Lockdown rules.

Curryman

Curryman

Well-known member
I live in Shipley, which is, unfortunately, part of Bradford met, as are Ilkley, Bingley, Baildon etc.
Shipley has not had any COVID cases for around a week but that doesn't seem to matter as we are now in lockdown again since last Thursday, a time when I was on holiday in Whitby under one roof with my son, who lives alone, my daughter and her two kids who also have their own house.

The rules imposed on the whole of the metro area, regardless of how many COVID cases have been identified in particular areas within the metro area, mean that though we have spent the last week with our family, my wife and I are now unable to see or help our daughter and our grandkids due to them not being in the same bubble. It doesn't affect my son who is in our bubble. What a load of old tosh this rule is. I understand the need for isolation and so on, but our circumstances are, I'm sure, not unique.

Due to the fragile state of my daughter who is divorced and cares for the kids as well as working from home and our 11-year-old grandaughter, who has perked up during the holiday but has been badly affected mentally by the previous lockdown restrictions, We feel we have no alternative to assist her and therefore break the law. I may therefore soon have a criminal record.

Just a quick thank you to those who have caused the increase in diagnosed cases in inner Bradford which has affected us all, to the Council for being total prats and not closing the affected areas down whilst leaving the low-risk areas alone, and to the Government for tightening the restrictions without any thought to individuals.

I have it on good authority that the attached figures are correct.
Latest figures: Covid-19 patients in our Bradford hospitals
Confirmed COVID-19 patients currently inpatient Trust-wide - 7
Confirmed COVID-19 patients currently in ICU - 0
 
I feel for you, I wouldn't worry about breaking the law though. You sound like you have been following the rules since day one and you will continue to be careful. They can't possibly police this and unless you are having a street party they probably aren't gonna know! They haven't stopped groups of kids congregating since day one, nor have pubs been closed down when they are at capacity and the drinkers are spilling onto the streets. Boils my piss.

Hope your daughter and granddaughter are ok 👍
 
Yes, it's a blunt instrument the government are using. Have a friend in Holmfirth (part of Kirklees but with no coronavirus cases within 10 miles of his house apparently) in a similar situation. Normally, I would say "follow the rules" - but so many people aren't, for no good reason (and haven't been for a long time ☹ ) that in certain circumstances, like what you've described, I don't blame you for breaking them. There is a small risk of being caught which you have considered.
 
Curryman said:
I live in Shipley, which is, unfortunately, part of Bradford met, as are Ilkley, Bingley, Baildon etc.
Shipley has not had any COVID cases for around a week but that doesn't seem to matter as we are now in lockdown again since last Thursday, a time when I was on holiday in Whitby under one roof with my son, who lives alone, my daughter and her two kids who also have their own house.

The rules imposed on the whole of the metro area, regardless of how many COVID cases have been identified in particular areas within the metro area, mean that though we have spent the last week with our family, my wife and I are now unable to see or help our daughter and our grandkids due to them not being in the same bubble. It doesn't affect my son who is in our bubble. What a load of old tosh this rule is. I understand the need for isolation and so on, but our circumstances are, I'm sure, not unique.

Due to the fragile state of my daughter who is divorced and cares for the kids as well as working from home and our 11-year-old grandaughter, who has perked up during the holiday but has been badly affected mentally by the previous lockdown restrictions, We feel we have no alternative to assist her and therefore break the law. I may therefore soon have a criminal record.

Just a quick thank you to those who have caused the increase in diagnosed cases in inner Bradford which has affected us all, to the Council for being total prats and not closing the affected areas down whilst leaving the low-risk areas alone, and to the Government for tightening the restrictions without any thought to individuals.

I have it on good authority that the attached figures are correct.
Latest figures: Covid-19 patients in our Bradford hospitals
Confirmed COVID-19 patients currently inpatient Trust-wide - 7
Confirmed COVID-19 patients currently in ICU - 0
Click to expand...
I feel your pain good luck mate.
 
GJJW said:
Well people have their own agendas I guess.
Click to expand...
Outside of the areas that have been locked down I suspect most people don’t really know what the rules are currently. It’s just a case of being sensible and proportionate, masking up when required, no hugging, handshaking or exchanging bodily fluids and washing your hands more often than is probably good for you.

