ChatterBank0 min ago
Curfew Carnage?
87 Answers
well, who'd a thought it? everything shuts at 10pm so everyone gets turned out on to the streets, into ubers and on to buses trains and tubes. no possibility of social distancing!
https:/
so instead of getting touchy feely in a late night bar, everyone now gets touchy feely on their way home, net result - the virus spreads as if there had been no curfew. did our politicos not think of this at all?
https:/
so instead of getting touchy feely in a late night bar, everyone now gets touchy feely on their way home, net result - the virus spreads as if there had been no curfew. did our politicos not think of this at all?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mushroom25. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
14.39 NJ that's just it, it is about the police controlling the streets, stopping large gatherings, in an attempt to control the virus. People have always gone back to other peoples houses after a night out.
If after the pubs have closed and there's no night clubs open, there's less people on the streets, less drunks, and less crime committed. Regarding the the cold weather, young people don't feel the cold, less so when their drunk, until its to late, when police or emergency crews have to scrap them up off the street. Control in pubs go's out the window when to much drink has been consumed, less hours will go some way to reduce consumption. That said , I agree you won't stop this virus, but I believe that all this is being done to hold it down as best we can, to buy us time to discover more drugs to help ease the situation, at very very best a vaccine of some sort.
If after the pubs have closed and there's no night clubs open, there's less people on the streets, less drunks, and less crime committed. Regarding the the cold weather, young people don't feel the cold, less so when their drunk, until its to late, when police or emergency crews have to scrap them up off the street. Control in pubs go's out the window when to much drink has been consumed, less hours will go some way to reduce consumption. That said , I agree you won't stop this virus, but I believe that all this is being done to hold it down as best we can, to buy us time to discover more drugs to help ease the situation, at very very best a vaccine of some sort.
//How can it be the government's fault if people go to other people's houses after chuck out//
Fewer of them would be inclined to do so if they were not thrown out of a pub or restaurant at 10pm. whilst in the pub or restaurant they are reasonably under control (as much as they ever will be). When chucked out on the street all at once they are not.
I've news for the government who seem surprised by this - many people - especially younger ones - who go out for the evening do not go home to bed at 10pm. The idea that there are sufficient police for them to "gain control of the streets" is ridiculous. My own local authority area covers 60 square miles, has a population of around 350,000 and has around ten "High Streets". My own (one of the smaller) has four pubs and about twenty restaurants. I came through there just before 10pm last Saturday on my way home from a restaurant. Already people were assembling in large numbers on the streets. Not unusually not a police officer was to be seen. In Central London there is an additional problem. Most of the people socialising there use buses and the underground to get there - and to get home. Instead of spreading out the traffic over a few hours public transport is now packed just after 10pm with those who have decided not to street party heading off home.
If people want to congregate in the streets they will; if they want to assemble in one of their houses they will. The government has said that "community transmission" within private homes is one of the main causes of transmission. It's a bit of a mystery how they know that (as it is with many pronouncements they make) but that's what they've said and that's why the ridiculous "Rule of Six" was introduced. So they chuck people out of the pubs and restaurants all at the same time so that they have to find somewhere else to go. There were reports at the weekend of people churning out of pubs at 10pm and heading for the nearest Tesco to stock up on takeaway booze to continue their evening. Are they going to take a can each home and drink alone? What do you think?
There is no point in developing a strategy based on how you think people should behave. You have to have a strategy that copes with how they actually do behave. Assuming that everybody will meekly toddle off home to bed at 10pm on a Saturday night is naïve and irresponsible. In Manchester, Birmingham and London there were major problems last weekend with people who had all been chucked out into the street at 10pm. A child of ten could have foreseen the problems. But this government assumes that everybody will do as they are told and go home to bed. I'm pleased to see that some public figures (the mayors of Birmingham and Manchester to name two) are calling for an urgent review because the curfew is failing to keep people apart, is actually increasing the risk of transmissions and is further damaging an already crippled hospitality sector. Predictably, alas, the Mayor of London is calling for the whole place to be closed down but I'd expect nothing else from him.
Fewer of them would be inclined to do so if they were not thrown out of a pub or restaurant at 10pm. whilst in the pub or restaurant they are reasonably under control (as much as they ever will be). When chucked out on the street all at once they are not.
I've news for the government who seem surprised by this - many people - especially younger ones - who go out for the evening do not go home to bed at 10pm. The idea that there are sufficient police for them to "gain control of the streets" is ridiculous. My own local authority area covers 60 square miles, has a population of around 350,000 and has around ten "High Streets". My own (one of the smaller) has four pubs and about twenty restaurants. I came through there just before 10pm last Saturday on my way home from a restaurant. Already people were assembling in large numbers on the streets. Not unusually not a police officer was to be seen. In Central London there is an additional problem. Most of the people socialising there use buses and the underground to get there - and to get home. Instead of spreading out the traffic over a few hours public transport is now packed just after 10pm with those who have decided not to street party heading off home.
