O/T:- Should he stay or should he go? WARNING - POLITICAL THREAD!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheBlackHorse

... in these days of enlightenment, I think you should all go onto bended knee to Mr C. He has demonstrated how to apply common sense to his own particular difficulty. You don't need the Gov to tell you so-called intelligent ones everything, do you. ADVISORY means think for yourself and decide. We are not in a police state and don't have to fill in bits of paper to move from A to B. FFS ...

---

We need to put an end to this BS. I know your type are fact-light. This is a quote from the House of Commons Library :

The law
On Thursday 26 and Saturday 28 March regulations were made across the UK which gave the police (and others if designated) powers to enforce the lockdown. The regulations have three main effects:

They significantly restrict the free movement of people by making it an offence to be leave home without a “reasonable excuse” and (with some exceptions) to gather in groups of more than two.
They require all non-essential retail, hospitality and entertainment businesses to close. Restaurants, pubs and cafés are permitted to operate takeaway services.
They give police officers powers to forcibly return those who refuse to comply with the lockdown to their homes. The police also have powers to issue Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) to those who commit an offence under the regulations.

The argument is around reasonable excuse in this case not whether he had an option to follow advice. The majority seem to think he didn't have a reasonable excuse.

Is this a press conference or a trial without jury?

If the police have overstepped the mark by fining people then that is the failure of the police not Cummings.

It seems the press would prefer we live in a 'press state' whereby people can't take actions that are within the law but don't fit in with their world view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frenchmagpie

We need to put an end to this BS. I know your type are fact-light. This is a quote from the House of Commons Library :

The law
On Thursday 26 and Saturday 28 March regulations were made across the UK which gave the police (and others if designated) powers to enforce the lockdown. The regulations have three main effects:

They significantly restrict the free movement of people by making it an offence to be leave home without a “reasonable excuse” and (with some exceptions) to gather in groups of more than two.
They require all non-essential retail, hospitality and entertainment businesses to close. Restaurants, pubs and cafés are permitted to operate takeaway services.
They give police officers powers to forcibly return those who refuse to comply with the lockdown to their homes. The police also have powers to issue Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) to those who commit an offence under the regulations.

The argument is around reasonable excuse in this case not whether he had an option to follow advice. The majority seem to think he didn't have a reasonable excuse.

---

Reasonable excuse isn't what 'the majority' think, it allows an individual a defence in law for their actions - to justify their actions. Do you think that Britain would be a better/safer place if the government had placed every person under house arrest in March?

Cummings "I once took my wife and child on an hour's drive to test my eyesight"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverleeno

Reasonable excuse isn't what 'the majority' think, it allows an individual a defence in law for their actions - to justify their actions. Do you think that Britain would be a better/safer place if the government had placed very person under house arrest in March?

---

Of course it isn't just what the majority think. But clearly the vast number of people don't believe he had a reasonable excuse and it doesn't become reasonable just because one person thinks so. And yes, there would have been no spread of the virus if every person had been under house arrest ! Doh. Do you know what STAY AT HOME means ? There were some exceptions under the rules but driving across the country with a potentially infected wife to elderly parents doesn't seem to have been compliant.

... well done in the presser Mr C. The UK bitching press are shown for what we all know they are; absolute gutter snipes. They know the gullible lemmings are easily conned and the Brexit Revengers and lefties now have no where to go. Next ...

From his concocted story and all the distorted justifications this one stands out...

...he drove to the Barnard castle beauty spot as a driving test.....! Like you do...

That's the most plausible 'story' him and his team can come up with! Ill or not, you'd know your own ability to drive or not, can you imagine yourself saying I need to drive 1 hr to a beauty spot as a test?

Goes to show the effort that's been needed to put this jackanory together. Taking the whole nation for fools

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheBlackHorse

... well done in the presser Mr C. The UK bitching press are shown for what we all know they are; absolute gutter snipes. They know the gullible lemmings are easily conned and the Brexit Revengers and lefties now have no where to go. Next ...

---

Wow. There is really nothing you won't swallow.

Who is the lemming? Because your Pied Piper just fell off a cliff.

If you're worried about your eyesight, you don't take to the road and the last thing you'd want to do is stick your child in the back seat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frenchmagpie

Of course it isn't just what the majority think. But clearly the vast number of people don't believe he had a reasonable excuse and it doesn't become reasonable just because one person thinks so. And yes, there would have been no spread of the virus if every person had been under house arrest ! Doh. Do you know what STAY AT HOME means ? There were some exceptions under the rules but driving across the country with a potentially infected wife to elderly parents doesn't seem to have been compliant.

---

You don't need to put stay at home in capitals, I know what it means. As you say there were exceptions under the law. who decides what is reasonable? The law doesn't list every eventuality. Did you watch the press conference? He travelled to property on his parent's farm - he didn't visit his parents house.

You agree what is reasonable isn't what the majority think but also you state it is not just what one person thinks. So how do you class what is reasonable? It is a defence that an individual can give in law, or in this case a defence when you go before the press.