'Prison' and fines for gatherings?

[itsgettingweird]

Bare with me and this could have libertarian questions with our general way of life.

However it's quite clear the fines and increase fines are not stopping gatherings.
My concern isn't the fines etc but rather after these events the attendees could be spreading covid and I think people who are attending these events are less likely to self isolate.

So what about tightening laws that you go to 'prison' and receive a fine.

Except 'prison' is 10 days quarantine in a hotel. The fines are used to pay for the hotels helping the hospitality industry and cutting the chance of transmission from what may be a super spreader event.

The fines alone don't seem to be a deterrent and we need to do something and I think enforced quarantine is two fold.

I've always been quite relaxed about the odd breach on a low scale level (eg sitting in neighbours garden at SD for a coffee to MH) even though I haven't broken them myself but I'm finding it increasingly difficult to remain locked down whilst others go about their lives normally without caring about the consequences and probably adding to the numbers not dropping so quickly.

So is this a mad idea or is it something that could work and would be acceptable within society?

Choc that's wasn't an event though. I'm thinking the indoor parties.

And rather than prison I was think enforced quarantine. Which under some COVID laws I think they can do it within your own home?

It still goes to show that the police get it wrong, and without a justice system to back them up it is a slippery slope. How do they know an "indoor party" isn't just a large family bubble? And where does it end?

@itsgettingweird

Choc that's wasn't an event though. I'm thinking the indoor parties.

And rather than prison I was think enforced quarantine. Which under some COVID laws I think they can do it within your own home?

That's not what you said. Spending 10 days in your home I.e. self isolating, is totally different to spending 10 days in a hotel guarded by police unable to work or see your children. No point back tracking now your lunacy has been noticed.

I think that it should be that if you are found breaking the rules especially in massive gatherings you should lose any support from the government should you catch Covid. So no access to grants etc. They should also lose their “place” on the priority list and be the very last to be vaccinated regardless of age and medical issues as if you aren’t taking it seriously and mixing with large numbers of people you clearly don’t mind taking the risk so you can wait til last.

I also think that organisers should be given a straight criminal record. No messing around.

Choc I'm not back tracking. My idea was enforced quarantine in a hotel was easily monitored compared to home.

But there is clearly limitations and questionable ethics to the idea.

There will always be some who are for it and some totally against. Same with whole idea of any restrictions.

I've always been quite laid back as I said in OP. But I'm getting increasingly annoyed by idiots having possible super spreader events whilst I'm getting up, spending the day in a classroom and coming home. Plus 1 trip to a supermarket.

We all want our lives back. But we will get it sooner if everyone behaves.

The public would riot, outnumbering the police, and rightly so, if such an undemocratic violation of our rights came forth. And I would be with them, Covid or no Covid. Lockdown is bad enough, and only just acceptable

It's this country, it's government by consent. The government are only just commanding the public respect as it is. The game of lockdown with extremely high compliance will soon be up: the public knows it, the government knows it. They don't have the police numbers to enforce lockdown the way that the lockdown zealots of Mumsnet drool over, so instead they are relying on fearmongering, bluffing, gaslighting, spin, outright lying, and playing divide and conquer to manipulate the public into doing what they want. To me, that methodology is bad enough.

If the government did implement such a "prison" system, they would never remove it: they would always keep it on standby "just in case". Governments love power. They get high on it. Eventually it goes to their heads so much, they believe they are God. (Thatcher and Blair, anyone?) For this reason, I think that lockdown in the first place was bad enough: it set a monumental precedent, and from now on, we will never be safe from the threat of lockdown: it could be wheeled out whenever the prime minister is in a bad mood. Even if they scrap the Coronavirus Act, there is also the enormous precedent of the government being able to grant itself "emergency" powers with no notice.

Life, with its 100% mortality rate, is full of risk: it always has been, it always will be. This seems to have been forgotten in the panic (sorry, I forgot the letters "dem" in the middle). We cannot legislate all risk out of existence. Sooner or later, we will have to learn to live alongside the virus, and accept it as one of the many, many risks of life. We have developed a mania of "Covid is the only thing that matters". Saint Boris and his merry men are keeping very silent about the forthcoming huge recession, mass unemployment, decimation of mental health (especially of children), all of which are direct consequences of lockdown.