And if you need to do something for the good of your family, which may not be strictly in accordance with the rules, then do it.
 
I was in Windermere and Bowness yesterday. As I drove though the main town centre, it was absolutely heaving. People shoulder to shoulder, large queues for shops and cafes and not a mask in sight.
All ages and so many children too.

We’ve no chance of containing this virus, seems almost pointless to try the lockdown of work and school when come the weekends or holidays everyone abandons the rules?
 
GJJW said:
If Cummings can break guidelines/laws for the good of his family, so can you pal.
Click to expand...
It’s down to people taking this attitude which has contributed to the virus spreading. Two wrongs don’t make a right. If Cummings had jumped off a cliff would you be advising people to follow his example?
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
It’s down to people taking this attitude which has contributed to the virus spreading. Two wrongs don’t make a right. If Cummings had jumped off a cliff would you be advising people to follow his example?
Click to expand...
If I thought it was for the good of my family, yes. Game changed when Cummings broke his own rules.
 
GJJW said:
If I thought it was for the good of my family, yes. Game changed when Cummings broke his own rules.
Click to expand...
As if anyone under 40 gave a toss about Cummings most would have never heard of him they would still had raves,protests,riots,football celebrations and gone to the beach.
Just a kop out blaming a poxy advisor most people have followed the rules and some haven't like the non wearing of masks you see now who's responsible for that in this blame culture.
 
poolseasider said:
As if anyone under 40 gave a toss about Cummings most would have never heard of him they would still had raves,protests,riots,football celebrations and gone to the beach.
Just a kop out blaming a poxy advisor most people have followed the rules and some haven't like the non wearing of masks you see now who's responsible for that in this blame culture.
Click to expand...
I'm not blaming him for people not following the rules.
 
GJJW said:
I'm not blaming him for people not following the rules.
Click to expand...
You said the game changed I disagree it wouldn't have stopped anything that happened after not one.
But hey ho old news what you drinking today while watching the match seeing as your the President of-
B.A.L.D
Blackpoolsupporters-Against-Lager-Drinkers. 🤣
 
poolseasider said:
You said the game changed I disagree it wouldn't have stopped anything that happened after not one.
But hey ho old news what you drinking today while watching the match seeing as your the President of-
B.A.L.D
Blackpoolsupporters-Against-Lager-Drinkers. 🤣
Click to expand...
Yes, game changed for a lot of people I believe. People started using common sense rather than strict lockdown rules. Just IMO mind.
Anyway, daughters 16th birthday BBQ today so brew dog, Budds, Kronenberg, Bud and Hobgoblin have all been procured. Have a good un 👍
 
Unfortunately people were protesting and packing beaches in their thousands before the Cummings story broke, but the way the government handled the Cummings fiasco was very poor indeed to put it politely!
 
So a decent chunk of the population are not following the rules or guidelines.
Going to be impossible to contain.

Let it rip - stack up the bodies and we can all stand outside on a Thursday night applauding the mortuary workers.
 
Hospital admisions continue to fall everywhere. (even in the North West)


A few more minor cases does not warrant these additional measures..
 
jack_bfc said:
Hospital admisions continue to fall everywhere. (even in the North West)


A few more minor cases does not warrant these additional measures..
Click to expand...
You are quite correct jack lad, just carry on doing what you are doing and keep drinking In those Wetherspoons in north london, I’m proud to say I’ve been in a pub every day since they Re opened 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻🍺🍺
 
If all people had followed the rules we wouldnt be in this mess.
I think cummings is a prick and should have been fired but to say what he did was a game changer is wholly wrong and is simply used as an excuse for political point scoring.
Of course there was a media witch hunt against him. I doubt if someone on here had done the same anybody would bat an eyelid.

He still as said should have been fired but that is possibly more due to the fact i cant stand him rather than taking a long drive in his car.
He isnt even a politician (simply an advisor) I agree he is repugnant & high profile, cant say i was a fan of Alistair Campbell who was the last high profile one i remember?
I bet most folk under 30 still dont know who he is so to say it was made acceptable to flaunt rules because of him i find worrying.

