Religion & Spirituality - What...
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Police To Search Your Shopping Trolley And Baskets.
Not sure what for though.
Is there a list of banned items?
Should the police not be charging supermarkets for selling prohibited items, rather than some poor unsuspecting customer who probably isn’t aware of what is and what isn’t illegal.
Is there a list of banned items?
Should the police not be charging supermarkets for selling prohibited items, rather than some poor unsuspecting customer who probably isn’t aware of what is and what isn’t illegal.
Answers
The police statement that they are not going to search shopping trolleys for non-
19:54 Thu 09th Apr 2020
Here is tonight Metro from cover.
https:/
And the Business Insider headline was:
// A police chief threatened to start checking shopping trolleys for 'unnecessary' items during the UK coronavirus lockdown //
https:/
And the Business Insider headline was:
// A police chief threatened to start checking shopping trolleys for 'unnecessary' items during the UK coronavirus lockdown //
As I've said in previous posts, I support and abide by the lock down and there are a few idiots that the police will need to deal with, on the other hand the police at the moment have never had it so easy, crime rates, accidents, drug running all way way down, no drunken drivers, no drunken fights in town centres late at night. This is a golden opportunity for some officers to show their authority and presents, at the same time as having to do very little, because in fact most of the population is doing what their told to do. May be some of the hot shot police drivers in their high powered cars that are redundant at the moment should be assigned to ambulance driving, or getting NHS workers to work.
A good example of being over manned is two officers together walked up my road today, not 2 meters apart I might add, I can honestly say I haven't seen two officers walk up my road in the last 10 years.
A good example of being over manned is two officers together walked up my road today, not 2 meters apart I might add, I can honestly say I haven't seen two officers walk up my road in the last 10 years.
Unfortunately, this sort of nonsense does not help the police and policing "by consent". Most people are sensible. Most stay in. Most are bloody indignant at the idea of some jumped up power crazy constable telling them what is and is not essential in their shopping basket. Unless and until the legislation provides what is and what is not essential in one's shopping trolley, there is no such right. Mr BM laughed and said "I'd like to see the police try that one with you" (but he doesnt get out much these days).
I honestly can't see police officers being allowed to inspect what you buy from the shops, I think possibly this has been blown up and miss worded. But if it does happen, as said, there will be anarchy and things will soon turn nasty, and that's the last thing we want, but it will have been caused by the police.
Maybe the police wish they could further inconvenience the public, brighten up a dull shift as they speak to punters in that weird language they adopt and ultimately leave everything as it was.
It'll fill up a long day since their usual suspects are off the streets.
Maybe councils could send squads of operatives to check under-stair cupboards in the homes of constables, make sure they only have essentials in there, no emergency alcoholic drink or Easter eggs.
Or maybe, like so many initiatives developed on the back of a fag packet it'll soon be forgotten.
It'll fill up a long day since their usual suspects are off the streets.
Maybe councils could send squads of operatives to check under-stair cupboards in the homes of constables, make sure they only have essentials in there, no emergency alcoholic drink or Easter eggs.
Or maybe, like so many initiatives developed on the back of a fag packet it'll soon be forgotten.
The police statement that they are not going to search shopping trolleys for non-essential items is reassuring. However, they might like to take advice from the CPS before they consider such a move.
The legislation sets out the types of stores which may open. But it does not provide any restrictions on what those stores may sell. So you see Tesco's and others selling bread, milk and rice alongside dresses, televisions and socks.
As far as the public’s movements go, the legislation says this:
"Restrictions on movement
6. (1) During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.
(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), a reasonable excuse includes the need—
(a)to obtain basic necessities, including food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including any pets or animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons and supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person, or to obtain money, including from any business listed in Part 3 of Schedule 2;
[+12 more]
First of all It should be noted that the list of “reasonable excuses” is not exhaustive. It provides examples of activities that are permitted but something being absent from the list does not mean it is not “reasonable”. If it was disputed it would be for a court to decide. But more important than that, the legislation specifically allows trips for essential supplies. It does not say you cannot buy non-essential supplies alongside the essential. So, if you leave your house to buy a loaf and a pint of milk your departure from the house and your trip to the shop amounts to a “reasonable excuse”. There is nothing to say that whilst undertaking that essential trip you cannot buy a pair of socks from the same store. The police threatening to impose a fixed penalty for buying “non-essential” goods in such circumstances should take advice before doing so and the alleged miscreant should also do so before paying it.
Interestingly, the police are not the only ones seeking to read into the legislation what is not there. The popinjay who masquerades as the Mayor of London has authorised this which travellers see when they visit the TfL website:
“Travel on public transport is only for critical workers making absolutely essential journeys,”
I don’t know on what authority he has taken such a view. I also don’t know how he expects those without a car make their essential trips for which they have a “reasonable excuse”. Perhaps he thinks that everywhere in the TfL area is within walking distance of a food shop, a pharmacy or a doctor’s surgery. Just to reinforce his message, at each bus stop across the capital is plastered a notice which says:
“You are only allowed to leave home if you are a critical worker and you cannot work at home.”
As a well known and much loved/hated Daily Mail columnist often says: “if you give somebody unsuitable a sniff of power, they will always, always abuse it.”
The legislation sets out the types of stores which may open. But it does not provide any restrictions on what those stores may sell. So you see Tesco's and others selling bread, milk and rice alongside dresses, televisions and socks.
As far as the public’s movements go, the legislation says this:
"Restrictions on movement
6. (1) During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.
(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), a reasonable excuse includes the need—
(a)to obtain basic necessities, including food and medical supplies for those in the same household (including any pets or animals in the household) or for vulnerable persons and supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person, or to obtain money, including from any business listed in Part 3 of Schedule 2;
[+12 more]
First of all It should be noted that the list of “reasonable excuses” is not exhaustive. It provides examples of activities that are permitted but something being absent from the list does not mean it is not “reasonable”. If it was disputed it would be for a court to decide. But more important than that, the legislation specifically allows trips for essential supplies. It does not say you cannot buy non-essential supplies alongside the essential. So, if you leave your house to buy a loaf and a pint of milk your departure from the house and your trip to the shop amounts to a “reasonable excuse”. There is nothing to say that whilst undertaking that essential trip you cannot buy a pair of socks from the same store. The police threatening to impose a fixed penalty for buying “non-essential” goods in such circumstances should take advice before doing so and the alleged miscreant should also do so before paying it.
Interestingly, the police are not the only ones seeking to read into the legislation what is not there. The popinjay who masquerades as the Mayor of London has authorised this which travellers see when they visit the TfL website:
“Travel on public transport is only for critical workers making absolutely essential journeys,”
I don’t know on what authority he has taken such a view. I also don’t know how he expects those without a car make their essential trips for which they have a “reasonable excuse”. Perhaps he thinks that everywhere in the TfL area is within walking distance of a food shop, a pharmacy or a doctor’s surgery. Just to reinforce his message, at each bus stop across the capital is plastered a notice which says:
“You are only allowed to leave home if you are a critical worker and you cannot work at home.”
As a well known and much loved/hated Daily Mail columnist often says: “if you give somebody unsuitable a sniff of power, they will always, always abuse it.”
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.