16-04-2020 4:24 PM
How do you think it should be done?
It can't be ended "just like that" so it should be done in stages?
What do you think the first stage should be, ignoring the simple industrial/economic angle and concentating on what is practical?
If people are allowed back to work in some types of businesses, what happens to the children? No schools open or nurseries so what happens there?
Do you think the schools should re-open first so that parents are then able to go back to work?
What ideas have you got?
It's life Jim, but not as WE know it.
Live long and prosper.
17-06-2020 12:14 PM
Oops - sorry Susie - happy belated birthday wishes
17-06-2020 2:22 PM
Suzie...it's not so much the parents..my niece is a teacher and is desperate to go back to work. They had a meeting last week to discuss the return to school, and the reason they won't go is because the schools are terrified of any of the children getting sick and sueing the schools. So it's litigation they are all afraid of.
17-06-2020 2:25 PM
CeeDee, I don't think that's quite true. My niece just wants to go back, she's worried about her pupils.
17-06-2020 2:26 PM
Awww Suzie...Happy Bithday for yesterday! Hope you enjoyed your day...and many happy returns!
17-06-2020 2:35 PM
17-06-2020 4:02 PM
I've just watched a couple of videos about the car crashing in to the PM's car and apart from the obvious "nuisance" of that chap running in front of the car, surely all those "demonstrators" are causing a breach of the peace by making so much noise and disrupting the traffic on the pavement as well as the road?
There was no "social distancing" going on there?
It's life Jim, but not as WE know it.
Live long and prosper.
18-06-2020 7:37 AM - edited 18-06-2020 7:38 AM
Making a noise and disrupting traffic, even blocking pavements or roads is not a 'breach of the peace'.
The demonstrator who caused the PM's car to stop suddenly and thus be damaged could potentially have been arrested for a 'breach of the peace'.
The definition of 'breach of the peace' is very simple:- “an act done or threatened to be done which either actually harms a person, or in his presence, his property, or is likely to cause such harm being done.”
Breach of the peace is not a criminal offence and whilst a police officer may arrest someone where the breach has occurred or is likely to occur they must release you as soon as the threat of a further breach is over. You are not obliged to give your fingerprints or a DNA sample nor even identify yourself in any way. If the police wish to detain you they must take you before a judge where you may be bound over to keep the peace and then released.
21-06-2020 7:32 PM
I forgot about this.
If a Breach of the Peace won't apply, there's the Public Order and Anti-Social Behaviour to have a go at. If none of those three doesn't apply (for want of application?), it looks like behaviour in a public place is now a lawless free-for-all?
It's life Jim, but not as WE know it.
Live long and prosper.
22-06-2020 8:38 AM
Thankfully we don't live in a police state and do have the freedom to protest, (albeit a lot of those freedoms have been restricted).
When a protest does, or is likely to, cause physical harm to person or property then that is the time for police to act.
Making a noise, causing an inconvenience for traffic and pedestrians are all part of demonstrating and protesting. Just because we're not in favour of a particular cause isn't a reason to restrict the right to protest.
22-06-2020 9:34 AM
It's EVERY reason to restrict "protests" to make them quiet, peaceful and non disruptive.
It's life Jim, but not as WE know it.
Live long and prosper.
22-06-2020 11:05 AM
22-06-2020 11:35 AM
A bit of consideration and respect for others wouldn't go amiss?
It's life Jim, but not as WE know it.
Live long and prosper.