|
|
Post by Arch Stanton on Apr 18, 2020 10:43:41 GMT
Let's pretend that a pandemic has hit the world shall we? Oh I dunno, like say a killer strain of flu, that seemingly strikes at random. I know it sounds far-fetched but just go with it...  Anyway as a result the government have had to sanction a countrywide 'lockdown' meaning that people should only leave their homes in case of absolute necessity. When the lockdown was first announced it had been raining solidly for months on end and now the government have called this bloomin lockdown it's just started to brighten up. Typical!... ...Having just finished reading the 1977 October issue of 'Inside Detective', you sit back in your wheelchair and relax. Close your eyes and prepare for a bit of a snooze. A light afternoon siesta. Then all of a sudden your idyll is destroyed, as you hear shouts of merriment coming from next door. Children playing, adults laughing, you recognise the spoinking sound of a large inflatable ball being spoinked from one end of the garden down to the other. Quickly your eyes dart open and your hands grip the circular bars that wheel your chair. Suddenly alert, suspicious and mobile, you stealthily roll your chair to within a twitching's distance of your curtains and the binoculars that reside on the windowsill. Ignoring the binoculars you angle your head, brush the curtain slowly to one side and instantly you see that those b@stards next door, The Thorwalds, are having a barbecue in their back garden, and it appears as though everyone is invited but you. Flagrantly they are defying the government rule of 'strictly no public gatherings' and instead just doing as they bl**dy well please. The cheeky ****s! Potentially they are putting everyone's life at risk with their selfish behaviour and clear disregard of the rules. Your eyes zoom in on the telephone that's situated on a small table across the room. What are you going to do, ring the police or ignore the Thorwalds fun?  Okay so this week's Death Match centres around whether or not you would grass someone up to the authorities, given the fact that they (The Thorwalds) are flouting rules which could put other's lives at risk? Do you snitch on them and grass them up to the authorities or ignore them? Pick one answer. As suggested by: L.B. Jeffries.
|
|
|
|
Post by jno on Apr 18, 2020 12:21:54 GMT
If it is proven behind reasonable doubt that anyone actively contributes to someone else's demise and hurt for their family by not following the advice of elected officials ... I don't have much time for them tbh. Yeah, they need a fine for being stupid. That said, if the law went around and arrested 'em, they'd only catch it too, so all a pointless tbh. Would I grass someone up for speeding? No, so yes, I'm a hypocrite as it is really the same thing. The difference is right now, I have time to get on the dog as I'm on lockdown, unlike my f3ckin neighbours having a party. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch Stanton on Apr 18, 2020 12:54:35 GMT
If it is proven behind reasonable doubt that anyone actively contributes to someone else's demise and hurt for their family by not following the advice of elected officials ... I don't have much time for them tbh. Yeah, they need a fine for being stupid. That said, if the law went around and arrested 'em, they'd only catch it too, so all a pointless tbh. Would I grass someone up for speeding? No, so yes, I'm a hypocrite as it is really the same thing. The difference is right now, I have time to get on the dog as I'm on lockdown, unlike my f3ckin neighbours having a party. I’ve seen loads of people flouting the rules.. You know my colleague took her dog for a fourteen mile walk last weekend. When she told me this I laughed and questioned whether or not that was essential exercise? She got all huffy and said ‘there was no official limitation on exercising’. Again I laughed and made some remark about the fact that I thought you're supposed to go out to exercise once a day, not once all day. And although there might not be an official ‘limitation on exercising’, I questioned as to whether or not she felt like her 7hour, 14mile dog walk was taking the p!ss a bit? I could tell I was pushing her buttons though, coz apparently it seems like people don’t appreciate you highlighting and discussing potential faults concerning their actions, so I gave up. Sometimes even the self-righteous need to know when to quit.  I haven’t grassed on anyone yet though. Not even my colleague, Kimberley*. *My colleague isn’t really called Kimberley. I used a fake name |
|
|
|
Post by ltd on Apr 18, 2020 21:48:43 GMT
I’ve seen loads of people flouting the rules.. You know my colleague took her dog for a fourteen mile walk last weekend. When she told me this I laughed and questioned whether or not that was essential exercise? She got all huffy and said ‘there was no official limitation on exercising’. Again I laughed and made some remark about the fact that I thought you're supposed to go out to exercise once a day, not once all day. And although there might not be an official ‘limitation on exercising’, I questioned as to whether or not she felt like her 7hour, 14mile dog walk was taking the p!ss a bit? What law has she broken though Arch? If she's been cooped up all week I can understand her wanting to get out. As long as she and her dog are observing social distancing when they're off on their walk, are they really doing anything wrong? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch Stanton on Apr 18, 2020 22:10:36 GMT
I’ve seen loads of people flouting the rules.. You know my colleague took her dog for a fourteen mile walk last weekend. When she told me this I laughed and questioned whether or not that was essential exercise? She got all huffy and said ‘there was no official limitation on exercising’. Again I laughed and made some remark about the fact that I thought you're supposed to go out to exercise once a day, not once all day. And although there might not be an official ‘limitation on exercising’, I questioned as to whether or not she felt like her 7hour, 14mile dog walk was taking the p!ss a bit? What law has she broken though Arch? If she's been cooped up all week I can understand her wanting to get out. As long as she and her dog are observing social distancing when they're off on their walk, are they really doing anything wrong? No, I don’t think she did anything wrong either particularly. I mean going out for long, 14mile walks is a bit of a stretch when it comes to ‘necessary exercise’, but was K doing anything against the law? No. Do I think she was really putting others at risk? No. She’s a good laugh and knows when I’m joshing. She knows I’m full of it. |
|
|
|
Post by jno on Apr 19, 2020 4:30:47 GMT
She knows I’m full of it. Never!  |
|
|
|
Post by ltd on Apr 19, 2020 6:56:56 GMT
No, I don’t think she did anything wrong either particularly. I mean going out for long, 14mile walks is a bit of a stretch when it comes to ‘necessary exercise’, but was K doing anything against the law? I'd agree that 14 miles is a bit of a stretch. I enjoy a wander in the open air myself (all the more in these straitened times) but that sort of distance sounds like more of an endurance test. She wasn't doing the coastal path as well by any chance was she? |
|
|
|
Post by KarinB on Apr 19, 2020 12:12:23 GMT
Yep they're going down !
