Please explain.CycleCoach wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 11:25 pm 1936 Germany! I think you need to read some history.
Hilarious.
Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
- Lindsayt
- Posts: 4232
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 9:06 pm
- Has thanked: 1111 times
- Been thanked: 701 times
Re: Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
-
- Posts: 268
- Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2017 12:18 pm
- Has thanked: 77 times
- Been thanked: 114 times
Re: Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
I eat tons of butter, full fat milk, cream in my coffee every day, cheeses, steak as often as affordable. Meats with plenty of fat. 2 eggs daily. Some fruits and vegs. 3000 iu of Vit D. I never wore a seat belt till I had a new car with a bleedin' Beeper! I wont wear a muzzle in a shop but if asked politely I oblige. I may catch Sars cov2 but I wont get Coronavirus and I wont give Coronavirus to you.
Kevin.
No Valves - Technics SL1210/Jelco/DL103 (vdh) - Phono2 - P50SA - A70's - Cubettes
Valves - Cambridge CD - World Designs Pre3 - WAD 6550 - Troels Gravesen CA18rnx speakers.
No Valves - Technics SL1210/Jelco/DL103 (vdh) - Phono2 - P50SA - A70's - Cubettes
Valves - Cambridge CD - World Designs Pre3 - WAD 6550 - Troels Gravesen CA18rnx speakers.
- CycleCoach
- Posts: 1090
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 5:20 pm
- Location: Kings Cliffe
- Has thanked: 1740 times
- Been thanked: 687 times
Re: Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
The fact that you use the buzzword "muzzle" when describing a surgical mask tells me all I need to know about you. Wow.ArloFlynn wrote: ↑Wed Apr 14, 2021 1:29 am I eat tons of butter, full fat milk, cream in my coffee every day, cheeses, steak as often as affordable. Meats with plenty of fat. 2 eggs daily. Some fruits and vegs. 3000 iu of Vit D. I never wore a seat belt till I had a new car with a bleedin' Beeper! I wont wear a muzzle in a shop but if asked politely I oblige. I may catch Sars cov2 but I wont get Coronavirus and I wont give Coronavirus to you.
I think I might be in the HiFi trade.
I am not currently seeking treatment for this.
Current System: Linn LP12 Lingo Ekos Troika, NVA PHONO2 with BBPSU, NVA AP20 (White), Quad ESL 57s &/or NVA Cube3s (White)
I am not currently seeking treatment for this.
Current System: Linn LP12 Lingo Ekos Troika, NVA PHONO2 with BBPSU, NVA AP20 (White), Quad ESL 57s &/or NVA Cube3s (White)
- CycleCoach
- Posts: 1090
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 5:20 pm
- Location: Kings Cliffe
- Has thanked: 1740 times
- Been thanked: 687 times
Re: Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
Maybe take the time to know the basic facts behind the ridiculous claims you're making.Lindsayt wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 11:35 pmPlease explain.CycleCoach wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 11:25 pm 1936 Germany! I think you need to read some history.
Hilarious.
Do you know any Jews? Ask them about their shared history of Nazi Germany and then ask them how insulting they feel your puerile comparison of their experiences with *being asked to stay at home and wear a mask* is.
Frankly you're making a fool of yourself.
I think I might be in the HiFi trade.
I am not currently seeking treatment for this.
Current System: Linn LP12 Lingo Ekos Troika, NVA PHONO2 with BBPSU, NVA AP20 (White), Quad ESL 57s &/or NVA Cube3s (White)
I am not currently seeking treatment for this.
Current System: Linn LP12 Lingo Ekos Troika, NVA PHONO2 with BBPSU, NVA AP20 (White), Quad ESL 57s &/or NVA Cube3s (White)
- savvypaul
- Posts: 8688
- Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 7:14 pm
- Location: Durham
- Has thanked: 1664 times
- Been thanked: 3006 times
- Contact:
Re: Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
Yes, but he only seized overall (and ultimate) power through systematic intimidation, violence and murder of his opponents. It is, though, a useful reminder to be careful about who you vote for.
Even if we assume that you are correct, and the Covid Warden has been overzealous in issuing a fine without a warning, it doesn't come close to Nazi Germany. I understand that you are trying to demonstrate a principal, but I think it is a comparison that will seem absurd to the vast majority of people (and offensive to a fair percentage of that majority).
My attitude to individual liberty is relatively straightforward; my rights stop when your rights begin. In this case, my right to refuse to wear a mask in a shop stops when it threatens your right to life.
I'm sure there will be a few overzealous covid wardens, and police, and members of the public. The fact that such occurrences are worthy of being national news should be a good indicator that they are a relatively rare exception rather than the norm.
