Crosswords0 min ago
This Lot Should Surely Have Been Arrested?
https:/
By all means protest outside but going into a supermarket full of anger like this should not be acceptable?
By all means protest outside but going into a supermarket full of anger like this should not be acceptable?
Answers
I see wearing a mask as a short-term measure which may, just, help slightly slow down the spread of Covid . It is a minor issue- I wear one maybe twice a week for 15 minutes. I'm happy to do so as it might help a bit, it makes others feel better, and it doesn't put others (eg staff) in a possible uncomfortabl
11:04 Tue 11th Aug 2020
//We are the people.We are the power//
The gobby mouthpieces are the very group,we have been told, who are particularly susceptible to dying from Covid than their white // brothers and sisters//.
Of course these numpties believe the disease is a racist plot. I couldn't give a fig for the fate of the selfish and ignorant but at least allow people to make their own choice and shop unhindered with the comfort they may take that the mask might be protecting others.
The gobby mouthpieces are the very group,we have been told, who are particularly susceptible to dying from Covid than their white // brothers and sisters//.
Of course these numpties believe the disease is a racist plot. I couldn't give a fig for the fate of the selfish and ignorant but at least allow people to make their own choice and shop unhindered with the comfort they may take that the mask might be protecting others.
//…not wearing a mask in a shop is an offence JD.//
Not if you have a “reasonable excuse” it isn’t.
//I don't like wearing the masks one bit, particularly in this hot weather, but if it makes a small difference to the number of people being struck down with this awful virus, so be it.//
The person most likely to see that small difference is you, Lady GC. You are far more likely to end up contaminating yourself by wearing one than you are to prevent anybody else from being contaminated.
//I personally don't feel my freedom has been taken away//
You are being compelled to do something which you may not otherwise choose to do, Bobbie. You cannot go into a shop or on a bus without wearing a face covering (unless you have a “reasonable excuse”). You are not free to do something that, until recently, you used to do and that’s taking a freedom away from you.
//Would you include wearing seat belts or banning smoking in pubs/restaurants as removal of freedoms…//
Yes. But before those freedoms were removed, sound scientific evidence was presented to show that the practices involved could, and usually would, result in great harm to the individual concerned and/or others around him. No such evidence has been produced to show that wearing a face covering reduces spread. In fact until recently the WHO stated as much. It also explained my concern – self contamination by the wearer. The measure is not “perfectly sensible” by any stretch.
I don’t agree with the activities taken by the mob in Peckham. But it might help offset the abuse that people who do not wear face coverings have to bear. As I explained last week, I do not wear a face covering anywhere. I have been on the wrong end of facetious remarks and rudeness. I am robust enough to deal with it – a polite request to “mind your own business, please” is normally enough. If not, the torrent of more forthright vitriol which follows has done the trick up to now. But many people are not so robust and some people who cannot wear coverings are afraid to go out. That should not happen and people wearing them in Peckham who were subject to the mob got a little flavour of what it’s like for those not wearing a covering to suffer abuse from the “maskvists” that are out there.
Not if you have a “reasonable excuse” it isn’t.
//I don't like wearing the masks one bit, particularly in this hot weather, but if it makes a small difference to the number of people being struck down with this awful virus, so be it.//
The person most likely to see that small difference is you, Lady GC. You are far more likely to end up contaminating yourself by wearing one than you are to prevent anybody else from being contaminated.
//I personally don't feel my freedom has been taken away//
You are being compelled to do something which you may not otherwise choose to do, Bobbie. You cannot go into a shop or on a bus without wearing a face covering (unless you have a “reasonable excuse”). You are not free to do something that, until recently, you used to do and that’s taking a freedom away from you.
//Would you include wearing seat belts or banning smoking in pubs/restaurants as removal of freedoms…//
Yes. But before those freedoms were removed, sound scientific evidence was presented to show that the practices involved could, and usually would, result in great harm to the individual concerned and/or others around him. No such evidence has been produced to show that wearing a face covering reduces spread. In fact until recently the WHO stated as much. It also explained my concern – self contamination by the wearer. The measure is not “perfectly sensible” by any stretch.
