-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
UK face coverings discussion
- Thread starter Mag_seven
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
VauxhallandI
Established Member
Whilst I agree wholeheartedly about the hypocrisy of the neck wearing righteous wearers I don’t agree that the bell-ends are all on that side. There will be plenty of belligerent hard men who aren’t wearing a mask for all the wrong reasons than some of the right reasons displayed on here
Pete_uk
On Moderation
Hope the police get sued for that. Total a**********
Been talking to a teacher friend in Scotland (who, like myself, is anti-mask) and he has I given me some insight on what it’s like in his school. The Scottish government mandated masks in corridors and communal areas of all secondary schools (which I’m extremely angry about and am tempted to contact an MSP concerning this, as I don’t believe it’s at all justified). He tells me that in his school it’s extremely difficult to enforce, so what they do is that they’ll tell off a group for not complying collectively (ie 5-6 people who aren’t bothering), but when it comes to individuals, discretion is used often (the only time teachers are asked to speak to (not tell off) a student is if they’ve been seen wearing a mask before and at the time concerned they are not). For bad repeat-offenders, I am told they can receive detentions and/or be given punishment exercises (essentially where you have to take a piece of paper home and write an apology/lines on it), but that’s as far as it will go and no child will ever receive an exclusion or suspension for refusing to wear a mask.
Ken_Ilworth
Member
- Joined
- 10 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 95
https://twitter.com/BTPMersey/status/1301769503861362688?s=09
Regarding the video incident, tweet from BTP at approx. 0730. A man has been charged with a public order offence and assaulting an emergency worker.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I was quite shocked when it became visible that that involved a BTP officer - I had, up to that point, thought it was one of Merseyrail's hired thugs.
As far as the law goes "I have a medical exemption" is the end of the conversation, whether the BTP happen to like it or not, or whether it is true or not. There does not appear to be any mechanism for validation.
No surprise to me, as my partner's had persistent bullying from BTP - fortunately in her case they've always backed off after their lies have failed to get a reaction.
Scrotnig
Member
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 593
The Tweet states this all started with reports of a man spitting at passengers. Perhaps, as is commonly the case, there is rather more to this than meets the eye.
If anyone's been spitting at people, especially in the current climate, then they deserve all they get.
Agreed! I've been spat at and it is disgusting. What does intrigue me with this case is that not once on the footage does the officer or anyone else mention the word spitting to the passenger.
bramling
Veteran Member
Shouldn’t be too much of an issue getting to the bottom of that, as the train should have CCTV.
Maybe but if that was the case, why bring face coverings into it? And if they must discuss face coverings, that conversation should end when the exemption is mentioned.
Quite; none of us can be sure what happened before they started filming but it makes no sense if he was spitting at people but yet was nicked for not wearing a face covering.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
It's been clarified (25 minutes ago) to say he was deliberately coughing at other passengers.
My guess would be that the passenger was spitting at others before the officer arrived. As the officer had no direct evidence that this had happened (perhaps received through a 61016 text), the officer decided to challenge him on the mask as he could see that he was not wearing one. The passenger started to become aggressive and then the physical assault happened as filmed. The police officer absolutely should not be acting in this way towards someone who, may well be, genuinely exempt but at the same time selective evidence from both pro and anti-mask sides isn’t helpful or favourable right now.
lyndhurst25
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 1,591
Using pepper spray on someone who has just told you that they have a medical condition that prevents them from wearing a face mask doesn't seem like the brightest of moves by the BTP officer.
Scrotnig
Member
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 593
Well that's just as bad.
It's outrageous behaviour even without the current virus - plenty of other nasty viruses already around of course - but to be doing it in this current climate is appalling.
If it's true, then the police officer was justified in trying to get him off the train.
I'm afraid I have no sympathy for people deliberately coughing at people.
If he was deliberately coughing at people, why was no mention made of this at any point in the 4 plus minutes of video?
