Yesterday Derbyshire Police’s roads unit used an armed drone strike to take out a car heading into the Peak District National Park. Obviously they’ve tried to paint it as a simple road traffic accident, but…
😀
"Reasonable" force.
Don’t see why you can’t do 1
Ditto 2 but both with the proviso they don’t want you doing it all day
For me the exercise is the 12 miles you cycle, so doesn’t leave you any time for doing anything on the beach.
As with all these things the aim is to reduce social contact. The rational thing here is that when you go somewhere, even if it is to the park at the end of the road, if there are loads of people and you can’t maintain 2m then go somewhere else.
More seriously, it's noticeable that Derbyshire Police who call out 'lycra wearing leisure cyclists' and use drone footage to shame folk driving to walk, don't seem particularly bothered that some dumb-arse car driver has managed to use up valuable NHS resources by needlessly totalling their car in what is a 30mph speed limit.
Given that, can I:
– Carry my Kayak 400m to the river?
Ah, but how far would you need to carry it back? 😉
"reasonable" actually has a legal definition. Its " as understood by the man on the clapham omnibus" ie what the average person thinks not what one individual thinks but what the average person thinks so you may think something is reasoanbale - like driving to exercise but if the average person does not think it reasonable it is not in the eyes of the law
On non essential travel its pretty clear that those who think driving to exercise is reasonable are a small minority therefore it is NOT reasonable in the eyes of the law.
How are you judging a small minority? Have you failed to read the Guardian article which explicitly states that it is legal? Unless you deliberately try to misinterpret the guidance to fit in with your own existing views which of course has already happened on here.
TJ, you are Immanuel Kant and I claim my six million a priori dollars 🙂
TJ, you are Immanuel Kant
<reported for swear filter avoidance>
Actually I am Lord Denning - I believe it was his interpretation in a case that became the standard.
Set a limit, however arbitrary, and communicate it properly to the public.
Does that also appy to Biddlestone?
its pretty clear that those who think driving to exercise is reasonable are a small minority
Not according to recent dialogue on this forum.
"the man on the Clapham omnibus" might well ask what the opinion is of The National Police Chiefs Council before deciding whether it is reasonable to travel for exercise on the basis that carries weight than yours or if some of the more shouty members of this forum.
Hey binners, sorry I didn’t reply to you sooner but I’ve been out on my bike for a couple of hours.
It’s pretty clear you can’t engage with this stuff on a rational basis and would rather just rant, foam and exaggerate what others are saying. I’m not really into that so I’ll just leave you to it.
Well, thats a terrible shame. I feel a bit guilty now that the forum is going to be deprived of your exceptionalism and enormous, planet-sized sense of self-entitlement 'commmon sense' opinions and wsidom on this subject, on my account.
And reciprical apoligies for not replying sooner. I've been out for a walk. From my door. I didn't feel the need to drive anywhere, on account of being happy to adhere to Rule 1, and not thinking I'm such a special and unique being that the rules don't apply to
Guys - not meaning the reasonable thing to be applied strictly to this. Just pointing out that reasonable does have a legal definition. As in "take all reasonable steps"
'Reasonable' is a useful legal term, but it's a placeholder which generally attracts legal precedent over time as its limits are tested - 'man on the Clapham Omnibus' being the classic example of a law which said 'reasonable', followed by a judge being asked to rule later what that actually meant.
My point was that 'reasonable' is all well and good when you have the time to apply the legal checks and balances, not so great when the next day, an officer like Mildred is debating what's 'reasonable' with some argumentative sod through a car window.
The government IMO needs to define clearly what it expects of the population in terms of essential/non-essential movement, and communicate that clearly, rather than announce something, then get Michael Gove to walk it back a bit or interpret it live during an interview.
Has anyone ever been on a clapham omnibus?
I think we need to know what kind of charachters we're dealing with here
I think you probably need a hat Binners. A proper stylish hat but not too posh or edgy. Trilby?
I have to say that personally I'd probably go for a Panama. Worn at a rakish angle, but not too racey
Has anyone ever been on a clapham omnibus?
I think we need to know what kind of charachters we’re dealing with here
You've obviously not watched Downton Abbey.
On a more serious note there's been a number of technically correct interpretations of the current situation, you may be able to drive, exercise, drive a lot more safely than go to the supermarket for example. Trouble is other's, including the police don't know you've done that risk assessment in your head. The more people see others going out the more people we will be out and the faster the lock down will crumble.
