Page 3 of 13
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:14 pm
by Grumble
raven wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:09 pm
If the Easter eggs thing is as presented in, for instance,
this BBC story, then yes, what the actuall hell.
But I did wonder if perhaps what had happened was some police officer had a quiet word with someone who'd nipped out to the corner shops to buy the kids a treat like normal, and the resulting barney got overheard and interpreted as police telling shopkeepers what they can and can't sell.
Because people will take the piss when they don't like the rules. As I was reminded when I read these two stories today:
https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/18344 ... okemon-go/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-52088987
That last one... He put his wife in the boot. On the M6.
There is every chance that what appears in the news isn’t what actually happened. But police using drones and such is straight from the horse’s mouth.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:39 pm
by AMS
From the legal twitterers commenting on this - the police need to be clear about the difference between the law and government guidance, because there are gaps and inconsistencies. In particular, they cannot **enforce** guidance, though they can encourage people to follow the guidance.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Raphael_Hoga ... 1799237632
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:02 pm
by AMS
Oh, and also on the badly worded legislation - it says you may only ***leave your house*** for a reasonable excuse. But what if I leave my house to buy food, and then subsequently decide I fancy heading off to the beach?
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:14 pm
by Bird on a Fire
AMS wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:02 pm
Oh, and also on the badly worded legislation - it says you may only ***leave your house*** for a reasonable excuse. But what if I leave my house to buy food, and then subsequently decide I fancy heading off to the beach?
I don't think a reasonable person could be in any genuine confusion about things like that, really.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:44 am
by Woodchopper
raven wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:09 pm
If the Easter eggs thing is as presented in, for instance,
this BBC story, then yes, what the actuall hell.
That does appear to be excessive.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:21 am
by Blackcountryboy
I see a difference between going out to just buy an Easter egg and going out to buy essential groceries and putting an Easter egg in the trolley. When I went to Waitrose last Friday I put some smoked salmon in the trolley. If the wife asked me to pop out and get her some smoked salmon for her tea she would be told that isn't an essential item.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:43 am
by Woodchopper
lpm wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:17 pm
The police in Stupidosaurus's lands posted their invented rules on Sat 28th. Your Gove quote was from Sun 29th. The police have also invented rules about visiting elderly parents, going shopping in the wrong places and not being allowed to buy easter eggs.
If the govt issues new guidelines then good - they, unlike the police, are entitled to.
Interesting.
Looking into it it seems that the "exercise once a day for an hour" rule
originated in France about a week ago. But the French also added within one kilometer from your house.
There was also confusion and dispute that about exactly what it meant.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:30 am
by Grumble
It seems counterproductive to confine everyone to 1km of their houses. In dense urban areas that leads to more contact rather than less, surely.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:48 am
by bagpuss
Grumble wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:30 am
It seems counterproductive to confine everyone to 1km of their houses. In dense urban areas that leads to more contact rather than less, surely.
Not just in dense urban areas. Where I live, I'm right on the edge of a small town. In one direction, I can go for a run along all sorts of paths that are mostly pretty quiet, but only once I get more than about 750m from home. In the other, I'm on much busier roads. If I'm restricted to staying within 1km of home, then most of the time I'll be on busy paths or roads which will, of course, be even busier as no-one can spread out into the countryside.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:50 am
by bob sterman
AMS wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:02 pm
Oh, and also on the badly worded legislation - it says you may only ***leave your house*** for a reasonable excuse. But what if I leave my house to buy food, and then subsequently decide I fancy heading off to the beach?
It is worth noting that although the legislation does refer to members of a "household" it does not define the place that you must not leave without reasonable excuse as a "house" - it is simply the place "where you are living" ...
"During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse. "
And it adds...
"For the purposes of paragraph (1), the place where a person is living includes the premises where they live together with any garden, yard, passage, stair, garage, outhouse or other appurtenance of such premises."
How long someone needs to have spent in a particular place to be deemed to be "living" there does not seem to be defined.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:53 am
by Martin_B
Woodchopper wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:43 am
lpm wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:17 pm
The police in Stupidosaurus's lands posted their invented rules on Sat 28th. Your Gove quote was from Sun 29th. The police have also invented rules about visiting elderly parents, going shopping in the wrong places and not being allowed to buy easter eggs.
If the govt issues new guidelines then good - they, unlike the police, are entitled to.
Interesting.
Looking into it it seems that the "exercise once a day for an hour" rule
originated in France about a week ago. But the French also added within one kilometer from your house.
There was also confusion and dispute that about exactly what it meant.
If your exercise is cycling, then if you can only get 1 km away in an hour you must live near a velodrome!
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:56 am
by discovolante
bob sterman wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:50 am
AMS wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:02 pm
Oh, and also on the badly worded legislation - it says you may only ***leave your house*** for a reasonable excuse. But what if I leave my house to buy food, and then subsequently decide I fancy heading off to the beach?
It is worth noting that although the legislation does refer to members of a "household" it does not define the place that you must not leave without reasonable excuse as a "house" - it is simply the place "where you are living" ...
"During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse. "
And it adds...
"For the purposes of paragraph (1), the place where a person is living includes the premises where they live together with any garden, yard, passage, stair, garage, outhouse or other appurtenance of such premises."
How long someone needs to have spent in a particular place to be deemed to be "living" there does not seem to be defined.
