Reduction in social gatherings.

[RomeoCharlie71]

Sturgeon has just announced that it will be changing in Scotland to 6 people from 2 households, indoors and outdoors. Not sure when effective from.

 

[joncombe]

Yes but she also said she cannot rule out changing it. Which I think is Sturegeon speak for "I'm going to change it". The BBC article also has the comment



See here

Which suggests to me she's going to change it, but still make sure it differs from England.

Looks like I was right on both counts. She has changed it to be 6 people but of course, she has added a limit of from a maximum of 2 different households presumably to ensure the rules still differ in Scotland from England.

 

[Crossover]

My job involves seeing a lot of people with fairly advanced cancers. The overriding message I'm getting from them is that they are sick of restrictions and don't want to spend their final days locked away or being told what to do. I agree with them. To put it bluntly, a quick Covid death for them having enjoyed themselves beforehand is far preferable to a hermit lifestyle followed by the slow and lingering death from their disease.

What many have said is that they resent being labelled as "vulnerable" and know about risk and consequences.

I have heard similar from contacts with more vulnerable (elderly, mainly) family members who just want to enjoy their time that is left, not distanced from their family

 

[Richard Scott]

So you don’t believe in society? Your individual decisions will affect many other people - you even say that your family is widely spread geographically so you could send Covid infections all over the country.

Stop being so melodramatic. The virus (which is SARS-CoV-2 not Covid) is not the only thing going on. No-one is condoning killing anyone but at the end of the day we do have to get on with life and allow people to make decisions. That's what society does, there are going to be negative outcomes from this but that is what we accept as being able to live in such a society. There will be numerous mental health issues if this carries on much longer and some won't cope seeing suicide as a way out. That's what'll happen in the society you wish to see. Hopefully you're prepared to accept that?

 

[Ianno87]

I have heard similar from contacts with more vulnerable (elderly, mainly) family members who just want to enjoy their time that is left, not distanced from their family

My Mum's in her mid-late 60s. Not 'vulnerable', but it's increasingly on my mind how much time with her grandkids she's missing out on whilst having very good health.

 

[trebor79]

My Mum's in her mid-late 60s. Not 'vulnerable', but it's increasingly on my mind how much time with her grandkids she's missing out on whilst having very good health.

Mine is mid 70s, had lymphoma twice. There's no way she isn't seeing her grandkids. She views every day as a bonus, as does my father who has health issues of his own.
For them the whole point of living is to do things and spend time with people who are important to them. They have no desire to be locked up at home for their own good. They take sensible precautions like avoiding crowded places for now, that's as far as it goes.

 

[Ianigsy]

My uncle is 85 or thereabouts and diabetic. He lives in North Yorkshire with my cousin and her partner, and has two grandchildren, both of whom have partners of their own. One of the grandchildren lives in Surrey.

I'm fairly sure that if you asked him, he'd rather see his grandchildren this Christmas and risk contracting the virus than not see them, be safe from the virus and potentially die of something else before he can see them again.

 

[DorkingMain]

This restriction is incredibly disappointing. 30 people is too large of a gathering, for sure.

But making up silly unenforceable rules to scare people into not visiting their grandparents?

 

[adc82140]

This restriction is incredibly disappointing. 30 people is too large of a gathering, for sure.

But making up silly unenforceable rules to scare people into not visiting their grandparents?

The average family in the UK is 2.4 children. So surely a maximum of 10 would have been suitable. I note that Sturgeon has said that children don't count towards a total. For once she's said something sensible.

 

[DorkingMain]

Unfortunately all this rule serves to do is give the police a reason to go barging into people's gardens while they quietly have a BBQ under the premise of "breaking up a mass gathering".

I live on my own but now if I visit certain residences belonging to family and friends I'm now breaking the law by default.

 

[adc82140]

Unfortunately all this rule serves to do is give the police a reason to go barging into people's gardens while they quietly have a BBQ under the premise of "breaking up a mass gathering".

