The new rules

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

You can be fined for dropping litter or a cigarette butt in the street. So fkin what! It doesnt stop selfish idiots with little regard for their environment doing it.
Some folk just dont give a fuck.

And so, in the context of the discussion, what point are you making exactly?

 

[deary]

And so, in the context of the discussion, what point are you making exactly?

Er selfish idiots flaunt regulations maybe?
Are you disputing that?
What point are you making exactly?

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Bottom line is none of us want to wear masks by choice but realise our responsibilities.
Pisses me off how many people still don't whilst shopping & I can't believe all of the are 'legally' exempt. Surely the list BFCx3 provides would suggest they fall into the vulnerable group & therefore should be shielding themselves especially since this latest spike. As others have said online shopping, it's 2020. Yes bang on about the potential mental health issues with shielding/lockdown but things need to be black & white now with far less greys whereby people take the piss.

The number not wearing masks is less than 5%. 12% of people are asthmatic alone!!! So most people (even those with health issues) are wearing them.

There is no “Shielding” as things stand and grocery deliveries often outstrip demand. Plus, as anyone who has used the service will know, they send you all the nearly out of date shit and worst cuts of meat.... Having an illness or disability shouldn’t exclude you from society - that really is Nazi mentality!!!

 

[rockontommy]

True which is why I was suggesting that if the masking rules are to be applied they need tightening up but as they stand they are unenforceable
As we all face fines for having the temerity to covertly meet up with our own families I fail to understand why the rules on masking are so lax

Because the science surrounding their use is flimsy and they were only brought in at the end of an epidemic to prop up a floundering government response that had recently killed thousands of care home residents?

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Er selfish idiots flaunt regulations maybe?

Here you go... here’s what was said before you jumped in with your input...

TAM said

“As we all face fines for having the temerity to covertly meet up with our own families I fail to understand why the rules on masking are so lax”

To which I replied

“ You can be fined up to £200 for not wearing a mask!!”

 

[deary]

The number not wearing masks is 5%. 12%

Is that an official figure or is it what you have deduced using your extensive supermarket survellance Bifster Statto?

 

[Willie Mcgrotty]

The number not wearing masks is 5%. 12% of people are asthmatic alone!!! So most people (even those with health issues) are wearing them.

There is no “Shielding” as things stand and grocery deliveries often outstrip demand. Plus, as anyone who has used the service will know, they send you all the nearly out of date shit and west cuts of meat.... Having an illness or disability shouldn’t exclude you from society - that really is Nazi mentality!!!

I've totally agreed with your stance on the press scaremongering & the need fir people to get back out there post lockdown bifster but this thread primary is about people being lazy, not taking personal responsibility & in a lot of cases, not all, flouting the rules the government put out there. I detest mask wearing but trying to be a team player. Many aren't & whatever it takes it needs sorting.

 

[deary]

Here you go... here’s what was said before you jumped in with your input...

TAM said

“As we all face fines for having the temerity to covertly meet up with our own families I fail to understand why the rules on masking are so lax”

To which I replied

“ You can be fined up to £200 for not wearing a mask!!”

Ah Thanks for that maybe you can 'jump in' with your extensive statistical input and tell us how many have been fined?

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I've totally agreed with your stance on the press scaremongering & the need fir people to get back out there post lockdown bifster but this thread primary is about people being lazy, not taking personal responsibility & in a lot of cases, not all, flouting the rules the government put out there. I detest mask wearing but trying to be a team player. Many aren't & whatever it takes it needs sorting.

Jesus....

Instead of blowing smoke up my arse and then proceeding to regurgitate more garbage, why don’t you take time to actually research this ‘so called’ problem you are magnifying into a major issue...

I’ve linked the statistics to make it easy for people.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Ah Thanks for that maybe you can 'jump in' with your extensive statistical input and tell us how many have been fined?

Why would I want to do that?

