Jump to content

Interpreting the Law


LadyG

Featured Posts

3 hours ago, LadyG said:

No, tbey were entering my bubble,  in spite of the fact that the law is there to protect me, to protect them, and to stop the plague.

I am a high risk person, I do not want to be assaulted by idiots who decide to interpret the laws to suit themselves. I have made my position clear, your post is pointless.

 

And it was not your job to stop people entering a train just because they didn't fit into your twisted mindset.
The only people who have a right to stop someone getting onto a train are BTP or the railway officials, and even they have been told only to advise in the current situation. It was you who was actually breaking the Law in doing what you did by blocking their way.
If you are so at risk, which I'm beginning to doubt, you should not have been on the train.
The Americans have a name for the likes of you; Google "Karen's". You fit the description perfectly!
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At thde weekend we went into a Tesco's supermarket, for the first time in some time. They didn't have the queuing system outside, so there were quite a few customers in there, but I was pleased to note that the level of compliance appeared to be 100%: every single one (and doubtless the married ones too) was wearing a face covering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be surprised if wearing a cheap cloth mask is of any use at all, and they fog my specs up and I don't like them. Due to beardedness, they don't seal at all. Visors are apparently useless. But it seems polite in the current situation to wear a mask when asked, so I do, if only to stop other people worrying a bit. It's nice if they feel a bit safer, even if it almost certainly isn't true. But, as I said in the dog poo thread, most people are plonkers and the trick is to try and keep oneself as safe as you can and not get depressed because there are a lot of idiots out there. You aint going to change human nature, though if enough of them refuse a vaccine when it arrives, Darwinism might lend a hand.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I would be surprised if wearing a cheap cloth mask is of any use at all, and they fog my specs up and I don't like them. Due to beardedness, they don't seal at all. 

I am affected in a similar way for the same reasons.  However I feel that where I to couch or sneeze in the mask any droplets which escape will be moving more slowly and fewer in number because of the twists and turns the air goes through to escape the mask.

 

The fogged glasses are a minor irritation which I can put up with when in an enclosed area.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Murflynn said:

any diver will tell you that spit and polish does the trick.

I tried that. Didn't work :(

 

Of the various masks available, I have found that the surgical mask, with a bit of metal that bends over my nose, has worked best to resist fogging.

 

Anyone who has watched the video with a laser showing droplets with, and without, a mask, will know that they have a significant effect. The petri dishes shown here only serve to add to that. In addition, the cartoon doing the rounds where someone pisses on you:

 

Both Naked : you get soaked in piss.

 

Pisser wearing trousers and underpants: no piss reaches you, even if naked.

 

Pisser naked, Pissed on wearing trousers etc.: trousers get damp, a bit might get through

 

Both wearing trousers etc.: no piss gets near you.

 

The pictures are better, but it ain't rocket science, even for Smelly.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

 Visors are apparently useless. 

This is unnerving news. The young lady who administered my overdue post-lockdown haircut last week was wearing a full-length face visor, i.e. it reached down to just below her chin. Surely if a person's exhalations reach the visor, they don't go any further? I suppose a few germs could escape from the bottom of the visor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Athy said:

This is unnerving news. The young lady who administered my overdue post-lockdown haircut last week was wearing a full-length face visor, i.e. it reached down to just below her chin. Surely if a person's exhalations reach the visor, they don't go any further? I suppose a few germs could escape from the bottom of the visor.

The air flow is directed downwards by the face shield.   The droplets are so very tiny they flow along with the air so more than a few escape from below the shield.  

 

Not that I expect your "I am the only one who is ever right" attitude to accept that.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jerra said:

The air flow is directed downwards by the face shield.   The droplets are so very tiny they flow along with the air so more than a few escape from below the shield.  

 

Not that I expect your "I am the only one who is ever right" attitude to accept that.

Thanks for the explanation.

What does that last line mean? I am always quick to admit mistakes and keen to learn from people who know more about a given subject than I do. I assume you were joking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Athy said:

This is unnerving news. The young lady who administered my overdue post-lockdown haircut last week was wearing a full-length face visor, i.e. it reached down to just below her chin. Surely if a person's exhalations reach the visor, they don't go any further? I suppose a few germs could escape from the bottom of the visor.

 

Realistically none of these things are 100% effective, but there's a balance between benefit and cost, as with everything else.

 

I recall in the early days of this virus we were told that whatever measures we put in place had to be sustainable in the long run, so started out with things like staying 2m apart, working from home etc - if we were too draconian then people would get fed up and stop complying. Probably should have added face coverings to that back in March.

 

And then the government got bullied off course by populist media pressure into a draconian lockdown that of course was unsustainable and they had to lift eventually. With the result that people are now fed up and can't be bothered to comply with masks etc.

 

I do think if they had stuck to their guns, put some sustainable regulations in place to slow the spread without being too draconian and trusted the public to comply then we'd be in a much better position all round now and have a much higher degree of compliance. See also: Sweden. And before anyone points out the death rate in Sweden, yes, I know, they had infection control problems in care homes in common with several other European countries.

 

Personally, I hate wearing masks. They make me feel travel sick on public transport, glasses fog up etc. Can't spend more than 10 mins in a shop without having to go outside for air. But instead of ignoring the regulations I just avoid shops and public transport as much as possible.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Athy said:

Thanks for the explanation.

