The Clown Circus

[Steely Glint]

Then when you show up and see that it would be hard to do so, or notice it becoming too crowded, you leave and go some place else? This doesn't require advanced degrees or technical training - it is common sense. When I go on a walk with my children I take them and walk off the path when someone is approaching. If a park seems busy we will go elsewhere. I'm guessing this is easier in rural and suburban areas.

That's also unenforceable.

[Hazir]

That's also unenforceable.

Well, maybe enforcement shouldn't be your main concern? Maybe you can convince enough people of the importance of social distancing that social distancing becomes the norm. I'm not going to say everything went perfect overhere, but by and large people respected social distancing and clearly to the extent that the numbers have moved dramatically down to the point that regular care has been taken up again in hospitals all over the country. A friend of mine even had a purely elective procedure earlier this week.

[Enoch the Red]

That's also unenforceable.

I'm no brain surgeon, but having a max capacity at the parks wouldn't be terribly difficult if you absolutely needed an enforcement mechanism - which certainly hasn't been my experience. A tally counter would be sufficient in the vast majority of cases.

[Steely Glint]

I fail to see how you could keep a tally or control entrance any exit for an entire park, beach, beauty spot or just... Barnard Castle.

[Enoch the Red]

I fail to see how you could keep a tally or control entrance any exit for an entire park, beach, beauty spot or just... Barnard Castle.

Maybe parks are significantly different around here, but generally there are entrances and exits, areas for car parking, and gates when the parks close for the night. So using those same mechanisms, (an entrance/exit to the parking lot and a gate to prevent entry) the only thing you would need additionally would be a park employee or volunteer asking how many people are in the vehicle when they are coming in or going out. Your mileage may vary - urban parks probably don't rely as much on parking, and might require someone to walk through and determine capacity. In that case I'm guessing what we are really talking about would be a police officer asking people to disperse if it looks as though it has become too crowded. I'm guessing many urban parks already have police officers that patrol them in some capacity.

[RandBlade]

So you're comparing speeding to breaking quarantine during a pandemic? Seriously?

Yeah, fuck that dishonest argument. Back to ignore with you. Don't bother replying.

He didn't break quarantine.

He "might" have done a "minor" breach of lockdown, not quarantine.

[gogobongopop]

And he lied to the British public.

[Aimless]

I have doubts about both the merits of the rules and their enforcement, as I have noted earlier. In short, I am not seeking a pass for the current British government, I am using this as an indictment of it. Regular people, politicians, and everyone else should be allowed to visit Bernard Castle if they behave responsibly, just like they should be allowed to walk their dog, or sit on their front porch. If the government enacts a policy that says otherwise then that is a bad policy, and that is on them.

Again, my ignorance of British politics is showing. Dominic Cummings played what role in regard to the creation and enforcement of health policy? Is pandemic response in his wheel house? Does he deal with policy implementation, enforcement and fines? If any of this is true, and he was in charge of setting these bad rules, or managing enforcement actions, then it is absolutely contemptible of him to say one rule for thee and another for me. If he is simply a member of the government that implemented these rules then I am far more sympathetic. My sympathy only grows if enforcement is handled independently on a local level, (for instance if a police officer in Durham is being told to approach the individual with a warning and only issue a fine if they don't comply vs. one in London being told to fine first). I don't get to dictate what good or bad policies my boss puts into place, and I have probably knowingly or inadvertently violated one or two.

If that is the case, and he had a hand in crafting and enacting the policy then he can get bent. You don't get to set a rule for everyone else and then not follow it yourself, and if you enact a bad policy that comes back and bites you then that is on you.

The scandal arises not simply from the fact that Cummings—an unelected tool who everyone knows believes himself to be above the rules—did something wrong and hypocritical, but from elected leaders' support for his actions and for his bullshit excuses. Now, some reporting indicates that Cummings may indeed have influenced SAGE recommendations to favour a switch to stricter suppression measures, which ultimately resulted in the UK's lockdown policy; based on reports of his influence in govt, it would seem unlikely that those measures would have been implemented against his advice. However, even if that hadn't been the case, the govt is ultimately responsible for those policies, and it is unjust for that govt. to give him a free pass for violating both the letter and the spirit of those rules, while actively enforcing them for ordinary people in the UK. The special treatment and arbitrary enforcement renders the rules not simply bad but unjust. The govt. has confirmed that it won't waive fines for ordinary people, even as they have defended Cummings. This offends a basic moral institution shared by most people.

