Walking Forum
Main Boards => News and Articles => Topic started by: April on 20:09:02, 11/01/21
-
Covid: Women fined for going for a walk receive police apology - BBC News (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-55625062)
It is a relief to those who don't have a green space right on their doorstep that it is ok to drive a short distance to be able to access one.
-
I should think so too,
It was flippin ridiculous :(
-
Maybe the police said "it was a nice little tickle". ;D
-
Covid: Women fined for going for a walk receive police apology - BBC News (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-55625062)
It is a relief to those who don't have a green space right on their doorstep that it is ok to drive a short distance to be able to access one.
Shhhh! you're not supposed to mention the C word on the forum any more!
But the press are making a fuss today after the PM was seen cycling 7 miles from his home. If that is seen as wrong then it's also wrong to be walking 7 miles from home, which must apply to some of us, whether we've walked that far or maybe driven 3, 4 miles to start the walk.
-
Basically, just like the first time round, there are constant calls for the police to 'do something' and 'stop people breaking the rules' but whenever they do something there's an outcry. They can't win.
-
And to the actual government guidance, it states that you can "travel to somewhere local, for instance to access open space for exercise", but local means "not leaving your village, town, or part of the city in which you live".
-
You need to read the rules and guidance properly folks, there is no mileage mentioned in any of the guidance. You are allowed to drive somewhere to walk so you can avoid the busy streets, small green areas and very busy parks in cities where there are a lot of people and social distancing is very difficult. That is why the police have withdrawn the fines from the women because they hadn't broken the rules. They mentioned the park closest to them was really busy so they drove a little further to a more quiet area to avoid people. That is what I did at the weekend because walking on my street is not safe and I'm more likely to catch covid if I walk down it. I will be continuing to drive to start a walk. I think we are allowed to discuss C as long as it is an walking context, which this is.
From the guidance on gov.uk
"The list of reasons you can leave your home and area include, but are not limited to:
outdoor exercise. This should be done locally wherever possible, but you can travel a short distance within your area to do so if necessary (for example, to access an open space)"
-
Perfectly reasonable for those two women to drive 5 miles to reach a bit of green space. Also perfectly reasonable to cycle 7 miles (as long as you maintain social distancing) - that really is no distance at all on a bike.
-
In my circumstances, where I have some excellent walking from the door, it would not be reasonable to drive 5 miles, as it is quite simply not necessary.
-
Perfectly reasonable for those two women to drive 5 miles to reach a bit of green space. Also perfectly reasonable to cycle 7 miles (as long as you maintain social distancing) - that really is no distance at all on a bike.
So it is ok to go further and leave your own locality if you cycle, when you could cycle around in circles within your area? I know, that would seem ridiculous but that's the problem. The rules are so fuzzy that even the fuzz can't interpret them.
-
Maybe the police said "it was a nice little tickle". ;D
Alright pleb how are ya doing son?
Hope you still getting out and about,
Knuckles is doing bird at the moment,
he got a bit too excited when we were debt collecting and broke the blokes jaw :o
Anyway well have to go for a beer when this lockdown is over O0
Herb
-
The Minister for Vaccines, interviewed on women's hour this morning resurrected the old myth (not in any of the regulations) that exercise is limited to one hour
-
The Minister for Vaccines, interviewed on women's hour this morning resurrected the old myth (not in any of the regulations) that exercise is limited to one hour
That one really is a dead duck. But if numpty interviewers didn't go asking the same old stuff then ministers wouldn't be having to say these things. Just ignore it.
-
Alright pleb how are ya doing son?
Hope you still getting out and about,
Knuckles is doing bird at the moment,
he got a bit too excited when we were debt collecting and broke the blokes jaw :o
Anyway well have to go for a beer when this lockdown is over O0
Herb
Oh good grief. I told you not to feed him those artichoke milkshakes.
-
We have green space a short walk from the front door and more if we walk half a mile, this area is furnished with a Right of Way that could lead to a village a 10 mile drive away. It has been of great interest to follow the tracks that have developed around the field margins the Right of Way since March. User demand (as highlighted as a reason for the development of access by the Joint Users conference a few years ago is patently evident). This was in the face of Privacy Notices in plentiful supply. We rewalked a few of these paths a couple of days ago and found a number of new Privacy Notices, newly erected and well within the geography of Private Land. This walk did us both a lot of good helping to protect us from the stir-crazy symptoms that might lead to emotional problems.