I’m not arguing that fines are effective (which is why I don’t understand quite why you quoted my post). I was simply saying (to TAM) that sanctions apply for non-mask wearing, just like they do for non-compliance with other rules.

I agree that some people will always break the rules regardless. However that number is so small that it makes no difference.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Is that an official figure or is it what tou have deduced your extensive surpermarket survellance Bifster Statto?

ONS data says 96% compliance and that was back in August. Mask wearing has since increased.

 

[Miko]

I agree that some people will always break the rules regardless. However that number is so small that it makes no difference.

So the guy who broke the rules by not quarantining upon his return to Bolton and went on pub crawls instead....did he make a difference? That was 1 bloke FFS who managed to spread the virus to lord knows how many and you say 'it makes no difference'.

 

[Willie Mcgrotty]

A common theme has been you challenging any stats people put up but are quick to back yours to the hilt.
You probably argue with yourself just to get a bit of practice in.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

So the guy who broke the rules by not quarantining upon his return to Bolton and went on pub crawls instead....did he make a difference? That was 1 bloke FFS who managed to spread the virus to lord knows how many and you say 'it makes no difference'.

No, I didn’t say that not quarantining and wandering round whilst known to be infected does not make a difference, I said that the small percentage of people not wearing masks will not make a difference.

Those are two very different things and the risks, based on probability differ by orders of magnitude.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

A common theme has been you challenging any stats people put up but are quick to back yours to the hilt.
You probably argue with yourself just to get a bit of practice in.

Lol... Sorry if I dented your ego

What is the basis of your conclusion that “ it seems blatantly clear high numbers of shoppers not wearing masks are flouting the law.“?

I’ve linked to figures that come from the ONS?

TAM’s figures are based on a couple of trips to his local corner shop... You?

 

[Wizaard]

The number not wearing masks is less than 5%. 12% of people are asthmatic alone!!! So most people (even those with health issues) are wearing them.

There is no “Shielding” as things stand and grocery deliveries often outstrip demand. Plus, as anyone who has used the service will know, they send you all the nearly out of date shit and worst cuts of meat.... Having an illness or disability shouldn’t exclude you from society - that really is Nazi mentality!!!

I dont believe it's less than 5%. I can only go on what I witness but I'd say it's closer to 20%. In the newsagents, for example, people take the view "They're just nipping in and out so it won't matter". I was the only one wearing one this morning out of 5 staff and customers. There is a sign on the door saying it's mandatory btw.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I dont believe it's less than 5%. I can only go on what I witness but I'd say it's closer to 20%. In the newsagents, for example, people take the view "They're just nipping in and out so it won't matter". I was the only one wearing one this morning out of 5 staff and customers. There is a sign on the door saying it's mandatory btw.

I think I’ll trust the ONS data over your bloke in the newsagent stuff.

 

[southshorepool]

So the guy who broke the rules by not quarantining upon his return to Bolton and went on pub crawls instead....did he make a difference? That was 1 bloke FFS who managed to spread the virus to lord knows how many and you say 'it makes no difference'.

I can also tell you as a matter of fact that the same guy has been breaking the rules since March but no-one in his area would approach or confront him

 

[basilrobbie]

So the guy who broke the rules by not quarantining upon his return to Bolton and went on pub crawls instead....did he make a difference? That was 1 bloke FFS who managed to spread the virus to lord knows how many and you say 'it makes no difference'.

It never ceases to surprise me the lengths some will go to to rationalise away anti-social behaviour.

There is some idiot (Allison Pearson?) writing in the Telegraph today about how the young can be some kind of petri-dish that will pave our way to herd immunity. The notion that they don't live in a laboratory environment and therefore might lethally infect thousands of people in the process doesn't seem to have occurred to her.

 

[TwelveAngryMen]

I think I’ll trust the ONS data over your bloke in the newsagent stuff.

Whoever it was who did the research you are quoted clearly didn't visit South Shore

 

[Sooty59]

I very much doubt if we are all following the government's advice to the letter, including MP's.