I live on my own but now if I visit certain residences belonging to family and friends I'm now breaking the law by default.

If they barge in to a garden they are breaking the law. They can knock on your front door and question you about your intentions. Any more than that and they require a warrant. Exceptions apply if they believe a life is in danger, or a cry for help is heard.

 

[Huntergreed]

If they barge in to a garden they are breaking the law. They can knock on your front door and question you about your intentions. Any more than that and they require a warrant. Exceptions apply if they believe a life is in danger, or a cry for help is heard.

They could (possibly) argue lives were in danger due to the spread of the virus, I would assume? (Don’t get me wrong, I think the whole thing is awful, bonkers and entirely unenforceable)

 

[adc82140]

They could (possibly) argue lives were in danger due to the spread of the virus, I would assume? (Don’t get me wrong, I think the whole thing is awful, bonkers and entirely unenforceable)

They'd have to prove that a life was in imminent danger, and even in the current climate they'd struggle to do that. I suppose they could shout over the fence though.

 

[Mag_seven]

Would posters who wish to discuss face coverings please use the face coverings thread. I have just moved some posts to that thread:

UK face coverings discussion

They're just not even close to the big deal some people seem to be making out. Cite the heaving town centres of face-coveres folk. As has been pointed out before, jsut because YOU don't find them a big deal doesn't mean that others don't - many dislike them strongly, and some find them...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Bletchleyite]

The average family in the UK is 2.4 children. So surely a maximum of 10 would have been suitable. I note that Sturgeon has said that children don't count towards a total. For once she's said something sensible.

Yes, I'd have gone with 8 or 10.

 

[Huntergreed]

Yes, I'd have gone with 8 or 10.

I would've went with Scotland's 8 from 3 households as the uniform rule across the nation, it seems wide enough to be practical and small enough to reduce most transmission and make any large parties/gatherings prohibited.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would've went with Scotland's 8 from 3 households as the uniform rule across the nation, it seems wide enough to be practical and small enough to reduce most transmission and make any large parties/gatherings prohibited.

True, it would also be conveniently the precise size and makeup of my extended family!

However, I think England wanted to get away from the "N households" thing because it's too easy to say "we iz livin togevva innit blud" and there's no real way to prove otherwise.

 

[NorthOxonian]

However, I think England wanted to get away from the "N households" thing because it's too easy to say "we iz livin togevva innit blud" and there's no real way to prove otherwise.

I believe that if a group are all from the same household, they are still allowed to socialise regardless of size. So in theory they could still say that.

For example, at my university, we're being placed into "households" of eight based on where we live within the college. If I went to the pub to socialise with the rest of my household, this would technically be within the rules (in practise most venues probably wouldn't let us all in and we wouldn't be able to prove we were in a household).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I believe that if a group are all from the same household, they are still allowed to socialise regardless of size. So in theory they could still say that.

For example, at my university, we're being placed into "households" of eight based on where we live within the college. If I went to the pub to socialise with the rest of my household, this would technically be within the rules (in practise most venues probably wouldn't let us all in and we wouldn't be able to prove we were in a household).

True. But universities are just about the only place where you actually get "households" of up to about 10 (I don't think I've come across more than that, usually that's the biggest size of "flat" you seem to get, which as they share kitchens really do need to be treated as households, there's really no other legal or practical way of doing it other than sealing the communal space off in catered halls). And so "can I see your uni ID card, then" would probably be enough to throw them off.

I doubt anyone other than Derbyshire Constabulary, who I guess might have the drone out to go and hunt for oversized hiking groups on Stanage if they're a bit bored, will bother about a group of say 7. However, these groups are likely to be much bigger.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

I suppose the Scottish version allows three sets of parents to be together, with all their children. Or a more likely family grouping of grandparents (2), grown up children (2) and their partners (2), plus all the kids. Wouldn't meet all requirements obviously but excluding the children from the total makes it far more realistic for family gatherings whilst preventing large parties of adults.