Was I to heed these, newly erected privacy notices and drive perhaps 5 miles to a layby I know, I might be considered too far out and be fined. Can I sue the landowner for the fine? In this state of emergency are his privacy notices an unnecessary public nuisance, the evidence of the footfall from March gives clear signs of the public need and those using them are taking reasonable precautions to exercise more safely by extending the limited public space provided by a single line of Right of Way.
-
That one really is a dead duck.
Do you mean the 1hr myth or the minister? ;)
But if numpty interviewers didn't go asking the same old stuff then ministers wouldn't be having to say these things. Just ignore it.
I try to but when someone in his position is asked sensible questions mis-quotes the rules and has to be corrected by the interviewer I do despair.
Now switched to R3 for respite O0
PS please can I have the receipt for Artichoke milkshake, Pleb ;D
-
PS please can I have the receipt for Artichoke milkshake, Pleb ;D
Taxman after you for proof of claimed expenses? :2funny: :2funny: :2funny:
-
PS please can I have the receipt for Artichoke milkshake, Pleb ;D
[/size]Taxman after you for proof of claimed expenses? :2funny: :2funny: :2funny:
Oh [censored]. ;D recipe! ;D
-
Oh [censored]. ;D recipe! ;D
It's that blinking smell checker, ......
-
. . . the PM was seen cycling 7 miles from his home . . .
One rule for them, another rule for us. Again.
To rub it in, the prime minister expressed concern that too many people were in the Olympic Park on Sunday - yet he was one of them!
Please note: this post is intended as light hearted banter. ;)
-
You need to read the rules and guidance properly folks, there is no mileage mentioned in any of the guidance.
"The list of reasons you can leave your home and area include, but are not limited to:
outdoor exercise. This should be done locally wherever possible, but you can travel a short distance within your area to do so if necessary (for example, to access an open space)"
The exceptions is specifically 'within your area' and the paragraph before states:
"If you need to travel you should stay local – meaning avoiding travelling outside of your village, town or the part of a city where you live – and look to reduce the number of journeys you make overall."
Problem is the lack of mileage/firm way of telling. Its not been so bad this time, but in the first lockdown I got really fed up of cyclists travelling 30-odd miles and saying 'but that's nothing for a cyclist. You know what, 100 miles is nothing for a car driver, but that's not the point. The point is not to spread from one area to the next.
-
Boris has been cycling in a park seven miles from his home. So you can travel at least seven miles before starting a walk.
-
Met police chief Cressida Dick has today called for more clarity on the exercise rule, while minister Kit Malthouse has admitted that the stay local instruction is "open to interpretation".
Hopefully something might result from this.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/12/stay-local-england-exercise-rule-open-to-interpretation-minister-admits-coronavirus (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/12/stay-local-england-exercise-rule-open-to-interpretation-minister-admits-coronavirus)
-
Since this current lockdown began I have driven once to meet another person for a walk. I drove 7 miles from my home to Ham Hill country park. I was intending this week to drive 9 miles to meet someone and walk but have now decided not to go and to only walk from home.
I do not believe that driving those distances on my own adds to the risk of catching and spreading the virus in fact to the contrary I think it is far safer to drive to a more remote area than it is to start a walk from a built up area.
I have decided not to drive because I do not want the opinion of a ill informed police officer to cost me £200.
-
Since this current lockdown began I have driven once to meet another person for a walk. I drove 7 miles from my home to Ham Hill country park. I was intending this week to drive 9 miles to meet someone and walk but have now decided not to go and to only walk from home.
I do not believe that driving those distances on my own adds to the risk of catching and spreading the virus in fact to the contrary I think it is far safer to drive to a more remote area than it is to start a walk from a built up area.
I have decided not to drive because I do not want the opinion of a ill informed police officer to cost me £200.
What it needs is for somebody to challenge a fine in court and rectify the situation.
The rules are ambiguos and 'local' isnt defined clearly. The law likes clarity. This is the real reason that Derbyshire Police backed down with the two ladies they fined. Those two individuals were prepared to force a legal decision and had backing from MP's and lawyers and lots of publicity etc.
The Police would have lost the case and then a precedent would have been set they didnt want as it would open the floodgates for travel.
Relying on individuals, policemen or not, own personal slant of any rule just leads to a mess. I mean, describing a coffee as a picnic - just ridiculous.
-
I have decided not to drive because I do not want the opinion of a ill informed police officer to cost me £200.
What I imagine the police would tell you is that if your car broke down or you had an accident away from home, you would then require the assistance of emergency services.