If a lot of people go to a place, it becomes difficult. That's the point.

From a healthcare system perspective, a similarly important point is that, if people don't take long and/or unnecessary trips, hospitals and healthcare workers will have to deal with fewer trauma patients while simultaneously trying to manage an absolutely devastating pandemic. This was very clear here in the north until fairly recently—people drastically changed their movement patterns, and the number of patients in the ER, ICU and neuro-ICU immediately dropped, remaining lower than I've ever seen them until they started moving about again.

[Aimless]

He didn't break quarantine.

He "might" have done a "minor" breach of lockdown, not quarantine.

He did in fact breach lockdown rules.

[RandBlade]

Maybe. That's what the Police said. Might have in a minor way.

Big whoop.

[Enoch the Red]

The scandal arises not simply from the fact that Cummings—an unelected tool who everyone knows believes himself to be above the rules—did something wrong and hypocritical, but from elected leaders' support for his actions and for his bullshit excuses. Now, some reporting indicates that Cummings may indeed have influenced SAGE recommendations to favour a switch to stricter suppression measures, which ultimately resulted in the UK's lockdown policy; based on reports of his influence in govt, it would seem unlikely that those measures would have been implemented against his advice. However, even if that hadn't been the case, the govt is ultimately responsible for those policies, and it is unjust for that govt. to give him a free pass for violating both the letter and the spirit of those rules, while actively enforcing them for ordinary people in the UK. The special treatment and arbitrary enforcement renders the rules not simply bad but unjust. The govt. has confirmed that it won't waive fines for ordinary people, even as they have defended Cummings. This offends a basic moral institution shared by most people.

I think I am missing the part where he received special treatment or there was arbitrary enforcement. If he was approached by a police officer and was told to leave but waved his government credentials in their face and told them to buzz off, I get it. If he just wasn't caught, (likely like thousands of other people) then there was no special treatment that I can see - unless the we are talking about the other resignations that Steely mentioned earlier, which I don't know the particulars of. Has it always been the policy of Number 10 that any member of the cabinet who has been found to violate these protocols be forced out?

[Steely Glint]

Maybe parks are significantly different around here, but generally there are entrances and exits, areas for car parking, and gates when the parks close for the night. So using those same mechanisms, (an entrance/exit to the parking lot and a gate to prevent entry) the only thing you would need additionally would be a park employee or volunteer asking how many people are in the vehicle when they are coming in or going out. Your mileage may vary - urban parks probably don't rely as much on parking, and might require someone to walk through and determine capacity. In that case I'm guessing what we are really talking about would be a police officer asking people to disperse if it looks as though it has become too crowded. I'm guessing many urban parks already have police officers that patrol them in some capacity.

There are a handful of parks like that here, but most of them are just public spaces you can just go into at any time, no gates or employees.

[Aimless]

Maybe. That's what the Police said.

No, that's not what the police said. The police said he engaged in conduct that would likely have been regarded as a violation of lockdown rules. His actions, as he has described them, justify that assessment. What the police statement means is that, had he been caught, he would have been regarded as violating lockdown rules, and told to go home. This is clear from the statement—they lay out their assessment of what a police officer would likely have done, if s/he had caught Cummings in the act. Do you truly believe that rightness and wrongness—or legality and illegality—are simply functions of how good you are at not getting caught? That's certainly... a take.

[Aimless]

I think I am missing the part where he received special treatment or there was arbitrary enforcement. If he was approached by a police officer and was told to leave but waved his government credentials in their face and told them to buzz off, I get it. If he just wasn't caught, (likely like thousands of other people) then there was no special treatment. Are other people being fined simply because it was later revealed that they went out on day trips?

The special treatment is that the govt. has downplayed his actions, defended them, accepted his clearly dishonest excuses, and the AG has even publicly interceded on his behalf, before the facts were known and adjudicated—while thousands of people have been fined for violating this govt's lockdown rules.

[Steely Glint]

Does Randblade know that the police don't actually determine whether an offence has been committed, that is the job of the CPS and, ultimately, the courts?

[Aimless]

Does Randblade know that the police don't actually determine whether an offence has been committed, that is the job of the CPS and, ultimately, the courts?