Its a bit like saying when OO got caught for rape, It not convicted it gives the green light for everyone to become all rapey 🤣
 
Last edited:
I have no
deary said:
If all people had followed the rules we wouldnt be in this mess.
I think cummings is a prick and should have been fired but to say what he did was a game changer is wholly wrong and is simply used as an excuse for political point scoring.
Of course there was a media witch hunt against him. I doubt if someone on here had done the same anybody would bat an eyelid.

He still as said should have been fired but that is more due to the fact i cant stand him rather than taking a long drive in his car.
I bet most folk under 30 still dont know who he is so to say it was made acceptable to flaunt rules because he is a prick & did so is wholly wrong.

Its a bit like saying when OO got caught for rape, It not convicted it gives the green light for everyone to become all rapey 🤣
Click to expand...
I have no affiliation to a political party so your point re game changer for me doesn't hold. Anyway, watching the footy now so enjoy the game guys.
 
Last edited:
Prince Charles, when he had tested CV+ decided to take Camilla and fly/drive up to his Birkhall estate near Balmoral. Completely aided and abetted by the police. Few people made a cheep about that. More should have.

Cummings is another case. Widely viewed as the instigator of most government policies, he has to be seen as being as virtuous as Caesar’s wife. It was embarrassing to watch Johnson and Gove demeaning themselves in bending over backwards with ridiculous reasoning to defend him. They lost a lot of moral credibility. The “Barnard Castle Eye Test” is now a standing joke and still undermines every CV Rules statement that is made.

However, those crowding the English south coast beaches would still have done so, with or without the Cummings example.
 
GJJW said:
If I thought it was for the good of my family, yes. Game changed when Cummings broke his own rules.
Click to expand...
No the game didn't change, if it could be described as a game. No matter what Cummings or any other public figure did, the virus stayed exactly the same and it carried on killing people. And no matter what anyone did, it wasn't an excuse for anyone else to follow that stupidity and start being reckless themselves.
What Cummings did was plainly wrong. That doesn't mean others should follow that example.
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
No the game didn't change, if it could be described as a game. No matter what Cummings or any other public figure did, the virus stayed exactly the same and it carried on killing people. And no matter what anyone did, it wasn't an excuse for anyone else to follow that stupidity and start being reckless themselves.
What Cummings did was plainly wrong. That doesn't mean others should follow that example.
Click to expand...
Game changed for me and many others I know.
 
Lytham_fy8 said:
Not for me, I prefer not to take my morality cues from Tory advisors.
Click to expand...
Nothing to do with him being Tory. It went from follow lockdown rules to the letter, to doing what is best for your family. I started to do what was best for my family.
 
CalmDown said:
This can be moderated all you and your friends like.

This isn’t what most of you were saying about Cummings.

That’s hypocrisy. Fact.
Click to expand...
First off I’m well aware that, under various guises, you have a long running spat with a prominent poster on here, but please don’t drag me into your silly conspiracy theories.

Turning to the question of Kremlin Asset Dom and your allegation of hypocrisy, I’d make two observations.

First, when your Hero decided to flout the law the rules were quite clear. Stay at Home. He clearly didn’t. If you read my post I clearly stated that the rules now are far from clear, and in fact I doubt many people could tell you what they are currently.

Secondly, as has been said, when Double Standards Dom decided he was exceptional, it was a game changer. Just read back to the posts on here at the time, and you’ll see the level of anger. Until that point I believe most people were grumbling but complying. After then many people just thought “fuck it, and fuck him”. Brits are generally compliant, until they decide those in power are taking the piss a little too blatantly. And then they push back. Chickens, roosts and all that.
 
Lytham_fy8 said:
'It went'? Why? Because an individual of questionable character broke the rules?
Click to expand...
No, because they suddenly became guidelines and not rules, and the majority of the Government backed him. So, I made a judgement call based on the situation that from.not seeing my family and my 70 year old father who lives by himself, it would benefit me and my collective as a whole to then see them.
 