But if we all try to do something extra them that will probably be enough.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Whoever it was who did the research you are quoted clearly didn't visit South Shore

I’ve visited South Shore though and, if anything, the 96% compliance seems on the low side to me.

It’s human nature to focus disproportionately on whatever it is they have in their mind. So essentially you hone in on the tiny minority with no mask and totally ignore those who are wearing them.

I mean look at Wiz above quoting figures of 20% not wearing masks. How else could anyone come up with such an utterly ridiculous and wildly inaccurate figure?

You get the same effect when you buy a new car. All of a sudden it feels like everyone has the same car as you..

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

It never ceases to surprise me the lengths some will go to to rationalise away anti-social behaviour.

There is some idiot (Allison Pearson?) writing in the Telegraph today about how the young can be some kind of petri-dish that will pave our way to herd immunity. The notion that they don't live in a laboratory environment and therefore might lethally infect thousands of people in the process doesn't seem to have occurred to her.

Rationalise it, or accurately reflect both the extent and impact, rather than blowing something out of proportion?

 

[rockontommy]

It never ceases to surprise me the lengths some will go to to rationalise away anti-social behaviour.

There is some idiot (Allison Pearson?) writing in the Telegraph today about how the young can be some kind of petri-dish that will pave our way to herd immunity. The notion that they don't live in a laboratory environment and therefore might lethally infect thousands of people in the process doesn't seem to have occurred to her.

It could be argued (quite easily) that closing schools, illegally forcing healthy people to stay indoors for 23hrs a day, stopping cancer treatment, killing thousands of care home residents and sinking businesses are all examples of extreme antisocial behaviour. Trying to rationalise and explain all of that away by pointing instead to soggy mask wearing in shops - enforced in some countries but not others - is a bit silly in comparison.

It's all relative though I suppose

 

[basilrobbie]

It could be argued (quite easily) that closing schools, illegally forcing healthy people to stay indoors for 23hrs a day, stopping cancer treatment, killing thousands of care home residents and sinking businesses are all examples of extreme antisocial behaviour. Trying to rationalise and explain all of that away by pointing instead to soggy mask wearing in shops - enforced in some countries but not others - is a bit silly in comparison.

It's all relative though I suppose

Its clear that you and Biff have weighed the "economy v public health" balance and come down in favour of the former. I don't think any responsible Government can afford to choose one over the other, hence the messy compromise we have seen in the last six months. And I would remind Tommy that in the beginning, a lot of our approach was based upon the premise that we had to avoid putting unbearable strain on the NHS. That particular factor may be back in play quite soon, once the winter weather kicks in.

But this isn't just about the Government, and never has been. Compliance among the public has been very good in the main. But there is a fair sized minority that don't follow the guidance, and don't want to. We can argue about how many of them there are, but they undermine our overall performance (in absolute terms), and do a lot of "softer" damage to things like public confidence and morale. If that wasn't true, we wouldn't be having this debate at all.

 

[rockontommy]

Its clear that you and Biff have weighed the "economy v public health" balance and come down in favour of the former.

You start with an incorrect assumption and build on it.

Many times I have read you post that "the left don't have a monopoly on compassion". Well lockdown zealots don't have a monopoly on compassion either and base attempts to smear opposing views as 'all about the economy' are equally wrong (and arguably costing lives as minds are closed).

It never was economy vs lives. This is a false dichotomy. It was always lives vs lives and that includes quality of life because being kept in a gilded cage - for most people at least - is not a life worth living. Hence the upset at this weeks' announcements. Surely you must see that all people are after is their quality of life returned?

Returned, it has to be said, by a government that I'm struggling not to see as anything other than out-and-out terrorists.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Its clear that you and Biff have weighed the "economy v public health" balance and come down in favour of the former. I don't think any responsible Government can afford to choose one over the other, hence the messy compromise we have seen in the last six months. And I would remind Tommy that in the beginning, a lot of our approach was based upon the premise that we had to avoid putting unbearable strain on the NHS. That particular factor may be back in play quite soon, once the winter weather kicks in.

