Staying local

Davesnave

leopoldo_2 said:

It has clearly been stated that stay at home is ending and stay local is not. 

OK  so some sensible interpretation is called for, which might include appraising infection rates rather than blind adherence to some thoughts about what 'local' might be.

For example, it might be considered less responsible to go from a high rate area to a low one for a purely social visit, even if it was just a 5 mile trip. I'm not sure otherwise how 'bending the rules,' as you call it, would impact the situation, whether the relatives lived 7, 17 or 27 miles away. I've just finished my shopping for the week, having driven about 50 miles, but apart from taking longer and giving me a slightly greater chance of having a road accident, the community and myself are no worse off than if ithat activity had been possible within 5 miles. Where I went and where I live have similar low infection rates, so distance in itself is barely a consideration.

elsien

And in that respect it would seem to make more sense for one lot of relatives to visit another in the safety of their garden, having driven 17 miles, that it would for various lots to drive half way and have a larger public gathering.

Davesnave

Torry_Quine said:

Sea_Shell said:

"Stay local", is a woolly and open to interpretation phrase.

We have one set of parents that live only 5 miles away, but over the county border, and the others are in the same local authority as us, but are just over 20 miles away!!!

To me, these could both be argued to be "local".

  They had to use the one in the same council even though it wasn't as close.

You say 'had to,' but what would have happened if they'd taken a more pragmatic view?

Torry_Quine

Davesnave said:

Torry_Quine said:

Sea_Shell said:

"Stay local", is a woolly and open to interpretation phrase.

We have one set of parents that live only 5 miles away, but over the county border, and the others are in the same local authority as us, but are just over 20 miles away!!!

To me, these could both be argued to be "local".

  They had to use the one in the same council even though it wasn't as close.

You say 'had to,' but what would have happened if they'd taken a more pragmatic view?

They'd be in trouble if caught. Knowing the employer that would have been an issue too. 

Sea_Shell

I can understand not wanting to import/export cases within any given hospital catchment area.

However, the relatives within our district, come under the healthcare trust of their adjoining county, rather than their own!!  It's nearer.

Davesnave

Torry_Quine said:

Davesnave said:

Torry_Quine said:

Sea_Shell said:

"Stay local", is a woolly and open to interpretation phrase.

We have one set of parents that live only 5 miles away, but over the county border, and the others are in the same local authority as us, but are just over 20 miles away!!!

To me, these could both be argued to be "local".

  They had to use the one in the same council even though it wasn't as close.

You say 'had to,' but what would have happened if they'd taken a more pragmatic view?

They'd be in trouble if caught. Knowing the employer that would have been an issue too.

Are lots of people being caught for going a few miles less far, and if they are, would prosecutions be successful?

I'm very aware of persons coming to the West Country from far away during lockdown as I live on one of the rat runs into the area of the county known for surfing. I see the camper vans going past with the bikes and boards and it's obvious they aren't locals.  These people are often stopped, and I've witnessed that too, but I wouldn't expect to be quizzed myself going about my normal business.

Torry_Quine

Davesnave said:

Torry_Quine said:

Davesnave said:

Torry_Quine said:

Sea_Shell said:

"Stay local", is a woolly and open to interpretation phrase.

We have one set of parents that live only 5 miles away, but over the county border, and the others are in the same local authority as us, but are just over 20 miles away!!!

To me, these could both be argued to be "local".

  They had to use the one in the same council even though it wasn't as close.

You say 'had to,' but what would have happened if they'd taken a more pragmatic view?

They'd be in trouble if caught. Knowing the employer that would have been an issue too.

Are lots of people being caught for going a few miles less far, and if they are, would prosecutions be successful?

I'm very aware of persons coming to the West Country from far away during lockdown as I live on one of the rat runs into the area of the county known for surfing. I see the camper vans going past with the bikes and boards and it's obvious they aren't locals.  These people are often stopped, and I've witnessed that too, but I wouldn't expect to be quizzed myself going about my normal business.

It says something if people only do what they've been told is the right thing because they think there's a chance of getting caught. 
What happened to doing the right thing and we're all in this together?

Davesnave

Torry_Quine said:

Davesnave said:

Torry_Quine said:

Davesnave said:

Torry_Quine said:

Sea_Shell said:

"Stay local", is a woolly and open to interpretation phrase.

We have one set of parents that live only 5 miles away, but over the county border, and the others are in the same local authority as us, but are just over 20 miles away!!!

To me, these could both be argued to be "local".

  They had to use the one in the same council even though it wasn't as close.

You say 'had to,' but what would have happened if they'd taken a more pragmatic view?

They'd be in trouble if caught. Knowing the employer that would have been an issue too.

Are lots of people being caught for going a few miles less far, and if they are, would prosecutions be successful?

I'm very aware of persons coming to the West Country from far away during lockdown as I live on one of the rat runs into the area of the county known for surfing. I see the camper vans going past with the bikes and boards and it's obvious they aren't locals.  These people are often stopped, and I've witnessed that too, but I wouldn't expect to be quizzed myself going about my normal business.

It says something if people only do what they've been told is the right thing because they think there's a chance of getting caught. 
What happened to doing the right thing and we're all in this together?

It was you who said "they'd be in trouble if caught," not me.

My response was to suggest that nobody is looking to catch people going about their daily business in a sensible and measured way, using their own good judgement. That could be more 'right' than whatever the 'rules' say. Apparently, in your world people can't be trusted at all; they must behave like automatons. The rules are mostly meant as guidance.

My example highlighted people who blatantly break the rules. Rightly, they're held to account. However, despite some videos posted on social media,where the police behaved wrongly and overreacted, we're not living in a police state yet.

As for "we're all in this together" that's only true in the narrowest of senses. Someone like Piers Morgan could fly his family to Antigua for Christmas. You couldn't. Someone like Professor Neil Ferguson could break the very rules he devised and still remain employed, but according to you, your friend couldn't. Even as a modestly remunerated pensioner, I've been far better off during the past year than the majority of others, especially those stuck in flats and urban areas of deprivation.

sheramber

in Scotland it was put into law.

silvercar

On another forum people are saying the stay local rule for England is going, replaced by not staying overnight and only meeting people outdoors. No mention of staying local.