of not meeting with another family in our garden on the basis that we would number seven. That’s utter bollocks. I also won’t be going to a pub with five other friends from five other households, which is allowed, because it’s far riskier and not something I’m comfortable. I will continue to apply critical thinking and my own judgement of ACTUAL risk, and not follow arbitrary rules so that I can pay myself on the back for doing my bit while possibly doing things that are actually quite risky (e.g. pubs with multiple households). I will do my bit using my best intelligent judgement of my own individual circumstances and will sleep soundly at night.

Of course the govt has to plan at a population level and not account for every individual situation. But I truly believe that if we apply the rules with common sense and intelligence, the overall effect will be the same. No govt minister actually believes that a family of three meeting a family of four is more risky than six individuals from six households meeting up. They just have to draw the lines simply and clearly at some point. My conscience would be absolutely clear in braking them in certain circumstances. It wouldn’t, however, be clear if I visited an elderly relative the morning after sitting in a busy pub which is ‘allowed’.

This is eminently sensible and I think it is a very good guide to all this.

No.

In a word.

And from what I'm seeing people have previously followed the rules don't really understand these ones and how they are allowed to do x but not y.

And so don't intend to stick to them because they think they are bollocks and no one will catch them, as if the thing to worry about.

I'm seeing a lot of people who followed the rules before, thinking about ways they can find loopholes and get around them. Which says a lot about just how much high ranking government beaucrats have damaged the authority of the government to issue rules.

Its not a good sign.

Looking at the numbers there will be several more places that will go into local lockdown next week.

@Refractory

The trouble is our government are not following Sweden so they will impose further restrictions if numbers go up. We don’t get to make them switch tracks even if we want them to.

Here is where I think you're wrong.

Remember, this was 'three weeks to flatten the curve & save the NHS'.

Then six, then eight, and so on.

Now, we're in retrograde.

I do not support lockdown or social distancing measures to eliminate all possible C19 deaths, or really even to minimise them. There's a tranche of vulnerable people who are at risk every single winter, without some kind of democratic mandate the government cannot unilaterally impinge our ancient rights on a continuing basis to minimise the spread of an infectious disease.

If Johnson wants to establish a medium/long-term 'C19 zero' plan, then he needs to do this under scrutiny of Parliament.

Where am I wrong?

You have said they are not following Sweden path which is what I said.

I didn’t comment on whether it was the correct approach or a u turn. from previous strategy of flattening curve. The latter is easy to see.

It doesn’t change what will happen next if numbers go up and they want to track say Belgium not Spain,

Do you mean the government’s approach is wrong?

Mostly I will be following it.
I’m under local restrictions and have been bending them a little as I have been to a couple of back gardens - my mum and my friend - but distancing was maintained.
We might meet in a group of 7 or 8 (only 2 households) outside a few times but in general we’ll stick to it.

I have just check infection rate in my area - 6 in 100,000 ..... yet Birmingham has 85 in 100,000 ......

Now my area appears to mainly follow the rules and therefore IMO we don't need the rule of 6 - didn't before and don't now.

Birmingham on the other hand does.

@Hopeisnotastrategy

The point is with a mere 6 out of 100,000 in my area there is a very small chance of getting it.... We have been very low throughout both before/during and after lock down!

Birmingham has 85 in 100,000 a much bigger chance of getting it.

So your comment about 'Covid won't care where you are when you catch it and then spread it around to other people. It will just seize the opportunity and then get on with it, and the whole situation will just go on and on with appalling long term consequences.' - We have kept it down in this area all the time with SD, and hand washing etc.... don't need no lecturing here thanks

Most probably will, though whinging.

I can see a few just saying bugger it if theres 7/8 of them and basically convincing themselves this is more a rule against parties and such than trying to keep family members apart or whatever.

@RedToothBrush

This was me.

I followed the rules. I worked throughout lockdown putting myself at risk (living and breathing just work) and am still expected to now...along with my husband and son.

I stayed in. I didn’t see family other than on zoom. I missed out on my big birthday gladly. My holiday of a lifetime was cancelled and I lost a lot of money. I shopped online for the most part. I covered my face with a neck gator when I Went out on the rare occasion. I only walked for an hour a day and steered clear of other people.

