I assume everything is covered with sh1t. Focusses the mind!
I assume everything is covered with sh1t. Focusses the mind!
Inside the average house, it is! Swabs from many places in the home grow faecal organisms. Some years back a chap where I was working gave a talk about Pakistan, his home country. To try and avoid traveller's diarrhoea he said assume everything is covered in faeces. Very honest of him.
To try and avoid Covid 19 we not only have to be aware of where others have touched, but where they have coughed/sneezed or even breathed or spoken over. There seems little doubt Covid 19 is in exhaled breath. The harder the exhalation - coughing for example - probably the bigger the infection risk, but I doubt it is just coughing/sneezing/touching that results in transfer of infection.
An argument that will be fought out in the courts I suspect.
Here is the law. See section 6
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/...0200350_en.pdf
Yet police in south west are enforcing a none existent law ,by not allowing travel to dog walk or exercise.
A criminal prosecution QC on Twitter, said they will get thrown out of court, that he has no case he can bring on the polices behalf. Rightly so.
Why is CPS not banning such cases?
Is it too much to hope the police involved will be prosecuted for wasting police time?
As an infringement of civil liberty, this should be appealed to the top.
If the government wants to ban drive to exercise, or put limits on it, it could easily amend the law.
Last edited by Oracle; 01-04-2020 at 12:13 PM.
Cause tramps like us, baby we were born to run
This is not a loophole, there isnt a law! a prosecution barrister says he has no case to prosecute those the police are summoning.
The statute declares reasons for leaving home ie exercise, not location duration or frequency.
How is driving 5 minutes to an empty off road place a violation of letter or spirit? It’s a health law, not public order in a time of unrest. So it should be viewed in the context of whether a breach reduced social distancing, or was for other than stated reason. That is all.
Yet a Cheshire man is summonsed for driving a couple of minutes to exercise a dog on his own land. Which is what I do to run. Do you support a fine for me?
The difference between Russia and free countries is supposedly the police cannot make it up as they go along.
Last edited by Oracle; 01-04-2020 at 01:12 PM.
The thing is people do disagree on what is sensible and interpret things differently. I read a long Facebook thread the other night where a load of sanctimonious runners were castigating a bloke, who had driven a short distance to a park to walk his dog in south Leeds. Yet the man will likely have been coming into contact with far less other people than the runners, who were all starting and finishing from their homes.
Now regardless of who you think is right, the fact is there is no law currently prohibiting you from driving a short distance in order to exercise. So the police should not be harassing people who do so. There is no case to answer.
Last edited by Muddy Retriever; 01-04-2020 at 01:29 PM.
It’s refreshing to see that most people appear to now be exercising directly from home, far less cars yesterday evening filling the local beauty spot car parks.