Suppose you are an asymptomatic carrier, and someone has to get in your car.
-
What I imagine the police would tell you is that if your car broke down or you had an accident away from home, you would then require the assistance of emergency services.
Suppose you are an asymptomatic carrier, and someone has to get in your car.
I could be an asymptomatic carrier walking through my town centre to start a local walk.
-
But as an asymptomatic hopefully you are abiding by the 2 metre rule?
Or wearing a mask if you can't. As per the law.
-
In busy streets it can difficult to maintain 2 metres distancing as people walk up behind you to within that distance and push past. You cannot see all round you to take avoiding action all the time hence my original point about it being less risky to drive to a start point. The odds of breaking down or being in an accident are far less, i would have thought, than the odds of being infected in a busy pedestrian area.
-
What it needs is for somebody to challenge a fine in court and rectify the situation.
The rules are ambiguos and 'local' isnt defined clearly. The law likes clarity. This is the real reason that Derbyshire Police backed down with the two ladies they fined. Those two individuals were prepared to force a legal decision and had backing from MP's and lawyers and lots of publicity etc.
The Police would have lost the case and then a precedent would have been set they didnt want as it would open the floodgates for travel.
Relying on individuals, policemen or not, own personal slant of any rule just leads to a mess. I mean, describing a coffee as a picnic - just ridiculous.
The problem is that anything that happens in a magistrate's court doesn't set any legal precedents. So it would have to get to a crown court and even then it may not set a precedent.
-
The law on exercise states quite clearly that if with the one other person as permitted a 2 metre distance must be kept or a mask worn. ( if you are asymptomatic as you proposed you can help prevent spreading your illness on to others.)
If it's difficult in public places to be 2 metres apart on exercise , wear a mask. The law is quite simple. Why push it,? They state stay at home. Yes exercise is as allowed, but that is stated as an exception to the rule of stay at home.
You say you live in North Yorkshire, well unless they changed the boundaries there aren't many places there in which you would need to travel 9 miles to be on your own, in fact the largest being Middlesborough is only a couple of miles from moorland.
As the woman said yesterday Stay at home, stop pushing.
-
now as an 'extremely clinically vulnerable' one im not for pushing the rules on travel or Covid at all, but having said that they do need to make sense.
My house is right ontop of the SWCP, one direction there are nice footpaths in Newquay to walk on, or the other direction a (now) very churned up muddy cliffpath which i walk daily that is usually empty.
Unfortunately, as my 'local town' has been declared to be in the high 800/100k cases i would quite sensibly opt for my usual remote cliffpath route in the opposite direction.
however, everybody in the town has decided to do the same and its packed to the rafters with people now leaving decent social distancing very difficult. I have never seen it so busy, its akin to the high street.
So now i drive 5 miles to the nearest quiet area and exercise there as there is never anybody about.
Seems very logical to me, and far far safer given my personal medical and 'local' circumstances, i will continue.
Wont be going any further though.
-
CCPD it's quite different keeping safe for exercise as opposed to driving 9 miles to meet up with a friend. One is common sense as shown not only by yourself but by other members such as April.
The other is either a deliberate breach or just an example of winding people up. It's difficult for some to lose the reputation for trolling when it looks like that is exactly what they're doing.
-
CCPD it's quite different keeping safe for exercise as opposed to driving 9 miles to meet up with a friend. One is common sense as shown not only by yourself but by other members such as April.
The other is either a deliberate breach or just an example of winding people up. It's difficult for some to lose the reputation for trolling when it looks like that is exactly what they're doing.
What the heck is the obsession for saying, someone is trolling, when they take a different view on things on this site?
-
The Covid rules couldn't be clearer.
Any form of exercise must be undertaken whereby the person walks from their home and returns on foot
They used the car, so their fine should have remained
The only reason the Police backed down, was because this case received huge national news coverage.
-
The Covid rules couldn't be clearer.
Any form of exercise must be undertaken whereby the person walks from their home and returns on foot
They used the car, so their fine should have remained
The only reason the Police backed down, was because this case received huge national news coverage.
.
To be fair Dyffryn the law you quote is applicable only in Wales.
The rules are different in Scotland, NI and England.
The two ladies had travelled in seoerate cars, having bought coffees en route. In the original statement they were together when approached by the police thus breaching the English 2 metre law. Police were asked to use the 4 Es when approaching people, Engage, explain, encourage, enforce.
They admitted they had not followed this guidance to the ladies and the fines were rescinded.