I don’t agree with the activities taken by the mob in Peckham. But it might help offset the abuse that people who do not wear face coverings have to bear. As I explained last week, I do not wear a face covering anywhere. I have been on the wrong end of facetious remarks and rudeness. I am robust enough to deal with it – a polite request to “mind your own business, please” is normally enough. If not, the torrent of more forthright vitriol which follows has done the trick up to now. But many people are not so robust and some people who cannot wear coverings are afraid to go out. That should not happen and people wearing them in Peckham who were subject to the mob got a little flavour of what it’s like for those not wearing a covering to suffer abuse from the “maskvists” that are out there.
I know there's been lots said about the value or not masks which I won't add to but how can people fail to be confused - example:
My local Co-Op has a big sign saying 'you are welcome to wear a mask if you want to' whereas another local Costcutter has signs which say 'if you are not wearing a mask we will not serve you'.
Which is right then?
My local Co-Op has a big sign saying 'you are welcome to wear a mask if you want to' whereas another local Costcutter has signs which say 'if you are not wearing a mask we will not serve you'.
Which is right then?
I too cannot wear masks for any period of time and only with a vent which is pointless for Covid. I dont go out anymore so the shops have lost my business (generally small shops) and I have lost my freedom.
These people should not have gone into the shop but I see nothing wrong with protesting outside. At the moment they are allowed an opinion.
These people should not have gone into the shop but I see nothing wrong with protesting outside. At the moment they are allowed an opinion.
//My local Co-Op has a big sign saying 'you are welcome to wear a mask if you want to' whereas another local Costcutter has signs which say 'if you are not wearing a mask we will not serve you'.
Which is right then?//
Neither is right - as far as the law goes. The Co-Op seems to suggest it is optional which it is not (unless you are either exempt or have a reasonable excuse). Costcutter could find itself on the wrong end of a disability discrimination action. There are people who cannot wear face coverings for medical reasons and they may have a disability which falls within the disability legislation. Refusing to serve them on the basis that they were not wearing a face covering may mean they discriminated against them because of their disability.
It's certainly up to individual businesses whether they want to refuse to serve people without face coverings (bar the discrimination problem I mention above). There is also no burden on shopkeepers to enforce the legislation. Both shops should be a little more circumspect with their notices.
Which is right then?//
Neither is right - as far as the law goes. The Co-Op seems to suggest it is optional which it is not (unless you are either exempt or have a reasonable excuse). Costcutter could find itself on the wrong end of a disability discrimination action. There are people who cannot wear face coverings for medical reasons and they may have a disability which falls within the disability legislation. Refusing to serve them on the basis that they were not wearing a face covering may mean they discriminated against them because of their disability.
It's certainly up to individual businesses whether they want to refuse to serve people without face coverings (bar the discrimination problem I mention above). There is also no burden on shopkeepers to enforce the legislation. Both shops should be a little more circumspect with their notices.
//You just dont get it do you. Some of us cant wear masks, it causes breathing difficulties especially in this heat.//
Unfortunately, youngmaf, many do not get it. The legislation is worded such that virtually anybody can claim they have a "reasonable excuse" for failing to comply. Personally I believe that is exactly as it should be. The difficulties arise because, as you have found, there is a significant element around who believe it is their duty to shame or even bully people into compliance. This was not helped when Commissioner Cressida Dick virtually endorsed vigilantism by saying she hoped people would be "shamed into complying." That was an absolutely disgraceful remark from the country's most senior police officer.
I've absolutely no objection to anybody wearing a face covering. I've explained my reason for not doing so. I took my decision after weighing up the pros and cons and I believe I am content that I am keeping within the law. What I don't like is situations like you face (and indeed that faced by the shoppers in Peckham) which are totally out of order. Personally I'd far rather see the police called to deal with intimidation of those not wearing masks by those who have no business interfering, than I would to see them called in an attempt to enforce face coverings.