But this isn't just about the Government, and never has been. Compliance among the public has been very good in the main. But there is a fair sized minority that don't follow the guidance, and don't want to. We can argue about how many of them there are, but they undermine our overall performance (in absolute terms), and do a lot of "softer" damage to things like public confidence and morale. If that wasn't true, we wouldn't be having this debate at all.

Out of interest, what on earth has given you the impression that I have come down in favour of the economy over public health, notwithstanding that the two are intrinsically linked? I realise that 'Covid Tunnel Vision' is commonplace, but surely someone with your intellect is able to recognise that it isn't a simple case of on or t'other and more a case of immediate implications to Public Health vs long term implications to Public Health.

The basis of my argument in this thread, is not that I don't think people should wear masks, but rather that there is no point wasting the Police or for that matter, anyone elses time in tackling an issue that is so small and insignificant (in the overall scheme of things).

In regard to wider issues of 'Non-Compliance' (and I use that word pretty loosely) then you may have a point that they need to be addressed. Where I would disagree with you is in terms of the reasons for the so called 'Non-Compliance', which are wide and varied, but IMO have more to do with failures in overall communication than they do with a lack of willingness from the public to cooperate.

If people know where they stand, they can understand why the actions are required and can see that the rules apply to all without exception (Including Senior Government Advisors and Prime Ministers Parents) and the rules are easy for everyone to understand and to implement, then there will be no issue with public compliance - certainly not beyond that which ought to have been included in any sensible modelling, in any case.

 

[basilrobbie]

Out of interest, what on earth has given you the impression that I have come down in favour of the economy over public health, notwithstanding that the two are intrinsically linked? I realise that 'Covid Tunnel Vision' is commonplace, but surely someone with your intellect is able to recognise that it isn't a simple case of on or t'other and more a case of immediate implications to Public Health vs long term implications to Public Health.

Wittingly or not, that is the impression you give. And you are quite right to point out that short term and long term health considerations are not the same. I said as much in my reply to Tommy.

I agree with you that masks aren't a major issue, in the scheme of things. But they are an issue nevertheless, because of the public perception issues that go with them.

On compliance, I don't think we are really far apart at all. And I agree with you that rules should be clear and easy to follow. That they aren't, always, is partly because the ground shifts, and rules have to move with it. I do agree with others that people who aren't disposed to compliance use that blurring as an excuse.

Anyway, that's my lot for this thread. A pleasure debating with you, as always.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Wittingly or not, that is the impression you give. And you are quite right to point out that short term and long term health considerations are not the same. I said as much in my reply to Tommy.

I agree with you that masks aren't a major issue, in the scheme of things. But they are an issue nevertheless, because of the public perception issues that go with them.

On compliance, I don't think we are really far apart at all. And I agree with you that rules should be clear and easy to follow. That they aren't, always, is partly because the ground shifts, and rules have to move with it. I do agree with others that people who aren't disposed to compliance use that blurring as an excuse.

Anyway, that's my lot for this thread. A pleasure debating with you, as always.

I'm not sure that it is the impression I give, so much as how others choose to interpret what I say, based on their own perspective. I may well have a different view (to some) as to how the health risks should be managed / viewed, but I accept the circumstances are unique and I acknowledge that there are no perfect solutions.

In terms of masks, I really don't see a significant issue with public perception either. There are a small minority of people who are excessively irritated by it...Probably the same people who got irritated by people riding their cycles in the middle of nowhere or shopping for chocolate and beer when they should have been buying essentials. The fact is that a small minority of people cannot wear masks and an even smaller minority won't wear masks....Deal with it because the solution is too cost and resource intensive and arguably far too draconian for a society like ours, so placating a fewgrumpy old men is simpy not a viable reason to give it too much attention.