What does that last line mean? I am always quick to admit mistakes and keen to learn from people who know more about a given subject than I do. I assume you were joking.

My very humble apologies for some reason I thought the post was by somebody else.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Athy said:

This is unnerving news. The young lady who administered my overdue post-lockdown haircut last week was wearing a full-length face visor, i.e. it reached down to just below her chin. Surely if a person's exhalations reach the visor, they don't go any further? I suppose a few germs could escape from the bottom of the visor.

I think a mask as well as a visor has been advised for hairdressers for some time, but this was made mandatory from 24 September. Still, it appears academic as you fortunately still seem to be well.

 

"The person providing a service (such as hairdressers or beauticians), because of the period of time spent in close proximity to a person’s face, mouth and nose should therefore take further precautions to protect clients. This must take the form of a clear visor/goggles and a Type II face mask."

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-coronavirus-covid-19/close-contact-services

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, phantom_iv said:

Talking of hair cuts, it looks from the latest regs that you need to wear a face covering while your hair is being cut. Looks like I'm back to cutting my own hair then ?

that suggests that you are as bald as a coot and the only hair you grow is on your face.

 

..................  or is your face fitted to your scalp?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Murflynn said:

that suggests that you are as bald as a coot and the only hair you grow is on your face.

 

..................  or is your face fitted to your scalp?

It's actually really easy and the hairdressers are used to dealing with face masks, not sure I see the problem either 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jerra said:

My very humble apologies for some reason I thought the post was by somebody else.

....and my grateful thanks for that reply (I hope that "grateful" and "thanks" do not constitute tautology).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, phantom_iv said:

 

Realistically none of these things are 100% effective, but there's a balance between benefit and cost, as with everything else.

 

I recall in the early days of this virus we were told that whatever measures we put in place had to be sustainable in the long run, so started out with things like staying 2m apart, working from home etc - if we were too draconian then people would get fed up and stop complying. Probably should have added face coverings to that back in March.

 

And then the government got bullied off course by populist media pressure into a draconian lockdown that of course was unsustainable and they had to lift eventually. With the result that people are now fed up and can't be bothered to comply with masks etc.

 

I do think if they had stuck to their guns, put some sustainable regulations in place to slow the spread without being too draconian and trusted the public to comply then we'd be in a much better position all round now and have a much higher degree of compliance. See also: Sweden. And before anyone points out the death rate in Sweden, yes, I know, they had infection control problems in care homes in common with several other European countries.

 

Personally, I hate wearing masks. They make me feel travel sick on public transport, glasses fog up etc. Can't spend more than 10 mins in a shop without having to go outside for air. But instead of ignoring the regulations I just avoid shops and public transport as much as possible.

try the washable cloth one, I hated them too but now got used to it... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, phantom_iv said:

Talking of hair cuts, it looks from the latest regs that you need to wear a face covering while your hair is being cut.

Well, it wasn't so last Monday (21st). Indeed, how can a barber cut long side hair and sideboards without snipping through the elastic on the mask?

I made a point of asking the hairdresser if I should wear my mask and she told me not to.

It looks as if I beat the new edict by three days!

Edited by Athy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Athy said:

Well, it wasn't so last Monday (21st). Indeed, how can a barber cut long side hair and sideboards without snipping through the elastic on the mask?

I made a point of asking the hairdresser if I should wear my mask and she told me not to.

You make a good point. I might not have to self-isolate while my hair grows back from a botched buzz cut after all ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Could I suggest "very carefully" they do manage to cut round the ears with no mishaps.

The (late) barber in our village managed this - miraculously, as in late life he developed the "shakes" and I was ever fearful that a slice of ear would fall to the floor alongside the hair trimmings. His condition meant that he also tended to take the scissors away before he had finished the snip - reminiscent of hair-pulling in junior school. I kept going there out of courtesy more than anything else, as his salon was only three doors away from our house.

 

Returning to your previous point about visors and their lack of effectiveness, is the same true about the perspex screens which many shops now have on their counters? Perhaps visor + screen blocks the bug effectively?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Athy said:

Returning to your previous point about visors and their lack of effectiveness, is the same true about the perspex screens which many shops now have on their counters? Perhaps visor + screen blocks the bug effectively?

The screens I have seen are large and the person not close to them, therefore the chance of a lot of droplets passing over/under/round will be much less than the breath coming down from a face shield.

 

I have read that droplets from a speaking unmasked face travel in the region of 1.9 - 2 m so a large shield a distance from the face will probably get plastered but not too much swirl round the edges/over the top.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, phantom_iv said:

 

trusted the public to comply 

The public that I saw, and see, have pretty much taken no notice of the 2m social distancing guidelines, since day one of this. Given that it is probably the easiest to comply with, there was never any chance of the public complying to any great degree.

 

I've said it before, but it bears repeating, that I've often found myself backed into a corner by someone, (often older than me), during a conversation. I'm trying to keep 2m, and they have no idea. Even a polite request that we keep our distance usually results in  few seconds of distancing, then back to backing of, on my part.

 

It seems that this public you think can be trusted to comply are now flooding out of pubs and restaurants at 10pm, and piling back to someone's house to carry on getting pissed and spreading the virus.

 

I was hopeful that the numbers had fallen and it might be under control.... at less than 50 deaths a day, it was around as deadly as the flu that we accept without batting much of an eyelid.

 

You get my drift - trusting the public to comply, (in enough numbers), is pretty much a non starter :( 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.