If people want to congregate in the streets they will; if they want to assemble in one of their houses they will. The government has said that "community transmission" within private homes is one of the main causes of transmission. It's a bit of a mystery how they know that (as it is with many pronouncements they make) but that's what they've said and that's why the ridiculous "Rule of Six" was introduced. So they chuck people out of the pubs and restaurants all at the same time so that they have to find somewhere else to go. There were reports at the weekend of people churning out of pubs at 10pm and heading for the nearest Tesco to stock up on takeaway booze to continue their evening. Are they going to take a can each home and drink alone? What do you think?
There is no point in developing a strategy based on how you think people should behave. You have to have a strategy that copes with how they actually do behave. Assuming that everybody will meekly toddle off home to bed at 10pm on a Saturday night is naïve and irresponsible. In Manchester, Birmingham and London there were major problems last weekend with people who had all been chucked out into the street at 10pm. A child of ten could have foreseen the problems. But this government assumes that everybody will do as they are told and go home to bed. I'm pleased to see that some public figures (the mayors of Birmingham and Manchester to name two) are calling for an urgent review because the curfew is failing to keep people apart, is actually increasing the risk of transmissions and is further damaging an already crippled hospitality sector. Predictably, alas, the Mayor of London is calling for the whole place to be closed down but I'd expect nothing else from him.
Most people go out for a specified time.
They want to meet friends and drink and eat for 2 or 3 hours.
If the venue shuts at 11pm, they will meet at 8pm.
If the venue shuts at 10pm, they will meet at 7pm.
They will be exposed to strangers for exactly the same amount of time. I cannot see how earlier closing makes any difference one way or another will reduce spread of the virus.
They want to meet friends and drink and eat for 2 or 3 hours.
If the venue shuts at 11pm, they will meet at 8pm.
If the venue shuts at 10pm, they will meet at 7pm.
They will be exposed to strangers for exactly the same amount of time. I cannot see how earlier closing makes any difference one way or another will reduce spread of the virus.
// I'm simply saying that with me being "forced" to go out earlier, I'm coming into contact with people that I wouldn't normally see.//
at least ONE person can see that doing something an hour or two earlier may lead to different behaviour
actually I think it is safer
https:/
at least ONE person can see that doing something an hour or two earlier may lead to different behaviour
actually I think it is safer
https:/
bobbinwales
Restraunts, Cafes and Pubs are complaining because they are losing an hour of trading. Their venues seating capacity has been significantly lower (and is being strictly enforced). So if the same amount of people come out but in less time, they will get full and have to turn paying customers away.
Restraunts, Cafes and Pubs are complaining because they are losing an hour of trading. Their venues seating capacity has been significantly lower (and is being strictly enforced). So if the same amount of people come out but in less time, they will get full and have to turn paying customers away.
// Restaurants, Cafes and Pubs are complaining because they are losing an hour of trading. //
some establishments are losing more than that - "closing time at 11pm" was legislated away in 2005; in towns and cities known for their pub culture (Doncaster, Wolverhampton, etc) many open until 1am at weekends. or rather, they did.....
some establishments are losing more than that - "closing time at 11pm" was legislated away in 2005; in towns and cities known for their pub culture (Doncaster, Wolverhampton, etc) many open until 1am at weekends. or rather, they did.....
I doubt many will agree, but when the government of the day many moons ago allowed all day boozing, and running into the early hours of the morning, this country went to pot, if I remember the government said they had done this to spread drinking over a longer period to reduce drunkenness and for visiting tourists, it did no such thing,. What it did do was increase revenue to the government, and produce thousands more people with a booze problem. In NJs post above he states that people coming out of pubs last week were going into Tesco to get more booze to take home, well, its obvious to me that these people have got a booze problem, and just the sort we don't want on the streets now, or in the future. There are more young people now with liver problems due to drink than we've ever experienced.
And just to add to that I've always liked a drink as far back as I can remember, and still do, but never would you have then, or now found me rolling round the street in my own vomit, and wasting ambulance and police time. Most cells at police stations are full of drunks at night, and with the present virus I wouldn't care to be a police officer or ambulance staff having someone vomiting in my face, plus may be heavy droplets of the virus.
//…its buying them time,…//
To what purpose?
//…so the policy works in reducing contacts in pubs//
And simply transfers the contacts to somewhere else.
// Restaurants, Cafes and Pubs are complaining because they are losing an hour of trading. //
Two restaurants that I use have a number of customers who like to eat early. They leave and they then re-let the table for the rest of the evening. They can’t do that with a 10pm chuck out so that’s 50% of the revenue (probably a bit more because later eaters tend to linger longer) for those tables lost. Bear in mind most places have already lost between 30% and 50% of their tables due to distancing requirements and that’s a lot of business lost. How much evidence is there that restaurants are a hotbed of infections?
I don’t think you quite understand just how close to the edge large numbers of these small businesses are. They were forcibly closed for three months; most have them have lost a sizeable chunk of their capacity. Now they have lost the ability to provide a service for a full evening. The loss of these businesses will have profound repercussions throughout the country. Tax revenue from them will be lost and much of that goes to fund the health service which, remember, is responsible for treating all conditions.