You might have thought it through carefully but you'll be encouraging many others who haven't it's fine to get outside again. Sometimes being seen to do the right thing is more important than doing something correctly.
The government IMO needs to define clearly what it expects of the population in terms of essential/non-essential movement, and communicate that clearly, rather than announce something, then get Michael Gove to walk it back a bit or interpret it live during an interview.
I agree in principle with this - but it's really difficult in practice. For example - It would not be reasonable for me to drive to exercise as I live on the edge of the countryside, couple of miles to open moorland, lots of RoW, empty roads - less than 100m from nearest Bridleway. If you live in a flat in centre of a city - driving s few miles to escape people would seem reasonable in this context
Obviously I've not driven anywhere to exercise anyway - I rarely do even without a lockdown - but if I was in a city centre I'm not sure what call I'd make
On a more serious note there’s been a number of technically correct interpretations of the current situation, you may be able to drive, exercise, drive a lot more safely than go to the supermarket for example. Trouble is other’s, including the police don’t know you’ve done that risk assessment in your head. The more people see others going out the more people we will be out and the faster the lock down will crumble.
You might have thought it through carefully but you’ll be encouraging many others who haven’t it’s fine to get outside again. Sometimes being seen to do the right thing is more important than doing something correctly.
I don’t necessarily disagree with this, but what if the alternative is going to a park where you have several dozen <2m encounters with people. Ignoring the risk of that actually transmitting infection, what if that leads people to get more blasé about close contact? Thereby also defeating the purpose of the lockdown. Ultimately in this situation there is no ‘good’ option:it’s about taking the least worst. Stick to the rules, abide by what the intention of what the rule is, and don’t abuse the situation. I’ll reiterate, the rules are there to reduce social contact, not to give a few anxious people on the internet the right to try and gain a feeling of control of the situation by exerting control of others. Sorry if that last bit is a bit harsh.
I agree in principle with this – but it’s really difficult in practice.
It’s not, if you don’t stick to the Tory libertarian philosophy. In Ireland they have stated you can exercise but only up to 2km from your home address, specific and clear guidance. Quite why we couldn’t do this..,
Stay in, not exercising for a couple of weeks wont kill you, there aren't many people who would really suffer from taking it easy for a few weeks. Ironically many of the people now exercising their right to daily exercise probably weren't before the lock down.
RULE NUMBER 1.
Can't we just save a lot of time and merge this thread with the "Lock down, can I ride my bike in the countryside?" on in classifieds? I'm sure there is going to be a massive overlap.
I agree in principle with this – but it’s really difficult in practice. For example – It would not be reasonable for me to drive to exercise as I live on the edge of the countryside, couple of miles to open moorland, lots of RoW, empty roads – less than 100m from nearest Bridleway. If you live in a flat in centre of a city – driving s few miles to escape people would seem reasonable in this context
Obviously I’ve not driven anywhere to exercise anyway – I rarely do even without a lockdown – but if I was in a city centre I’m not sure what call I’d make
In normal times I'd agree, there are lots of 'reasonable' interpretations, and lots of individuals who are capable of making reasonable risk assessments. But by leaving it up to them, you are also leaving it up to people who are incapable of this.
So while it is probably hard on some people in the former category, at the moment you have to make it crystal clear for everyone, which in turn makes it a lot easier for the people who are being asked to police this.
'Where do you live?' 'Right, that's 20 miles away, go home immediately, it's the law'.
or
'Where do you live?' 'That's 20 miles away, that doesn't seem like a reasonable distance to drive for exercise, please go home.'
'But I think it's reasonable officer, there's nothing saying I can't...etc'
I don't think setting a max distance will stop the arguments. People are still people. Say you make it 5 miles, someone turns up at a busy beach, gets turned away, big argument because "I live 4.9 milea away, I'm allowed to be here". Make a rule a people will argue against it.
Meanwhile, Rivington Moor is on fire due to people meeting up to have a BBQ.
Everyone thinks what they are doing is fine. It isn't always
Truth is that the overwhelming majority of folk in this country are perfectly reasonable and law-abiding and a quick chat with a police person will be enough to make them consider their actions.