GJJW said:
No, because they suddenly became guidelines and not rules, and the majority of the Government backed him. So, I made a judgement call based on the situation that from.not seeing my family and my 70 year old father who lives by himself, it would benefit me and my collective as a whole to then see them.
Click to expand...
So obviously two wrongs do make a right
 
Mexboroseasider said:
I never had you down as a forelock tugger Rusty.

“Ooooh Arrrr. Yooo just do as yooo loike Mr Dominic sir, and don’t lissen to’em”.
Click to expand...
No you're right Mex, I'm nothing of the sort. All through this I've just tried to use a bit of common sense. Sometimes I may have been wrong, sometimes right. But I just don't see how blindly following an example of something which is so obviously wrong is beneficial to anybody.
And like I've said previously, if a public figure decided to jump off a cliff, would you see that as a good example to follow?
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
No you're right Mex, I'm nothing of the sort. All through this I've just tried to use a bit of common sense. Sometimes I may have been wrong, sometimes right. But I just don't see how blindly following an example of something which is so obviously wrong is beneficial to anybody.
And like I've said previously, if a public figure decided to jump off a cliff, would you see that as a good example to follow?
Click to expand...
The trouble is that what he did wasn’t obviously wrong to Boris though. All the crap about looking after his family, acting honestly and with integrity that Boris spouted at his press conferences that was the game changer. I like many others will now do what is right for my family as advised by Boris but that doesn’t include driving 30 miles to test my eyesight as DC or MG suggested.
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
No you're right Mex, I'm nothing of the sort. All through this I've just tried to use a bit of common sense. Sometimes I may have been wrong, sometimes right. But I just don't see how blindly following an example of something which is so obviously wrong is beneficial to anybody.
And like I've said previously, if a public figure decided to jump off a cliff, would you see that as a good example to follow?
Click to expand...
No I wouldn’t jump off a cliff and posted much the same at the time.

However there’s no doubt that Cummings muddied the waters and that people concluded the rules were ambiguous and therefore open to interpretation. In other words, when called upon to make a decision that involved a sacrifice (so not visiting elderly relatives who were desperately lonely as an example) people would “take a view”. Being generally sensible I imagine most would still take precautions and socially distance, but the point is they felt there was now some flexibility.
 
That's absolutely fine Mex and seasider3. You have your views and I have mine. What Cummings did was obviously wrong. So I will use my own common sense and not follow that example, even if the Prime Minister himself appears to condone it.
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
That's absolutely fine Mex and seasider3. You have your views and I have mine. What Cummings did was obviously wrong. So I will use my own common sense and not follow that example, even if the Prime Minister himself appears to condone it.
Click to expand...
Which is pretty much what the rest of us are saying. So welcome to the society of hypocrites 👍
 
Mexboroseasider said:
First, when your Hero decided to flout the law the rules were quite clear. Stay at Home.
Click to expand...

If the rules are so clear why don't you understand them?

The rules are contained in The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020, the key regulation being "no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse"; the regulations go on to list what includes a reasonable excuse but the list is not exhaustive so anything that is "reasonable" is permitted.

"Stay at home" was advice, it does not have the force of law, it is a simplified version of the more complicated regulations for presentation at the daily press conference because, quite frankly, too many people are too stupid to understand anything more complicated so the message needed to be pitched at a level that might reach them.

So let's be clear, "his hero" did not flout the law, his actions were within the spirit and letter of the law, they may have conflicted with the more general message being presented to the public but that's more a matter of presentation rather than right or wrong.

Personally I don't think most journalists are too stupid to understand the situation, but after 2 months of lockdown the media were desparate to write about something different, many wanted Mr Cummings head anyway, so what was in reality a non-story became headline news for the next 10 days.
 
Lost Seasider said:
If the rules are so clear why don't you understand them?

The rules are contained in The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020, the key regulation being "no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse"; the regulations go on to list what includes a reasonable excuse but the list is not exhaustive so anything that is "reasonable" is permitted.

"Stay at home" was advice, it does not have the force of law, it is a simplified version of the more complicated regulations for presentation at the daily press conference because, quite frankly, too many people are too stupid to understand anything more complicated so the message needed to be pitched at a level that might reach them.