But I’m done with living just to work and nothing more. I’m not doing it anymore. The rules are indeed bollocks at this point and I feel no further desire to comply.

@DBML

I think there's lots of people in that boat.

Lockdown was always a one time only possibility. Each new restriction becomes harder to manage because compliance only works if people trust the system and think it offers them something.

After six months people no longer see a risk and even if they do, they feel they must make the most of what life they have rather than see it pass by pointlessly.

I think by mid November we could have more problems on our hands than people now anticipate and can fully comprehend from this moment in time. I don't just mean in terms of covid related deaths either.

I sincerely hope I'm wrong, but I get a sense of the events of the past 6 months starting to unravel and shit starting to slowly hit the fan.

For all those screeching that the rule breakers will be responsible for further restrictions, yes I can see that viewpoint if you’re talking about going to a rave but do you honestly think that people meeting in groups of seven from two households is actually going to have more of an effect than pubs staying open (within the rules)? Really? Selective, carefully considered breaking of arbitrary rules to account for actual individual circumstances will not be what results in a further period of lockdown. It just won’t.

I'll continue to do what I like.

Won't be having huge parties or gatherings as never do but am meeting 2 Friends tomorrow. And would continue to do so

@GeorginaTheGiant

For all those screeching that the rule breakers will be responsible for further restrictions, yes I can see that viewpoint if you’re talking about going to a rave but do you honestly think that people meeting in groups of seven from two households is actually going to have more of an effect than pubs staying open (within the rules)? Really? Selective, carefully considered breaking of arbitrary rules to account for actual individual circumstances will not be what results in a further period of lockdown. It just won’t.

Well the screeching and wailing is most definitely coming from those rule breakers but yes if enough people do as they wish the restriction won’t change the numbers much.

It’s a fairly small restriction when it comes to changing numbers in the first place.

Screeching? Really? Do we really have to paint those with a different point of view in such terms? Is it not enough that women with opinions are painted as hysterical in society without playing that same misogynistic game on MN?

No they wont as its an arbitrary number and makes no sense. People are just fed up with the whole thing.

The numbers were always going to go up at this point. We need to open things up.

The point is we need to manage the rate of acceleration. If not socialising slows things down just a little it helps.

We are not in the same position as March - the risk is lower as we understand how to treat the disease better. But we still need to slow things down to a managable level.

I think this is a much harder point psychologically than previously tbh.

It's still against the law , therefore your breaking the law, but so many of you don't care.

No. My DD's party is planned - outdoors with seven friends that she is in a bubble in school with. It is going ahead and all the parents are fine with that.

I'll quite happily pay the fine if I'm reported (as if the police haven't got anything better to do than break up a group of primary children playing in the garden).

@MarshaBradyo

DMBL no you’re right I can’t say it another way for you to get it. I really genuinely don’t see why it’s so hard to understand.

It’s hard to understand because something is either safe or it isn’t.

While the economy and education should, I agree, be prioritised, to do that you need a lot of people to be willing to take a risk. It’s no good telling people that there’s no risk to them if they go and do the jobs in the socially undistanced way the government says is safe, but there is if they meet up with a much smaller number of people in a better ventilated environment.

We can all understand that gatherings of more than six aren’t allowed unless they are government approved, but unless someone tells that to the virus, it’s completely pointless and unrealistic to expect people to comply.

Nails it’s not about a particular number being safe or not.

It’s about restricting where we can to ensure maximum chance of businesses and schools staying open.

The easiest place to do that is private socialisation. It’s also where the virus often gets passed on.

The big problem is what is being evidenced on this thread not everyone will be willing to do it.

Whereas if you close a school people can be unwilling but they can’t do anything about it,

I know that it takes barely anything to close a class. One or two cases. So incredibly low as a threshold. I also know there’s only a few cases in my area, and I want it to stay that way to give dc best chance to go to school.

I'm not much of a socialiser so it won't affect me.

I don't think that many people will follow the new rule of 6 religiously though. It is just too idiotic for words. Kids can be in school all day in bubbles of more than 30 but outside of school they can't mix in a group of more than 6!! Utterly ridiculous.