There will be quite a lot of other case law relating to that in respect of e.g. tenancies etc, although no they don't seem to have taken account of the fact that some people may have chosen to 'live' elsewhere during the lockdown.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 9:12 am
by Woodchopper
Grumble wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:30 am
It seems counterproductive to confine everyone to 1km of their houses. In dense urban areas that leads to more contact rather than less, surely.
As Bird on a Fire mentioned up thread the intention is to stop people transferring the infection from one area to another. For example, that could happen if someone drives to a local moor and has an interaction with someone from another town.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 9:13 am
by Woodchopper
Martin_B wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:53 am
Woodchopper wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:43 am
lpm wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:17 pm
The police in Stupidosaurus's lands posted their invented rules on Sat 28th. Your Gove quote was from Sun 29th. The police have also invented rules about visiting elderly parents, going shopping in the wrong places and not being allowed to buy easter eggs.
If the govt issues new guidelines then good - they, unlike the police, are entitled to.
Interesting.
Looking into it it seems that the "exercise once a day for an hour" rule
originated in France about a week ago. But the French also added within one kilometer from your house.
There was also confusion and dispute that about exactly what it meant.
If your exercise is cycling, then if you can only get 1 km away in an hour you must live near a velodrome!
Or just cycle round the block lots of times.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 11:50 am
by Stranger Mouse
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 12:27 pm
by lpm
It's a good sign the police are now taking the piss out of the moron police.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 1:22 pm
by Pucksoppet
AMS wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:02 pm
Oh, and also on the badly worded legislation - it says you may only ***leave your house*** for a reasonable excuse. But what if I leave my house to buy food, and then subsequently decide I fancy heading off to the beach?
David Allen Green blogs on precisely this point:
The Law and Policy Blog (David Allen Green): What the police are getting wrong about the coronavirus regulations 31st March 2020
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 1:47 pm
by AMS
Bird on a Fire wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:14 pm
AMS wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:02 pm
Oh, and also on the badly worded legislation - it says you may only ***leave your house*** for a reasonable excuse. But what if I leave my house to buy food, and then subsequently decide I fancy heading off to the beach?
I don't think a reasonable person could be in any genuine confusion about things like that, really.
Agreed. But you can't enforce this, because it wouldn't be breaking the law.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 3:16 pm
by Grumble
AMS wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 1:47 pm
Bird on a Fire wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:14 pm
AMS wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:02 pm
Oh, and also on the badly worded legislation - it says you may only ***leave your house*** for a reasonable excuse. But what if I leave my house to buy food, and then subsequently decide I fancy heading off to the beach?
I don't think a reasonable person could be in any genuine confusion about things like that, really.
Agreed. But you can't enforce this, because it wouldn't be breaking the law.
Courts decide on “reasonable” things all the time don’t they?
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 3:24 pm
by discovolante
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:07 pm
by Woodchopper
Woodchopper wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 9:13 am
Martin_B wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:53 am
Woodchopper wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 7:43 am
Interesting.
Looking into it it seems that the "exercise once a day for an hour" rule
originated in France about a week ago. But the French also added within one kilometer from your house.
There was also confusion and dispute that about exactly what it meant.
If your exercise is cycling, then if you can only get 1 km away in an hour you must live near a velodrome!
Or just cycle round the block lots of times.
Or there's this option:
https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments ... apartment/
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 9:40 pm
by raven
Grumble wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:14 pm
But police using drones and such is straight from the horse’s mouth.
Is it the use of drones or that they decided to make an example of 2 people who were apparently isolated and not putting themselves at risk?
I agree that the latter was a bit of an own goal. The rules are not particularly clear, at least to us lay people. We're supposed to exercise while keeping away from other people & I think most of us can see circumstance that might make finding an empty hilltop a short drive away from home a reasonable compromise. Hence the public sympathy for the dog walkers.
There may be reasons it wasn't reasonable to go for a walk there --- contact with people from other areas, risk of a sprained ankle & resultant added burden on emergency services, it was inside a National Park that had been closed and the signs said that, there was no emergency rescue cover because they'd all volunteered at the local hospital, or whatever. If so, the police would have been better to explain that.
Drone use doesn't bother me any more than the police taking photos of demonstrators does. Which is to say, I want there to be clear guidelines for when they can do it and plenty of oversight.
At least they weren't using facial recognition.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 9:50 pm
by Grumble
Oh yeah, not too bothered by the use of drones per se, I think it’s really the officiousness of the police who were using them that pissed me off more than anything.
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2020 10:11 pm
by raven
There's always one jobsworth, isn't there.
I remember when Esther Rantzen used to give them prizes....
Re: COVID-19 Police state
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:40 am
by Millennie Al
Woodchopper wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 1:16 pm
The police have always have a much wider role than enforcing laws. Then can have polite but firm conversations in which they tell someone that they are being irresponsible or anti-social even if that person hasn't broken any laws.
A polite but firm conversation from someone in authority is harassment and possibly also abuse of powers (e.g. if they used a power to stop someone solely to have such a conversation). A person obeying the law is entitled to go about their business without being stopped by the police, except as necessary in the investigation and prevention of crime. The police should certainly be allowed to stop people when they have a suspicion that the law is being broken - only that they cannot do so solely to prevent people being irresponsible or anti-social in ways which are not illegal.