EDIT just realised that it limits it to two households, so my family gathering theory collapses. Time to hide one set in the wardrobe when there is a knock at the door on Christmas afternoon!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Sep 2020 ==

True. But universities are just about the only place where you actually get "households" of up to about 10 (I don't think I've come across more than that, usually that's the biggest size of "flat" you seem to get, which as they share kitchens really do need to be treated as households, there's really no other legal or practical way of doing it other than sealing the communal space off in catered halls). And so "can I see your uni ID card, then" would probably be enough to throw them off.

I doubt anyone other than Derbyshire Constabulary, who I guess might have the drone out to go and hunt for oversized hiking groups on Stanage if they're a bit bored, will bother about a group of say 7. However, these groups are likely to be much bigger.

A new broom is in place at Derbyshire. She was in charge of operations at Whaley Bridge when the dam was at risk

 

[Huntergreed]

I suppose the Scottish version allows three sets of parents to be together, with all their children. Or a more likely family grouping of grandparents (2), grown up children (2) and their partners (2), plus all the kids. Wouldn't meet all requirements obviously but excluding the children from the total makes it far more realistic for family gatherings whilst preventing large parties of adults.

EDIT just realised that it limits it to two households, so my family gathering theory collapses. Time to hide one set in the wardrobe when there is a knock at the door on Christmas afternoon!

I’m sure the government already realise that no matter what they say, people will do what they please at Christmas and gather in as big a group as they like.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I’m sure the government already realise that no matter what they say, people will do what they please at Christmas and gather in as big a group as they like.

I think the objective is likely to be to whack cases down before then so they can release for a week either side of Christmas even if it means they have to reimpose afterwards.

Cancelling family Christmasses is a guaranteed vote loser, whatever COVID happens to be doing.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

I think the objective is likely to be to whack cases down before then so they can release for a week either side of Christmas even if it means they have to reimpose afterwards.

Cancelling family Christmasses is a guaranteed vote loser, whatever COVID happens to be doing.

Just like they released everyone for their summer holiday abroad, because to deny millions their trip to the sun would have been a serious vote loser, if not leading to disorder.

There was a suggestion that the story was a 'dead cat' one to divert attention from the Brexit problem. Given today's press, I imagine that 'Government breaks law' might actually have been a better headline for them!

I did like the Daily Star front cover (seen on the BBC News papers review, not a purchased copy).

 

[bramling]

I think the objective is likely to be to whack cases down before then so they can release for a week either side of Christmas even if it means they have to reimpose afterwards.

Cancelling family Christmasses is a guaranteed vote loser, whatever COVID happens to be doing.

Must admit I’m sick of hearing about Christmas. It’s not worth having four months worth of disruption for the sake of two weeks at Christmas.

 

[Cowley]

Must admit I’m sick of hearing about Christmas. It’s not worth having four months worth of disruption for the sake of two weeks at Christmas.

That sounds like every Christmas ever!

 

[bramling]

That sounds like every Christmas ever!

Yes and I don’t like that either!

As if this year hasn’t been bad enough already, all we now need is for the big Christmas frenzy to start *even earlier* than it normally does.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I imagine that 'Government breaks law' might actually have been a better headline

Joking aside, does nobody realise that these clowns are asking us to obey a new law as of next Monday, whilst they are simultaneously breaking international law, according to the EU???
This is far more scandalous than one idiot (Cummings) sticking two fingers up to the rest of us who did follow the rules

 

[Domh245]

Joking aside, does nobody realise that these clowns are asking us to obey a new law as of next Monday, whilst they are simultaneously breaking international law, according to the EU???

It'll be fine, so long as we only break the law in a specific and limited way

 

[Skimpot flyer]

Coronavirus has announced that daily briefings will commence tomorrow, to update the UK population on how to protect themselves from government

 

[Bantamzen]

Coronavirus has announced that daily briefings will commence tomorrow, to update the UK population on how to protect themselves from government

We really, really need that like button....