So let's be clear, "his hero" did not flout the law, his actions were within the spirit and letter of the law, they may have conflicted with the more general message being presented to the public but that's more a matter of presentation rather than right or wrong.

Personally I don't think most journalists are too stupid to understand the situation, but after 2 months of lockdown the media were desparate to write about something different, many wanted Mr Cummings head anyway, so what was in reality a non-story became headline news for the next 10 days.
Click to expand...
As I said the rules were clear when Double Standards Dom flouted them and broke the law.

I said the rules are less clear now.

For instance the link you posted is to the regulations as originally drafted. If you look at the updated regulations (also available through your link) then you’ll see they have changed.

But that you for making my point for me and so eloquently. Even you, it appears, don’t know what the current rules say.
 
I think what cummings did was wrong.

I understand probably better than most how tough 'lockdown' restrictions were and the impact on peoples physical & psychological well being.

However a part of me feels that some people were simply looking for a reason to flaunt the rules.

Some people no doubt felt the 'green light' was given by Cummings or perhaps the BLM protests?
 
Mexboroseasider said:
For instance the link you posted is to the regulations as originally drafted. If you look at the updated regulations (also available through your link) then you’ll see they have changed.

But that you for making my point for me and so eloquently. Even you, it appears, don’t know what the current rules say.
Click to expand...

The link is to the regulations that were in force at the time, they were not changed until 22 April, for the purposes of this discussion any subsequent amendments are irrelevant.


Mexboroseasider said:
As I said the rules were clear when Double Standards Dom flouted them and broke the law.

I said the rules are less clear now.
Click to expand...

Except, as previously established DC neither flouted the rules nor broke the law.

And to repeat, subsequent amendements are irrelevant to this discussion.
 
Last edited:
Lost Seasider said:
The link is to the regulations that were in force at the time, they were not changed until 22 April, for the purposes of this discussion any subsequent ammendments are irrelevant.




Except, as previously established DC neither flouted the rules nor broke the law.

And to repeat, subsequent ammendements are irrelevant to this discussion.
Click to expand...
Ah so you admit the regulations have changed then, and are no longer clear. But they were clear when Double Standards Dom broke them. Measured Progress I suppose.

Moving forward, it hasn’t been established that the Kremlin’s Favourite Asset “neither flouted the rules nor broke the law”. That’s what he, Boris and Gove claimed of course, but the decision whether his actions were “reasonable” or unlawful rests with the courts, not the Government. Of course, for some reason or other, it didn’t get to court. So whether or not he was being “reasonable” can only be determined in the court of public opinion. And there he’s absolutely nailed. As is clear from the posts on this thread alone.

Apt username in the circumstances - Lost.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
Ah so you admit the regulations have changed then, and are no longer clear.
Click to expand...

Looks pretty clear to me: "Regulations revoked"

The regulations are now replaced by The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) Regulations 2020, however there are no restrictions on movement comparable to section 6 in the original regulations.


Mexboroseasider said:
Moving forward, it hasn’t been established that the Kremlin’s Favourite Asset “neither flouted the rules nor broke the law”. That’s what he, Boris and Gove claimed of course, but the decision whether his actions were “reasonable” or unlawful rests with the courts, not the Government.
Click to expand...

Well, the decision to prosecute rests with the police and the CPS, not the government, and Durham Constabulary concluded that the original journey was within the law and only expressed uncertainty over the 12 April trip.

Of course it's possible that the courts would've taken a different view, but it seems unlikely (based on the standard of beyond reasonable doubt).


Mexboroseasider said:
Of course, for some reason or other, it didn’t get to court.
Click to expand...

Yes, strangely enough, when no offence is committed it doesn't get to court.


Mexboroseasider said:
So whether or not he was being “reasonable” can only be determined in the court of public opinion. And there he’s absolutely nailed. As is clear from the posts on this thread alone.
Click to expand...

Yes, in the court of your ignorance he is guilty, but lets stop pretending that you're being objective and instead are just venting your prejudice.


Mexboroseasider said:
Apt username in the circumstances - Lost.
Click to expand...

If I'm lost god help you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top