The officer led the incident down a rabbit hole by talking about wearing a mask, and nothing else.
Scrotnig
Member
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 593
*If* the coughing/spitting part is true, then my sympathy/empathy over any mask exemptions ends immediately and the person becomes fair game for whatever legal recourse is available. Even without Covid-19 around, deliberately coughing and spitting at people is absolutely unacceptable and needs to be firmly stamped on.
That said, it probably wasn't a good idea the officer putting his own safety at risk by getting within literal spitting distance of the person concerned. As the person was sat down by this point, he should have left him be until the next station then arranged assistance to remove him.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I don't know. We don't have all the facts. Maybe as someone else has suggested, the officer only had reports and not actual evidence at that point.
I should add, I'm very anti-mask but I am even more anti deliberate coughing over people and spitting.
Agreed, but what happened in the video is completely at odds with how someone who had been deliberately coughing at people should be handled.
All of this just proves you should never believe anything you see on social media. Is the video showing a gross over reaching of authority by the police officer, or has it been selectively edited with some important information missing? Who knows?
It's quite clear that it hasn't been edited, but what is missing is what happened before the video started rolling, and there is quite a bit missing in the middle too.
*If* however, it was about coughing, then why was there such a long and protracted conversation about wearing a mask?
Exactly. It just doesn't make sense. If the claim is true, the officer could have handled it much, much better.
It looks like the person is being pulled up for wearing a mask; if that wasn't the case it would have been easy for the officer to avoid this perception.
Skimpot flyer
Established Member
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2012
- Messages
- 1,938
What is far more disturbing are the comments from uneducated people, saying stuff like
‘he should carry an exemption certificate’
‘it’s the law to wear one on trains. End of!’
I read for about a minute only because I didn’t believe the level of stupidity out there was really as high as other posters claim. Terrifyingly, it is
I wonder whether they are more likely to back down if they are talking to a woman?
nedchester
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 May 2008
- Messages
- 2,093
Like in many incidents the police will use the 'attitude' test. The bloke had an appalling attitude and although I am no fan of masks what the police did here was 100% correct.
Scrotnig
Member
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 593
Yep and what's even worse is, it's those types who the government seems to be listening too. It causes me genuine despair.
bramling
Veteran Member
What is far more disturbing are the comments from uneducated people, saying stuff like
‘he should carry an exemption certificate’
‘it’s the law to wear one on trains. End of!’
I read for about a minute only because I didn’t believe the level of stupidity out there was really as high as other posters claim. Terrifyingly, it is
Just seen on Bridgnorth Cliff Railway, a notice to the effect of
“We are a private business and will not admit anyone without a mask, except children aged under 8”.
Needless to say they didn’t get our business, and one to remember for the future.
Surely there’s scope for that to be challenged under disability legislation? One would have thought it shouldn’t be that difficult for them to arrange for anyone exempt to simply ride in an empty car?
Quite conspicuous in Bridgnorth that a very conspicuous number of people are wearing masks in the open air, right down to walking in parks.
I'm not sure, but might be the case. Staying incredibly calm & polite and not swearing helps I think. That said, what as the guy in the above video meant to do when the police officer got physical?
He wasn't doing anything wrong and was being bullied by the officer.
No it was not 100% correct. The officer will have questions to answer here.
What makes me even more dubious about the BTP handling here is even this morning, they stated that a passenger was spitting and then changed their story to spitting. It all stinks of incompetence to me.
Skimpot flyer
Established Member
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2012
- Messages
- 1,938
I guess it depends, amongst other things, on how many cars they have and whether they are going around empty.
If someone with a bona fide disability could show that the policy resulted in them being treated unfavourably, then it could be a discrimination case; however, the railway would have a defence if it shows that the treatment is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim – section 15 (1) Equality Act 2010.
It is trivially true that their policy is a means of achieving an aim (the aim being to reduce the spread of Covid19) but whether it the proportionate and legitimate tests are met would ultimately be a question for a court.
- Status