What your local Bobby does not need is a nation of curtain-twitches calling in every imaginary discretion when they see folk behaving perfectly legally but beyond some homemade set of rules.
Meanwhile, Rivington Moor is on fire due to people meeting up to have a BBQ.
There was a peat fire on Barra yesterday caused by some overzealous crofters. Straw men really must learn to keep away from such things.
Stay in, not exercising for a couple of weeks wont kill you, there aren’t many people who would really suffer from taking it easy for a few weeks. Ironically many of the people now exercising their right to daily exercise probably weren’t before the lock down.
RULE NUMBER 1.
Gov advice is to actually exercise, they're not saying "if you want to, you can leave once a day" they're actively encouraging us to do so, 1 to keep as sane 2 to keep is fit to fight the virus.
There is a huge psychology at play here.
Currently we are asked and advised to 'do what we can'. Most people therefore voluntarily give up some rights for the greater good.
Make it a rule and people will both resent being forced by the government / police / The Man (and therefore show it) and they will find ways to circumvent something they know is for the greater good (see tax avoidance for example).
Can’t we just save a lot of time and merge this thread with the “Lock down, can I ride my bike in the countryside?” on in classifieds? I’m sure there is going to be a massive overlap.
I think 99.9% of people get that driving to ride is an entirely unnecessary risk of spread. It’s some people who are walking not riding that think their drive to a “quiet spot” is essential.
Gov advice is to actually exercise, they’re not saying “if you want to, you can leave once a day” they’re actively encouraging us to do so, 1 to keep as sane 2 to keep is fit to fight the virus.
Indeed.
Long term the effects of staying indoors for 12 weeks, suspending all the usual early-detection systems for other illnesses etc may well end up having a bigger and longer impact than Cv19.
The difference is they will be spread out, not concentrated in a short space of time.
Make it a rule and people will both resent being forced by the government / police / The Man (and therefore show it) and they will find ways to circumvent something they know is for the greater good (see tax avoidance for example).
Its fairly obvious that the government really don't want to have to legislate, and I very much doubt that the police would fancy compulsary enforcement either. They're hoping instead that people will adhere to Rule 1
I think that we can now divided into two groups
1. People who understand these are unprecedented times.... and who thus accept that perfectly reasonable, temporary restrictions must be placed on our usual freedoms to prevent the spread of a virus which is a huge threat to the most vulnerable in society.
2. People who don't
Its that simple. One group, which thankfully appear to be the overwhelming majority, are not acting like selfish, self-entitled bell ends. The other group most definitely are.
All the police are doing are informing the latter group of what they are
.
Obviously I’ve not driven anywhere to exercise anyway – I rarely do even without a lockdown – but if I was in a city centre I’m not sure what call I’d make
Probably worse in small towns, this is a photo my daughter took on her run this morning:
[img] 
[/img]
Isn't this all very simple?
Surely all we have to do is flag down a Clapham Omnibus and ask the most average looking fella on there what he thinks?
Bus will probably be empty, too. Damn you Covid 19!
Well this is what the courts think to it all
They better be sat over 2m apart...
Uptick in car use for the first time today. Good work of the police publicity being undone by the (reporting of) that new advice from the NPCC? Or yesterday’s “green shoots” ill advised comment at the daily press briefing?
[edit: data is for yesterday, so neither]
Uptick in car use for the first time today. Good work of the police publicity being undone by the (reporting of) that new advice?
Maybe people trying to get shopping it has been a week since lockdown and I know for one I will need to go soon as I cannot get a delivery slot.
Maybe so.
Maybe people trying to get shopping it has been a week since lockdown and I know for one I will need to go soon as I cannot get a delivery
+1
I went out in the car for the first time in over a week to the shop yesterday, I had had the same thought about the figures
Probably worse in small towns, this is a photo my daughter took on her run this morning:
To be fair that is the city of London though. There are no residential properties and all the office workers are obviously at home. It looks like that every weekend, which coincidentally makes it a popular running, bmx, skateboard etc location at weekends.
Friends who live in busy residential parts of London have been telling me that it is next to impossible to adhere to the 2m rule while at the local supermarkets or out for a run because so many people are doing the same.
Friends who live in busy residential parts of London have been telling me that it is next to impossible to adhere to the 2m rule while at the local supermarkets or out for a run because so many people are doing the same.
I live in Wimbledon, it’s not been a problem.