That depends, does knowing this require the ability to read and understand written information at some point in one's life?

[RandBlade]

Does Randblade know that the police don't actually determine whether an offence has been committed, that is the job of the CPS and, ultimately, the courts?

Since this is such a minor alleged breach it would never have gone to the CPS or Courts. It could have been a fixed penalty notice which the Police can issue.

They might have given him a fixed penalty notice if they'd not liked his further details (not asked for) as to why they were driving and if he'd ignored their instructions afterwards if they had issued them.

[Enoch the Red]

The special treatment is that the govt. has downplayed his actions, defended them, accepted his clearly dishonest excuses, and the AG has even publicly interceded on his behalf, before the facts were known and adjudicated—while thousands of people have been fined for violating this govt's lockdown rules.

Again, and bear with me because I know some people don't like this analogy, but it helps me understand. If this was Dominic getting away with speeding, are we saying that because millions of other people have gotten ticketed for speeding anyone who has sped and not received a ticket is getting special treatment if it later comes out that they had traveled faster than the posted speed limit? If a video came out of Mark Meadows going 75 in a 70, and it was downplayed by the president, ("fake news," I'm sure) and he said he accepted his stated explanation of having to go faster because he needed to go to the restroom, and Bill Barr shrugged and said, "Guess he got away with it," are we really saying that is special treatment? I know social mores and norms regarding social distancing are in flux, but it seems within the purview of Johnson not to require resignation for an offense that isn't even a misdemeanor - likely a civil infraction (I'm not sure either term is valid in Britain). That doesn't make him any less of an entitled jerk, and some level of public backlash seems reasonable if he was an architect of the rules, but politics are full of entitled jerks.

If he offered to pay the fine would that be a good compromise?

[RandBlade]

The alleged breach was so minor there'd only have been a fine if he'd refused to follow Police directives which never happened. Simply allegedly breaching on its own wasn't sufficient to get a fixed penalty notice (fine).

[Steely Glint]

Since this is such a minor alleged breach it would never have gone to the CPS or Courts. It could have been a fixed penalty notice which the Police can issue.

They might have given him a fixed penalty notice if they'd not liked his further details (not asked for) as to why they were driving and if he'd ignored their instructions afterwards if they had issued them.

You keep saying 'it was a minor breach' like it's some kind of winning argument. We know it was a minor breach, ok? He should still resign.

It was a minor breach when Calderwell drove across Edinburgh to her second home, and it sucked for her but she still hand to resign. I was a less minor but still minor breach Ferguson's girlfriend drove across London to spend time with him but he still had to resign.

[Hazir]

If he offered to pay the fine would that be a good compromise?

The problem is that Cummings did not offer to pay the fine (or even say that he was sorry). What he did was tell that according to his instincts the right thing to do was go at 90, so that he wasn’t actually speeding in the first place.

In the case of the second infraction it becomes even sillier as he then claims he had to go over the speed limit to know if it was safe for him to drive, so he hadn’t been speeding but testing. So again did nothing wrong.

Then the PM told that it was perfectly normal that Cummings had acted on his instincts rather than on formal speedlimits, and that testing was a perfectly good reason to drive too fast also

Then it was made clear the proles should not get any funny ideas in their heads about the actual speed limit being subject to their personal need for speed.

[RandBlade]

You keep saying 'it was a minor breach' like it's some kind of winning argument. We know it was a minor breach, ok? He should still resign.

It was a minor breach when Calderwell drove across Edinburgh to her second home, and it sucked for her but she still hand to resign. I was a less minor but still minor breach Ferguson's girlfriend drove across London to spend time with him but he still had to resign.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

The problem is that Cummings did not offer to pay the fine (or even say that he was sorry). What he did was tell that according to his instincts the right thing to do was go at 90, so that he wasn’t actually speeding in the first place.

In the case of the second infraction it becomes even sillier as he then claims he had to go over the speed limit to know if it was safe for him to drive, so he hadn’t been speeding but testing. So again did nothing wrong.

Then the PM told that it was perfectly normal that Cummings had acted on his instincts rather than on formal speedlimits, and that testing was a perfectly good reason to drive too fast also

Then it was made clear the proles should not get any funny ideas in their heads about the actual speed limit being subject to their personal need for speed.

You say "second infraction" but there "might" have been one infraction. Or maybe there were none. There was no second.