I'm dobbing them in. I might save someone's grandparents by doing it.
In Australia you can take your dog for a walk. If 14kms is your normal walk then that's fine. I walked for 1.5 hours the other day while a friend of mine walked the creek trail for over 3 hours.
|
|
|
|
Post by jno on Apr 19, 2020 18:33:07 GMT
Up the creek without a paddle Karin? |
|
|
|
Post by barrythebook on Apr 20, 2020 20:34:24 GMT
I'd agree that 14 miles is a bit of a stretch. She wasn't doing the coastal path as well by any chance was she? No, not the coastal path ltd. She was walking the boundary of Stanton Hall. |
|
|
|
Post by barrythebook on Apr 20, 2020 20:47:30 GMT
This is one of the few occasions that I would grass on someone.
We all have to think of the vulnerable at the moment BUT I don't think the distance you walk or where you go to exercise is too much of an issue as long as you keep your distance from others.
Government advice/ruling is that you must exercise very close to your home and only for one hour maximum but I could drive for 30 minutes, alone in my car, to the Moors of West Cornwall and walk all day without coming within half a mile of anyone - what's the problem?
|
|
|
|
Post by jno on Apr 21, 2020 4:37:57 GMT
This is one of the few occasions that I would grass on someone. We all have to think of the vulnerable at the moment BUT I don't think the distance you walk or where you go to exercise is too much of an issue as long as you keep your distance from others. Government advice/ruling is that you must exercise very close to your home and only for one hour maximum but I could drive for 30 minutes, alone in my car, to the Moors of West Cornwall and walk all day without coming within half a mile of anyone - what's the problem? Agree 101% |
|
|
|
Post by ltd on Apr 21, 2020 5:11:21 GMT
Government advice/ruling is that you must exercise very close to your home and only for one hour maximum but I could drive for 30 minutes, alone in my car, to the Moors of West Cornwall and walk all day without coming within half a mile of anyone - what's the problem? I think the authorities have, belatedly, realised that now. The guidance has been modified so that you can drive somewhere to take your exercise as long as the journey there and back isn't longer than the amount of time you spend outside. |
|
|
|
Post by jno on Apr 22, 2020 3:50:36 GMT
Government advice/ruling is that you must exercise very close to your home and only for one hour maximum but I could drive for 30 minutes, alone in my car, to the Moors of West Cornwall and walk all day without coming within half a mile of anyone - what's the problem? I think the authorities have, belatedly, realised that now. The guidance has been modified so that you can drive somewhere to take your exercise as long as the journey there and back isn't longer than the amount of time you spend outside. Some people will always 'bend' and 'interpret' rules in a certain way I think. As soon as any government makes the rules too complicated they also sound like they're being pathethic and/or pedantic. However, outside a rules based society what have we got? A breakdown of social order and civil unrest, which spoils it for all. Some people hate 30mph, and always drive faster because they think "oh, that rule doesn't apply to ME because I know best, I'm a self-professed GREAT driver and I'm neither going to get caught nor kill anyone anyway" ... no one is above the law though and corona virus has its rules and is far less forgiving to rule benders who think like this. The majority of good folks will always follow the rules but there will also be a section of society who think they're above them. That minority should not be allowed to spoil things for the good folks who follow the rules. Interestingly, the same applies to this forum, if folks don't like the rules they sign up to, the door is over there, and some have left to go and bend rules somewhere else. Off they trot then, because most decent people have zero time for the arrogant who consider themselves higher than the rest of us. The point is, we might like it when rules are set up as guidance, but they are there for a reason and let's be honest, life was far fewer on freedoms in other countries, even before corona virus lockdowns. |
|
|
|
Post by ltd on Apr 22, 2020 5:39:57 GMT
I think the authorities have, belatedly, realised that now. The guidance has been modified so that you can drive somewhere to take your exercise as long as the journey there and back isn't longer than the amount of time you spend outside. Some people will always 'bend' and 'interpret' rules in a certain way I think. As soon as any government makes the rules too complicated they also sound like they're being pathethic and/or pedantic. However, outside a rules based society what have we got? A breakdown of social order and civil unrest, which spoils it for all. I think the exercise rules were a bit to restrictive, or at least interpreted that way. Where's the harm in driving a few miles down the road (keeping to the speed limit of course), parking the car and having a 5 mile walk in the country as long as you maintain social distancing? I'm glad there's been some clarification on that.