The Welsh laws are less easy to push, as are the Scottish and NI laws
-
The Covid rules couldn't be clearer.
Any form of exercise must be undertaken whereby the person walks from their home and returns on foot
They used the car, so their fine should have remained
The only reason the Police backed down, was because this case received huge national news coverage.
Have you actually read what Derbyshire police have published?
https://www.derbyshire.police.uk/news/derbyshire/news/news/forcewide/2021/january/force-welcomes-new-guidance-from-npcc-around-about-travelling-during-lockdown/ (https://www.derbyshire.police.uk/news/derbyshire/news/news/forcewide/2021/january/force-welcomes-new-guidance-from-npcc-around-about-travelling-during-lockdown/)
The fines as most of the others are, are not legal.
We can argue the reasons as much as we like, but when the police or anybody else starts to issue FPN's etc for something that is not illegal, It is right that people "kickback"
-
The Covid rules couldn't be clearer.
Any form of exercise must be undertaken whereby the person walks from their home and returns on foot
They used the car, so their fine should have remained
The reason the fine was rescinded was probably because Boris was cycle 7 mls from home.
The only reason the Police backed down, was because this case received huge national news coverage.
-
I wonder if the fact that Boris was 7 miles from home, not local IMO, had any bearing on the fines being rescinded.
-
I wonder if the fact that Boris was 7 miles from home, not local IMO, had any bearing on the fines being rescinded.
They were rescinded because they were illegal.
They had been rescinded before Boris went on his perfectly legal bike ride.
-
They were rescinded because they were illegal.
They had been rescinded before Boris went on his perfectly legal bike ride.
Clearly you didn't read the newspaper article you highlighted, nowhere do they say the fines to the two breachers were rescinded due to illegality on behalf of the police, in fact it reiterates the rules under which they will fine breaches.
-
Clearly you didn't read the newspaper article you highlighted, nowhere do they say the fines to the two breachers were rescinded due to illegality on behalf of the police, in fact it reiterates the rules under which they will fine breaches.
Fairly clear to me.
By the way, it was not a newspaper article it was the force's own webpage. To be honest, if you can't tell the difference between a newspaper article and the forces own webpage that links to guidance from the NPCC (National Police Chiefs Council) then no wonder you get confused.
"UK Government guidance strongly requests that people do not leave their local area. However, the Covid Regulations which officers enforce and which enables them to issue FPNs for breaches, do not restrict the distance traveled for exercise".
We have had this argument before on here and some people don't get that guidance is not regulation (law).
I am not saying it should be a "free for all" but I for one find it very worrying when the police start to decide what is legal and what isn't.
I am comfortable in what I have written is correct, perhaps you could find the actual regulation (not guidance) that states traveling any distance is not legal?
Think about it, to legally prosecute someone for traveling "too far" that distance would need to be defined in law. (it is not) The guidance talks about avoid traveling outside "the part of the city where you live". to legally prosecute someone for that it would need to be defined.
If you cant travel outside your local area why are buses and trains still running? (with no checks on why people are traveling) why were National Trust gardens allowed to stay open?
I am talking of England as I am aware other parts of the UK have different regulations in relation to this.
-
double post
-
And which bit of " Where people are breaching the regulations and are away from home without a reasonable excuse, they may be issued with a FPN. In situations where people are breaching the guidance not to travel out their local area but are not breaching regulations, officers will encourage people to follow the guidance." are you deliberately failing to accept.
You clearly haven't lost any close family members to C19 or you wouldn't be looking to push as you are.
-
And which bit of " Where people are breaching the regulations and are away from home without a reasonable excuse, they may be issued with a FPN. In situations where people are breaching the guidance not to travel out their local area but are not breaching regulations, officers will encourage people to follow the guidance." are you deliberately failing to accept.
You clearly haven't lost any close family members to C19 or you wouldn't be looking to push as you are.
My concern is purely about the police trying to enforce a law that does not exist. if that is "pushing back" then so be it. If we don't what else are they going to do?
If you have lost a close family member from C19 then I am sorry for you. Whilst I thankfully haven't lost anybody close to me, I do have a lot of people that I know who are working for the NHS, so I understand how terrible this thing is.
I agree people shouldn't be travelling all over England, and people need to take more responsibility for what is going on. But in this country, we police by consent and things like this just erode that relationship.
-
I mean, describing a coffee as a picnic - just ridiculous.
Yeah. It needs a scotch egg ;)
-
Yeah. It needs a scotch egg ;)
Only if followed by a biscuit