[LittleFuzzy]

This is the sort of furor that in the US is reserved for bible-thumping pedophiles running for federal office. It far exceeds the reaction to the millions raked in from insider trading by three GOP and one Dem senator.

[Timbuk2]

It is a very British furore Fuzz.

This sort of rank hypocrisy from government leaders disgusts the British mindset. The British love rules, and will readily pile on those who flaunt them.

[Hazir]

It is a very British furore Fuzz.

This sort of rank hypocrisy from government leaders disgusts the British mindset. The British love rules, and will readily pile on those who flaunt them.

It's not that exclusively British, here in Holland officials have been resigning over small transgressions for as long as I can remember. A while ago a minister resigned because he got caught pimping up accounts of him meeting Putin before he got appointed. It turned out they'd barely been in the same room.

[Steely Glint]

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
You say "second infraction" but there "might" have been one infraction. Or maybe there were none. There was no second.

It's lots of people's opinion, including 40 Tory mps and some major right leaning press outlets. When I'm on the same page as a bunch of Tories, the Telegraph and the Mail, you know something's up.

I mean, you personally clearly don't. But 'you' in the general sense, yeah, you get it.

This is the sort of furor that in the US is reserved for bible-thumping pedophiles running for federal office. It far exceeds the reaction to the millions raked in from insider trading by three GOP and one Dem senator.

It's not that exclusively British, here in Holland officials have been resigning over small transgressions for as long as I can remember. A while ago a minister resigned because he got caught pimping up accounts of him meeting Putin before he got appointed. It turned out they'd barely been in the same room.

I love how confused Americans get when other countries actually hold their politicians to account. They're like... "wow, you can do that? but he only lied about speeding" meanwhile over there politicians are like "I used the federal government to confiscate State's PPE supplies and then gave them to my buddies to sell at a profit lol" and Americans are all "well, he wouldn't already be rich if it wasn't ok for them to do that so it checks out".

[GGT]

Enoch, you can't use speed limits as an analogy for laws you don't like, yet give leeway to government officials who break the laws they enact but don't like, either.

Speeding isn't an infectious or contagious disease.

The better analogy might be legislators who make laws about Public Health and Safety for school children but refuse to vaccinate their own kids against Measles. Or maybe they pontificate about "Family Values" but turn out to be adulterers, or claim to be The Moral Majority but are protecting church/clergy pedophiles.

It saddens me that you criticize the UK for making a big deal out of government officials *exploiting* "Rules for Thee, but not for Me", especially when they lie about it. You don't have to know anything about how their government works to say it's just plain wrong.

[gogobongopop]

I'm expecting the government to lower the Covid alert system level to 3 today, else I don't understand the point of it.

Plus it'd be nice to know how many people are being tested each day. I get the impression they are hiding the figures.

[Enoch the Red]

Enoch, you can't use speed limits as an analogy for laws you don't like, yet give leeway to government officials who break the laws they enact but don't like, either.

I'm really not sure what you mean here. Most people are knowingly or unknowingly breaking one or more laws every day. Leeway is given because not all laws are created equal. Speeding is absolutely not the same as murder, and I think everyone can agree on that. Requiring a public servant resign for *any* offense doesn't make sense, because then we would have no public servants.

Speeding isn't an infectious or contagious disease.

The better analogy might be legislators who make laws about Public Health and Safety for school children but refuse to vaccinate their own kids against Measles. Or maybe they pontificate about "Family Values" but turn out to be adulterers, or claim to be The Moral Majority but are protecting church/clergy pedophiles.

It saddens me that you criticize the UK for making a big deal out of government officials *exploiting* "Rules for Thee, but not for Me", especially when they lie about it. You don't have to know anything about how their government works to say it's just plain wrong.

I don't think this is too complicated - people who are behaving safely should not have to apologize for behaving safely. If the regulations say that safe behavior is unsafe, then the regulations are wrong. If Cummings had a hand in crafting those regulations then this is something akin to poetic justice.

[gogobongopop]

Hmm, were the slides wrong today or yesterday?

38489 yesterday. 39045 today.

Slides report 111 deaths.

But should be 556?

If it really is 556 that's really shitty news...

I also wonder why there was no scientists today going through the slides.

Again no testing figures.

Still at level 4, AFAIK?

Has anyone seen our PM?

Something isn't right.