As to the Supegrass question - I'm working from home at the moment. After being cooped up all day I sometimes go for a walk in the local park. I keep seeing the same group of half-dozen chavs standing around a bench and all over the path so other people have to walk right around them on the dog sh*te encrusted football pitch. I'm pretty sure they're not a family group. One of them inevitably has a mental Staffie which I saw him mistreating last night - lifting it by its lead so it was swinging by its neck for a few seconds. For two pins I'd grass them all up but my local police want my contact details which I'm not willing to give. Don't want a brick through the window thank you very much. If anyone has in idea how I dob them in anonymously let me know and I'll crack on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch Stanton on Apr 22, 2020 6:42:34 GMT
Some people will always 'bend' and 'interpret' rules in a certain way I think. As soon as any government makes the rules too complicated they also sound like they're being pathethic and/or pedantic. However, outside a rules based society what have we got? A breakdown of social order and civil unrest, which spoils it for all. I think the exercise rules were a bit to restrictive, or at least interpreted that way. Where's the harm in driving a few miles down the road (keeping to the speed limit of course), parking the car and having a 5 mile walk in the country as long as you maintain social distancing? I'm glad there's been some clarification on that.
As to the Supegrass question - I'm working from home at the moment. After being cooped up all day I sometimes go for a walk in the local park. I keep seeing the same group of half-dozen chavs standing around a bench and all over the path so other people have to walk right around them on the dog sh*te encrusted football pitch. I'm pretty sure they're not a family group. One of them inevitably has a mental Staffie which I saw him mistreating last night - lifting it by its lead so it was swinging by its neck for a few seconds. For two pins I'd grass them all up but my local police want my contact details which I'm not willing to give. Don't want a brick through the window thank you very much. If anyone has in idea how I dob them in anonymously let me know and I'll crack on.
You could use an assumed name and a derelict house nearby. My name is JR Hartley, you could say... Can you not just say this is an anonymous tip off? Can you send them a letter, then say if they don’t act upon it you’ll post it all over social media? That the police in your town do not care about protecting it’s citizens from Coronavirus or those breaking social distancing. You could have your windows re-done with steel shutters? |
|
|
|
Post by ltd on Apr 22, 2020 6:53:43 GMT
You could use an assumed name and a derelict house nearby. My name is JR Hartley, you could say... I did think about that - I'v got the Tor browser as well for extra anonymity. Might give it a try. |
|
|
|
Post by jno on Apr 22, 2020 20:00:59 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by fordcapri on Apr 23, 2020 10:45:51 GMT
Neither. If my neighbours broke the Lockdown with a barbecue, I'd shoot them. Thus eliminating that problem and saving the police the trouble of having to come round and give them a good kicking. Also, by the time they (and their guests) had been missed the local and visiting wildlife - cats, foxes, rats, crows, seagulls - would have made short work of their bodies, having been attracted by the barbecue. So I'd have done them a favour too. All's well that ends well. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch Stanton on Apr 23, 2020 10:55:41 GMT
Neither. If my neighbours broke the Lockdown with a barbecue, I'd shoot them. Thus eliminating that problem and saving the police the trouble of having to come round and give them a good kicking. Also, by the time they (and their guests) had been missed the local and visiting wildlife - cats, foxes, rats, crows, seagulls - would have made short work of their bodies, having been attracted by the barbecue. So I'd have done them a favour too. All's well that ends well. It’s yes or no I’m afraid FC. But by proxy ‘no’ you wouldn’t grass them up, because you’d be too busy shooting at them from out of your bedroom window, with your Thompson submachine gun. |
|
|
|
Post by Portland Road on Apr 30, 2020 9:20:22 GMT
Probably try to speak to those involved in the first instance - what is, and what is not, acceptable can be on a fine line.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch Stanton on Apr 30, 2020 9:46:52 GMT
Probably try to speak to those involved in the first instance - what is, and what is not, acceptable can be on a fine line. I think it would help if the government had given clearer guidelines. Or failing that everyone should have been tagged with exploding collars like that movie Wedlock. It has a timer on it and if you go further than the transmitter in your house by 100 feet for more than one hour at any point it just explodes and blows your head off. I think that would have been a fair way of policing the lockdown. |
|
|
|
Post by jno on May 1, 2020 6:05:17 GMT
Probably try to speak to those involved in the first instance - what is, and what is not, acceptable can be on a fine line. I think that's a totally fair assessment PR. The hard thing is enforcement of rules on a mass scale coupled with a lot of people who don't like to be told they are stupid rule breakers and need to get back in line for the good of everyone. |
|