I'm not sure I agree with you that the 'ground shifting' is a good enough excuse for the poor communication to be honest. Many of the issues have related to the inconsistencies between the policies of the devolved goverments, compounded further by inconsistencies in the regulations for local lockdowns and, in addition, the complexity of the measures that have been implemented. In many respects, I think not only the government, but also the scientists need to shoulder a lot of the blame...What they have done is taken their theoretical R number reduction policies and largely forgotten about the Human Factor. Unfortunately not everybody has a PHD and even those that do need practical, easy to follow instructions, not a complex web of rules that are eminently forgettable.

And whilst there may be a small number of people who use those issues to 'get away with it'...Those issues also create problems for the Police who find it impossible to enforce or even police to any meaningful standard (the 'Rule of Six' was essentially a response to complaints from the Police that the regulations were ridiculously complex). I have tried to follow the whole thing and to be honest even I have just ended up switching off and essentially implementing my own 'common sense' version of the rules (Basically... Wash my hands regularly, Stay away from other people and wear a mask in indoor public spaces)...I have had some contact with my kids and grandchild and been out for a walk with mates, but I have no idea what the rules are in that respect.

 

[deary]

ONS data says 96% compliance and that was back in August. Mask wearing has since increased.

Haha you really think the ONS data is accurate?
Surely you are not that gullible bifster?
Where does that data come from , Surveys.
Breaking News: People are not always truthful on surveys shocker!!

A high % of Your average Johnny rule breaker certainly wont be arsed doing a fkin survey as it doesnt matter to them.
Does the ONS have data on that?
Folk who do surveys are the same type who largely comply with regs so it it will be skewed. Often they will put down the more favoured answer to look good,

The 96% compliance is a pure fantasy Island, clipboard culture generated figure.

What you see on the ground is a far better reflection of what is actually happening in reality .

Nowhere near 96% have complied fully. If they had we wouldnt be possibly heading for a shitstorm.

 

[Johnno]

Haha you really think the ONS data is accurate?
Surely you are not that gullible bifster?
Where does that data come from , Surveys.
Breaking News: People are not always truthful on surveys shocker!!

A high % of Your average Johnny rule breaker certainly wont be arsed doing a fkin survey as it doesnt matter to them.
Does the ONS have data on that?
Folk who do surveys are the same type who largely comply with regs so it it will be skewed. Often they will put down the more favoured answer to look good,

The 96% compliance is a pure fantasy Island, clipboard culture generated figure.

What you see on the ground is a far better reflection of what is actually happening in reality .

Nowhere near 96% have complied fully. If they had we wouldnt be possibly heading for a shitstorm.

Judging by my local offy/convenience store, it’s 96% non-compliance.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Haha you really think the ONS data is accurate?
Surely you are not that gullible bifster?
Where does that data come from , Surveys.
Breaking News: People are not always truthful on surveys shocker!!

A high % of Your average Johnny rule breaker certainly wont be arsed doing a fkin survey as it doesnt matter to them.
Does the ONS have data on that?
Folk who do surveys are the same type who largely comply with regs so it it will be skewed. Often they will put down the more favoured answer to look good,

The 96% compliance is a pure fantasy Island, clipboard culture generated figure.

What you see on the ground is a far better reflection of what is actually happening in reality .

Nowhere near 96% have complied fully. If they had we wouldnt be possibly heading for a shitstorm.

Firstly, it is 96%compliance with mask wearing ONLY...

Secondly, if anything, it is likely to be a significant under-estimate, based on what I have seen and the date that the last survey was undertaken.

Thirdly, people are generally truthful in these types of surveys (individuals who don't wear masks want to explain why generally, rather than deny it)

Fourthly the ONS will go to lengths to ensure the integrity of their data. They have considerable experience in the area (obviously) and therefore the sample will reflect a proper cross-section of society.

