Shocked at people blatantly ignoring rule of 6!

[chestergirl39]

I knew it would happen, but it has still shocked me, especially the types of people who are doing it! (Eg not always younger ones). Someone at work, who has only just returned from shielding has flouted it 3 times already. She has bad chest and heart problems, so I’d have thought she’d be more careful. It’s hard not to feel cross about it, especially when you’re keeping to the rules yourself, mainly to protect people like them!

The country has enough budget (socialising) to have children in school or to have socialising in private homes but not both.

That's a terrible analogy. The government could have prepared for a safer return for schools, in which case we could have had both. Also, where do pubs come into your budget, are they more important than families?

Clearly not as the pubs are now take away food only in the most affected regions

@annabel85

Criminals. It's up to the police and the authorities to enforce the law.

Yes because the police aren't at all overstretched as it is.

Funny how this rule came into effect 1 week after the eat out discounts expired. And I can still sit in a pub with tens of randoms but I can't sit in my mum's garden with 6 other family members? This rule of 6 is utter BS.

Clearly not as the pubs are now take away food only in the most affected regions

Wrong.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-54188766

Did you honestly think people would comply?

I'm following it but the rule doesn't make much sense.

I can't find 6 friends to break the rule😂

@Howslifenow

I just heard 7 mn school children breaking the law as they met indoors in their classrooms. Luckily Covid couldn't touch them inside schools.

They're not breaking the law seeing as work and education are specifically excluded from the rule of 6.

You know when Michael Winner said he was surprised to learn it only cost £70 or whatever to drive in the bus lane, I think a lot of people think it’s worth risking a £100 fine to spend time with a bigger number of friends or relatives.

It's the same as Lambourghinis on double yellows outside Harrods. If the fine is small change to you, or you think the prospect of caught is low, you'll fought the rule.

Flought*

the rule is bullshit and doesnt make any sense. I think what is truly criminal is encouraging us to snitch on our neighbours. fuck that. I used to never understand how nazi Germany came to be but I bloody well can now. cunts, the lot of em and anyone who tells on their neighbours, I pity your very sad pathetic lives.

YABU to be surprised by it. We’ll end go with tighter restrictions for longer, worst stats for cases/admissions/deaths, a lonely Christmas for many and then the same people will complain about that!

I get that the government is choosing this restriction so that they can keep workers in work, economy moving etc. But it's so ridiculously arbitrary. We will be breaking it this weekend when DH's BF, his wife and 2 children come over. Because it's not possible for two families to meet under the 6 rule. Other countries have excluded children from these sorts of restrictions, which makes sense. But I can't see how two families of 4 meeting up is more dangerous than our family and just two members of that family.

“The law came in Monday, it's only Thursday and colleague has flaunted it 3 times???”

Yes!!! And she didn’t break it once during lockdown!! It’s mainly due to having a large extended family.

I completely understand how she feels and understand that the rules are confusing and contradictory, and that the government are hypocritical, BUT.... aren’t the rules there to specifically protect people like her? And if you have a large extended family with kids in different schools and year groups, there is more risk of spread. And if you’re vulnerable enough to be shielding?? It shocked me!

I've been up and down the whole spectrum of opinions from terrified to go out and wiping down shopping, to to hell with it all, we've got to live. The problem is people's views depend a lot on their situation. Panicked me was allowed to work from home and was able to get online shops. I couldn't understand why people felt the need to eat out etc. Now facing no social distancing in a large secondary and the joys of crowds on the school run I'm more inclined to say to hell with it. If I'm going to catch it, it'll be from work so I might as well live. Also, i need to look relaxed at work and I can't do that if im worrying about the virus. The problem is I can't switch off the relaxed mode now and I understand why people with high contact jobs are getting sick of all these nonsensical rules. I get there are risk quotas but I'm damned if others are going to make me spend all of mine on work.

@SpaceOP

I get that the government is choosing this restriction so that they can keep workers in work, economy moving etc. But it's so ridiculously arbitrary. We will be breaking it this weekend when DH's BF, his wife and 2 children come over. Because it's not possible for two families to meet under the 6 rule. Other countries have excluded children from these sorts of restrictions, which makes sense. But I can't see how two families of 4 meeting up is more dangerous than our family and just two members of that family.

Not all other countries have eg NI are more restrictive than England but people don’t seem to like using them as a comparison.

Someone at work, who has only just returned from shielding has flouted it 3 times already. She has bad chest and heart problems, so I’d have thought she’d be more careful.

The budget thing doesn't work though. It's about risk and benefit TO WHOM.

Your colleague may feel that given she has two kids in school in bubbles of 100 each that the marginal risk of meeting 7 people with social distancing is piddling. And she's right.

She has no choice over the huge, massive risk the government is exposing her to (she could lose her school place if they don't get sent in and they need education). It's unreasonable to expect her to do something that limits the benefits of her life to reduce risk to other people and the government themselves.

The only real benefit of sticking to rule of 6 is for the government - it'll allow them to reduce transmission a bit while keeping the economy open (they think, I think they're wrong).

I do not believe that being with 10 people with SD and masks is adding to my risk in any meaningful way now I'm sending kids to schools in small, unventilated classrooms for 6 hours a day sitting shoulder to shoulder with 29 other kids. Schools are currently hotbeds of disease transmission.

Why should she do it? Why should I?

I'm all for keeping rates low, but you can't shit on people and then expect them to say 'please give me some more shit I'd love that'. The government has given no money to schools to make them covid secure. They could have followed Italy and recruited more staff and used community spaces to allow SD. They didn't.

Their rule of 6 makes no logical sense against that backdrop, and is blatantly unfair to boot.

Once the nights draw in and it gets colder it will be quite difficult to see who is breaking the rule of six, curtains will be drawn of an evening and no one will be in gardens, it’s only so obvious now because it’s light and people are outside a lot and it’s easy to snoop. We haven’t had winter lockdown yet when it’s dark and cold

@Waxonwaxoff0

Not shocking. People are fed up. I'm complying but I completely understand why people aren't.

The virus doesn't care if people are fed up.

I don't think the virus cares if people are in groups of six or seven

@annabel85 the virus isn't the only thing that matters.

I don't think the virus cares if people are in groups of six or seven

No, but it's about minimising risk. You have to draw the line somewhere. I don't think people in groups of 7 should be bothered but large gatherings (i.e. much more than that) are completely irresponsible at the moment.

The government are doing what they can to keep schools, workplaces, pubs, shops open to keep the economy going, without cases getting out of hand again. That can't happen if people won't restrict their socialising and follow guidelines. Already they're having to issue curfews to businesses in some areas.

It's time people showed a bit of responsibility again.

If you knew it would happen, why are you shocked?

Just passed a restaurant where a group of 10 (clearly work related) were eating at one big joint table. No distance at all between anyone. In the window on the street viewable by loads passing on busy street. Found myself thinking maybe I had misunderstood the rules ?

Some people are just selfish. Always have been, always will be.
If the majority of us abide by the law then infection rates should come down. I can't deny it's not extremely irritating though knowing that others are not prepared to make any sacrifices for the greater good.
At least there are some voices of reason on this thread to counteract the selfish ones.