This continual effort to protect the vulnerable by trying to prevent all spread is proving an absolute disaster and in the long run will cost far more lives than Covid.
//…but never would you have then, or now found me rolling round the street in my own vomit, and wasting ambulance and police time.//
The vast majority of people simply like to go out and enjoy themselves by having a few drinks. You are trying to load the problems a few people have with alcohol on the back of Covid. Closing the pubs at 10pm won’t prevent problem drinking.
To what purpose?
//…so the policy works in reducing contacts in pubs//
And simply transfers the contacts to somewhere else.
// Restaurants, Cafes and Pubs are complaining because they are losing an hour of trading. //
Two restaurants that I use have a number of customers who like to eat early. They leave and they then re-let the table for the rest of the evening. They can’t do that with a 10pm chuck out so that’s 50% of the revenue (probably a bit more because later eaters tend to linger longer) for those tables lost. Bear in mind most places have already lost between 30% and 50% of their tables due to distancing requirements and that’s a lot of business lost. How much evidence is there that restaurants are a hotbed of infections?
I don’t think you quite understand just how close to the edge large numbers of these small businesses are. They were forcibly closed for three months; most have them have lost a sizeable chunk of their capacity. Now they have lost the ability to provide a service for a full evening. The loss of these businesses will have profound repercussions throughout the country. Tax revenue from them will be lost and much of that goes to fund the health service which, remember, is responsible for treating all conditions.
This continual effort to protect the vulnerable by trying to prevent all spread is proving an absolute disaster and in the long run will cost far more lives than Covid.
//…but never would you have then, or now found me rolling round the street in my own vomit, and wasting ambulance and police time.//
The vast majority of people simply like to go out and enjoy themselves by having a few drinks. You are trying to load the problems a few people have with alcohol on the back of Covid. Closing the pubs at 10pm won’t prevent problem drinking.
// It's a bit of a mystery how they know that (as it is with many pronouncements they make)//
contact tracing - you ask them where they got it from
no mystery- appliance of science
objectively in the scientific sense - X and all his children have it but not work mates nor schoolfrenz - looks like home
Y and a third of workmates are positive but not his wife and only one kid - - workplace
contact tracing - you ask them where they got it from
no mystery- appliance of science
objectively in the scientific sense - X and all his children have it but not work mates nor schoolfrenz - looks like home
Y and a third of workmates are positive but not his wife and only one kid - - workplace
.// Restraunts, Cafes and Pubs are complaining because they are losing an hour of trading. //
well come on reader
this shows behaviour is dependent on time-of-day - in this case spend spend spend ( and drink drink drink)
and yet we have 55 ABers plaintively asking on this thread why an hour earlier makes any difference
these impenetrable mysteries are solved by looking at the data
well come on reader
this shows behaviour is dependent on time-of-day - in this case spend spend spend ( and drink drink drink)
and yet we have 55 ABers plaintively asking on this thread why an hour earlier makes any difference
these impenetrable mysteries are solved by looking at the data
//...contact tracing - you ask them where they got it from
no mystery- appliance of science//
I've largely given up to responding to your posts, Peter, but since this remark is fairly lucid and sensible, I'll make an exception.
If I were unfortunate enough to contract the virus there would be absolutely no way of establishing with any certainty - or even uncertainty - where I got it from. In the past two to three weeks I've visited four local restaurants, at least three local pubs. I've spent two nights in Dorset, two in Cornwall (again visiting a number of hostelries and restaurants). I've visited the Eden Project in Cornwall, Hampton Court Palace and the Tower of London (which I usually visit at least twice a year). I've been on buses almost daily, made at least six train journeys and been shopping in probably half a dozen different shops. I've also had two lots of visitors to my house and two builders in repairing my front drive. And that's just what I can think of off the top of my head.
If anyone can successfully "apply the science" to properly establish where I might have contracted the virus, I'd take my hat off to them.
no mystery- appliance of science//
I've largely given up to responding to your posts, Peter, but since this remark is fairly lucid and sensible, I'll make an exception.
If I were unfortunate enough to contract the virus there would be absolutely no way of establishing with any certainty - or even uncertainty - where I got it from. In the past two to three weeks I've visited four local restaurants, at least three local pubs. I've spent two nights in Dorset, two in Cornwall (again visiting a number of hostelries and restaurants). I've visited the Eden Project in Cornwall, Hampton Court Palace and the Tower of London (which I usually visit at least twice a year). I've been on buses almost daily, made at least six train journeys and been shopping in probably half a dozen different shops. I've also had two lots of visitors to my house and two builders in repairing my front drive. And that's just what I can think of off the top of my head.
If anyone can successfully "apply the science" to properly establish where I might have contracted the virus, I'd take my hat off to them.
Latest Posts
Film, Media & TV9 mins ago
News13 mins ago
Dores Anyone Know What This Means...
Technology18 mins ago
News19 mins ago
ChatterBank21 mins ago
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.