Fifthly, this data is SIGNIFICANTLY more accurate than one person's occasional trip to the corner shops.

Sixthly, denying this kind of statistical evidence demonstrates conformation bias. Essentially despite signifcant evidence to the contrary, you would rather rely on less reliable sources of information in order to confirm your own opinion.

The reason we are 'heading for a shitstorm' is predominatly due to transmission within households.... BTW..Theres clear statistival evidence for that as well, if you care to look.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Judging by my local offy/convenience store, it’s 96% non-compliance.

Unless you spent the entire day for a week in your local offy/ convenience store you really wouldn't know, becuase the tiny amout of time you spend in there and the small number of customers that might be in there at that time is not a representative sample.

 

[deary]

Firstly, it is 96%compliance with mask wearing ONLY...

The reason we are 'heading for a shitstorm' is predominatly due to transmission within households.... BTW..Theres clear statistival evidence for that as well, if you care to look.

Theres, Lies, Damn Lies and statistics.


Most people wear masks i will give you that.
I agree there has been a major problem with transmission in households.
I have not been in anybodys house apart from my own since it began.
Sorry but people really should be more careful & take responsibility. Obviously if folk are letting many inside their home they are not behaving responsibly .

 

[cruzzer]

Unless you spent the entire day for a week in your local offy/ convenience store you really wouldn't know, becuase the tiny amout of time you spend in there and the small number of customers that might be in there at that time is not a representative sample.

My son is a store manager at a local Coop and he says at least 75% DO NOT wear masks.

Factual information from someone on the shop floor, literally, and not BFCx3’s made up garbage.

 

[Matesrates]

Having asthma doesn't mean you shouldn't wear a mask though does it ?

More often than not it's just the usual excuse those who don't want to wear them trot out when challenged

I wasn't even trying to be scientific with my 10 % - equally I bet it's not far off

Asthma.org.uk says there’s no problem with wearing a mask, especially for a short period.

 

[Sooty59]

Bloody hell there must be some people on here with too much time on their hands judging be the sheer size of the posts.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Asthma.org.uk says there’s no problem with wearing a mask, especially for a short period.

It doesn't say there's no problem with wearing a mask at all.....

It says that " Most people with asthma, even if it’s severe, can manage to wear a face mask for a short period of time, and shouldn't worry if they need to wear one. "

And "Most People With Asthma" are clearly wearing masks.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

My son is a store manager at a local Coop and he says at least 75% DO NOT wear masks.

Factual information from someone on the shop floor, literally, and not BFCx3’s made up garbage.

Your son is talking utter bollocks!! What do they say... "Like father....."

 

[cruzzer]

Your son is talking utter bollocks!! What do they say... "Like father....."

Facts trump your constant bullshit and that’s what you revert to, what a sad loser you are.

No he’s not talking bollocks you are again and again and again and again.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Facts trump your constant bullshit and that’s what you revert to, what a sad loser you are.

No he’s not talking bollocks you are again and again and again and again.

It isn't a fact, it's a lie

 

[cruzzer]

It isn't a fact, it's a lie

BTW, the 75% non compliance data has been collated over the past 3 weeks across all stores, and is a fact, not one of your made up bullshit quotes.

Edit to add; I’m not going to waste my time responding to your lies.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

BTW, the 75% non compliance data has been collated over the past 3 weeks across all stores, and is a fact, not one of your made up bullshit quotes.

Edit to add; I’m not going to waste my time responding to your lies.

Is his name Billy?

 

[Lost Seasider]

My son is a store manager at a local Coop and he says at least 75% DO NOT wear masks.

Sounds like the store should be closed and your son fired.

 

[Chunkylad]

shopping done, most wearing masks

 

[B_Side_The_C_Side]

Just came out of our local Co-Op in St.Annes and there is a big new sign on the front window saying they wont let you in unless you have a mask on.
Of the 7 or 8 people in the store.....all were wearing a mask.......as well as the 2 staff.