Unfortunately, youngmaf, many do not get it. The legislation is worded such that virtually anybody can claim they have a "reasonable excuse" for failing to comply. Personally I believe that is exactly as it should be. The difficulties arise because, as you have found, there is a significant element around who believe it is their duty to shame or even bully people into compliance. This was not helped when Commissioner Cressida Dick virtually endorsed vigilantism by saying she hoped people would be "shamed into complying." That was an absolutely disgraceful remark from the country's most senior police officer.
I've absolutely no objection to anybody wearing a face covering. I've explained my reason for not doing so. I took my decision after weighing up the pros and cons and I believe I am content that I am keeping within the law. What I don't like is situations like you face (and indeed that faced by the shoppers in Peckham) which are totally out of order. Personally I'd far rather see the police called to deal with intimidation of those not wearing masks by those who have no business interfering, than I would to see them called in an attempt to enforce face coverings.
1.If you have difficulty breathing why not get a doctor's note?
I understand Doctors are not producing notes. I could print out a 'badge' but I have real concerns about that. Why should I broadcast my ailments. If a potential employer saw that it could affect my chances (rightly or wrongly). In addition regimes in the past have used badges to identify those considered 'unclean'
2.Could you not wear something looser than a mask.?
At the minute its the heat/air, I suppose something really thin might be possible but then that too would be pointless. So why be forced to use it.
The real problem are the mask devotees who dont think about others as seen above we get classed as mask haters (and yes that may be true) rather than understanding the problem. One of my daughters has issues too. She is deaf and so lip reading is out of the question. This has caused many issues in shops (As I pointed out in another thread a bit back).
I understand Doctors are not producing notes. I could print out a 'badge' but I have real concerns about that. Why should I broadcast my ailments. If a potential employer saw that it could affect my chances (rightly or wrongly). In addition regimes in the past have used badges to identify those considered 'unclean'
2.Could you not wear something looser than a mask.?
At the minute its the heat/air, I suppose something really thin might be possible but then that too would be pointless. So why be forced to use it.
The real problem are the mask devotees who dont think about others as seen above we get classed as mask haters (and yes that may be true) rather than understanding the problem. One of my daughters has issues too. She is deaf and so lip reading is out of the question. This has caused many issues in shops (As I pointed out in another thread a bit back).
The problem is it is not usually those "with the authority " (whoever that may mean - I assume you imply shopkeepers have it?) that cause the problem. As NJ has pointed out vigilantism caused in part by Dick is the problem.
It's ok I'll just not bother. Can get everything I need on line so the high Street can disappear for all I care now and Johnson can explain(bluster) that to the public.
It's ok I'll just not bother. Can get everything I need on line so the high Street can disappear for all I care now and Johnson can explain(bluster) that to the public.
//You could always keep it in your pocket until someone with the authority to do so questioned your lack of face covering.//
That's fine. The only person with such authority to question someone in a shop is a police officer or a PCSO. The range of people with such authority is a little broader (but not much) on public transport, but in shop it's a PC or a PCSO. Shopkeepers, shop staff and other members of the public have no right whatsoever to question why somebody is not wearing a face covering. It's none of their business. If everybody knew that and accepted it we'd all get along fine. Those who are exempt or who have a reasonable excuse for not wearing a face covering should not have to roam around with a bell round their neck (yes, I exaggerate but you get my drift).
That's fine. The only person with such authority to question someone in a shop is a police officer or a PCSO. The range of people with such authority is a little broader (but not much) on public transport, but in shop it's a PC or a PCSO. Shopkeepers, shop staff and other members of the public have no right whatsoever to question why somebody is not wearing a face covering. It's none of their business. If everybody knew that and accepted it we'd all get along fine. Those who are exempt or who have a reasonable excuse for not wearing a face covering should not have to roam around with a bell round their neck (yes, I exaggerate but you get my drift).
ymb I frequently see people in shops without masks and no-one challenges them. Only yesterday two young girls of about 18 went into Sainsbury's in front of me laughing and joking and completely maskless. I often see people with them pulled down to their chins, I assume like me, so they can breathe easily for a time. Asda seems to have the biggest number without masks and again no-one bothers. If you don't want to wear one don't, or just wear it around your chin and pull it up every now and again. I will continue to do this and don't really care what others think, especially on here.