- These users thanked the author savvypaul for the post:
- CycleCoach (Wed Apr 14, 2021 11:33 am)
- savvypaul
- Posts: 8688
- Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 7:14 pm
- Location: Durham
- Has thanked: 1664 times
- Been thanked: 3006 times
- Contact:
Re: Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
- These users thanked the author savvypaul for the post:
- CycleCoach (Wed Apr 14, 2021 11:34 am)
- savvypaul
- Posts: 8688
- Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 7:14 pm
- Location: Durham
- Has thanked: 1664 times
- Been thanked: 3006 times
- Contact:
Re: Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
Not wearing a seat belt makes it significantly more likely that you will suffer severe injury (or death) in the event of a crash. That impacts on emergency services. hospital staff, your family and friends and anyone who pays their taxes. No man is an island, I'm afraid.Lindsayt wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 11:34 pmThe seat belt law is totalitarian.CycleCoach wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 11:15 pm
I refer you back to my comment re seatbelts. They (our democratically elected government, (and, no, I didn't vote for them.)) made it a law: it doesn't matter if you agree with it or not, if you fail to comply you'll be fined: end of.
The reason it has to be compulsory is because some idiot will always think he's above the rules and thereby endanger others.
Like I also said, being asked to mask-up is to protect others. (This is a proven scientific fact not "rhetoric.") If you want to portray it as in some way suppressing your human rights then you're wrong (but hey: bring up the Bolsheviks and Nazis because that always wins the argument.)
There's only one set of "propaganda" on show here, and that's the refusenik bullshit that you're spouting.
In areas regarding public health I actually wish the authorities were even stricter because the libertarians amongst us would kill us all if thy had the chance.
Not wearing a seatbelt makes you no more of a danger to others than if you are wearing a seatbelt.
It only makes you more of a danger to yourself.
Does this mean that we should also ban people from eating butter?
Or more than 1 egg a day?
Or 2 cream cakes?
Or from crossing the road when the red man is lit?
Or from using a ladder?
Or going ski-ing?
- These users thanked the author savvypaul for the post:
- CycleCoach (Wed Apr 14, 2021 1:54 pm)
- Lindsayt
- Posts: 4232
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 9:06 pm
- Has thanked: 1111 times
- Been thanked: 701 times
Re: Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
Fail on 2 counts:
1 The title of the legislation says "Wearings of face coverings on public transport." The high street pharmacy where the incident occured was not public transport. It'd be a quite remarkable Tardis like contraption if it was.
2. In any event, the wording of the legislation includes the following:
"(2) Where a relevant person considers that a person is not wearing a face covering, in contravention of the requirement in regulation 3, the relevant person may—
(a)direct that person to wear such a covering;
(b)direct that person to disembark from the relevant vehicle.
(3) Where a person does not comply with a direction given to them by a constable under paragraph (2)(b), the constable may remove them from the relevant vehicle.
(4) A constable exercising the power in paragraph (3) may use reasonable force, if necessary, in the exercise of the power. "
The provisions of this law are to direct people to wear a covering or direct them to disembark from the vehicle. It's only when both of those are refused that the escalation towards a Fixed Penalty Notice should be taken.
And that's not even getting on to grounds for exemptions as described by this legislation, which may well apply to this delivery driver in this scenario.
So please, try again: "what is the actual legislation that says that anyone forgetting to wear their mask in a shop should be made to pay a fine?"
- Lindsayt
- Posts: 4232
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 9:06 pm
- Has thanked: 1111 times
- Been thanked: 701 times
Re: Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
Eating butter, eggs, etc make it significantly more likely that you will suffer severe internal injury or death from heart disease, cancer, stroke.savvypaul wrote: ↑Wed Apr 14, 2021 12:00 pm
Not wearing a seat belt makes it significantly more likely that you will suffer severe injury (or death) in the event of a crash. That impacts on emergency services. hospital staff, your family and friends and anyone who pays their taxes. No man is an island, I'm afraid.
That impacts on emergency services, hospital staff, your family, friends and anyone that pays their taxes.
Using a ladder makes it significantly more likely that you will suffer sever injury or death. As does going ski-ing. etc etc etc.
- savvypaul
- Posts: 8688
- Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 7:14 pm
- Location: Durham
- Has thanked: 1664 times
- Been thanked: 3006 times
- Contact:
Re: Coronavirus restrictions: are they legal
Only a temporary fail. Posted wrong link.Lindsayt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 14, 2021 12:09 pmFail on 2 counts:
1 The title of the legislation says "Wearings of face coverings on public transport." The high street pharmacy where the incident occured was not public transport. It'd be a quite remarkable Tardis like contraption if it was.
2. In any event, the wording of the legislation includes the following:
"(2) Where a relevant person considers that a person is not wearing a face covering, in contravention of the requirement in regulation 3, the relevant person may—
(a)direct that person to wear such a covering;
(b)direct that person to disembark from the relevant vehicle.
(3) Where a person does not comply with a direction given to them by a constable under paragraph (2)(b), the constable may remove them from the relevant vehicle.
(4) A constable exercising the power in paragraph (3) may use reasonable force, if necessary, in the exercise of the power. "
The provisions of this law are to direct people to wear a covering or direct them to disembark from the vehicle. It's only when both of those are refused that the escalation towards a Fixed Penalty Notice should be taken.
And that's not even getting on to grounds for exemptions as described by this legislation, which may well apply to this delivery driver in this scenario.
So please, try again: "what is the actual legislation that says that anyone forgetting to wear their mask in a shop should be made to pay a fine?"
Here's the correct one: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/202 ... tents/made
I got that by googling 'face masks law shops'.