I think someone better be calling his Area manager.......before he gets a P45......

 

[Tangerinemoss]

Well this is going well, isn't it? Maybe those with very fixed ideas need to consider that things vary.

I am an expert in the public in retail, I work 40 hours a week in a store, as does my wife. In my wife's store, a small bakery offering pies, cakes and sandwiches for takeaway, compliance recently has become much worse, maybe down to 75%. She has been back at work since the start of June, she and all her colleagues have been wearing masks for the last few weeks, despite being behind screens. They get customers in without masks, idiots covering their mouth with the neck of their T shirt, COVID deniers who think its all a hoax. Is it because people just pop in and out, they think it doesn't matter?

I work in an outdoor shop, 3 doors down. Compliance is probably 98% plus, we all wear masks and have done since we re opened, whatever the law says. Our customers are nearly all brilliant at masks, pretty crap at social distancing, though.

Oh, and Bifster, if you accuse my wife of being a liar, you and I will have words.

Reality is that it varies from shop to shop, and everyone will have a different story

 

[cruzzer]

Just came out of our local Co-Op in St.Annes and there is a big new sign on the front window saying they wont let you in unless you have a mask on.
Of the 7 or 8 people in the store.....all were wearing a mask.......as well as the 2 staff.

I think someone better be calling his Area manager.......before he gets a P45......

I am talking about what it HAS been like. The new guidelines mean all shop staff now need to wear masks and the company is trying with signage to say no mask no entry.

Previous policy was not to challenge non mask wearers as store staff have experienced verbal and even physical abuse. I have seen CCTV footage of a scrote in his 30’s screaming abuse into the face of an 18 year old shop assistant.

We don’t live in BFCx3’s utopia, this is the reality of the dystopian society of this virus.

Mods, I called him out for being a lying tosser, what’s with that?

 

[Loco]

It never ceases to surprise me the lengths some will go to to rationalise away anti-social behaviour.

There is some idiot (Allison Pearson?) writing in the Telegraph today about how the young can be some kind of petri-dish that will pave our way to herd immunity. The notion that they don't live in a laboratory environment and therefore might lethally infect thousands of people in the process doesn't seem to have occurred to her.

If no one did anything at all, Darwinism would come into play. It may not be socially acceptable but is the principal of natural selection idiotic?

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Well this is going well, isn't it? Maybe those with very fixed ideas need to consider that things vary.

I am an expert in the public in retail, I work 40 hours a week in a store, as does my wife. In my wife's store, a small bakery offering pies, cakes and sandwiches for takeaway, compliance recently has become much worse, maybe down to 75%. She has been back at work since the start of June, she and all her colleagues have been wearing masks for the last few weeks, despite being behind screens. They get customers in without masks, idiots covering their mouth with the neck of their T shirt, COVID deniers who think its all a hoax. Is it because people just pop in and out, they think it doesn't matter?

I work in an outdoor shop, 3 doors down. Compliance is probably 98% plus, we all wear masks and have done since we re opened, whatever the law says. Our customers are nearly all brilliant at masks, pretty crap at social distancing, though.

Oh, and Bifster, if you accuse my wife of being a liar, you and I will have words.

Reality is that it varies from shop to shop, and everyone will have a different story

As you point out, compliance in your shop is 98% plus and I doubt very much that the difference is simply down to clientelle or either shops policy. Perhaps the size of the shop, the fact there are screens and a limited number of people in store at one time (i.e. it is considered to be limited risk because people just nip in and out) and maybe it is partially due to confusion over the fact that masks were initially not required in take-away food stores.

I'm sure your wife is not a liar, though like so many people, I would expect that she is very much prone to unintentional exaggeration of the truth, especially given that this (by the sounds of it) is an issue that gripes her.

75% means that one in every four people entering the store are not wearing a mask. That's an awful lot of people not wearing masks and seems very much out of kilter with the typical high street experience, including your own.