Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, charlie clown said:

The police aren't enforcing the rule on public transport so they're not going to be enforcing it in shops unless there's some major incident kicking off.

What's the point of making it compulsory if theres not going to be any enforcement?

5 minutes ago, charlie clown said:

The more the naysayers and frEedDomZ warriors crank up opposition to this, the more we'll see more of those types of incidents.

Do you consider me among these given I'm opposed to police enforcement of this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 12k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

News of our kitchen has spread around Bham - we've been doing deliveries over but now there's a Q at the door each night. Planning meeting tonight to decide how to cater/cope. Heartbreaking stuff. And

If he sees Paul Weller or Johnny Marr wear one he'll soon change his mind.

My condolences man. Ouch

Posted Images

27 minutes ago, Swan Red said:

People can be encouraged to wear masks, shops can refuse service, transport services can refuse access etc, but out sourcing the policing of that to an explicitly racist police service is not the way to enforce it.

That does tend to put the enforcement burden and risk on drivers, shop workers though. As we saw in France, people can be absolute murderous c**** about this but I doubt they'd do that to a copper.

I'm absolutely not going to go into bat for the police and absolutely agree with your principle but in reality not making the police the enforcement of this just transfers another issue to the lowest paid. I've seen some heroic bus drivers refuse entry to non mask c**** here and get dogs abuse for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Take here is different

Quote

The latest rules for shops will be enforced by the police, with anyone disregarding them at risk of a fine of up to £100. This will be reduced to £50 if people pay within 14 days.

 

1 minute ago, Bailo said:

That does tend to put the enforcement burden and risk on drivers, shop workers though. As we saw in France, people can be absolute murderous c**** about this but I doubt they'd do that to a copper.

I'm absolutely not going to go into bat for the police and absolutely agree with your principle but in reality not making the police the enforcement of this just transfers another issue to the lowest paid. I've seen some heroic bus drivers refuse entry to non mask c**** here and get dogs abuse for it.

And you accept that the police will enforce this arbitrarily as they do all policing decisions with the discriminatory impact of all policing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Swan Red said:

Take here is different

 

And you accept that the police will enforce this arbitrarily as they do all policing decisions with the discriminatory impact of all policing?

I know that's the policy, I'm counterpointing you saying it shouldn't be.

No, it's likely not as we've seen for fines on lockdown breaches. But transferring the onus on enforcement doesn't help persecuted minority groups anymore. I can only hope this hard line encourages the use of masks and enforcement isn't needed.

We've seen in the US the worst demographic for mask refusal is white boomers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bailo said:

I know that's the policy, I'm counterpointing you saying it shouldn't be.

No, it's likely not as we've seen for fines on lockdown breaches. But transferring the onus on enforcement doesn't help persecuted minority groups anymore. I can only hope this hard line encourages the use of masks and enforcement isn't needed.

We've seen in the US the worst demographic for mask refusal is white boomers.

That BBC article was posted in response to CC who was saying the police wouldn't be responsible for enforcement in shops.

The point is about whether we are serious about looking outside of policing for addressing the needs of communities because the police are not our friends and are racist as f***. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cymrococh said:

If masks are compulsory, are they going to provide them?

Good question, also fixed penalties always discriminate against the poor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Swan Red said:

Are there other ways of normalising that behaviour without adding to already extensive policing?

In different times maybe, but with the urgency of this (a laughable concept in itself given how far behind the curve the UK govt is) I don't; see how you change those behaviours without emergency measures etc. As we've already seen demonstrated over and over again for the past few months, changing behaviours by suggestion, relying on the publics common sense, relying on public health messaging are all ineffective or too slow to get traction.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, charlie clown said:

In different times maybe, but with the urgency of this (a laughable concept in itself given how far behind the curve the UK govt is) I don't; see how you change those behaviours without emergency measures etc. As we've already seen demonstrated over and over again for the past few months, changing behaviours by suggestion, relying on the publics common sense, relying on public health messaging are all ineffective or too slow to get traction.  

And we also saw the racist implications of having police fine people for failing to socially distance and I have no reason to believe that this won't occur again. If our preferred solution to serving a communities needs is increased police authority we must be prepared to say that we accept that this increased authority will be implemented in a discriminatory manner. Given there is so much we don't know and given we are going to fine people who do not constitute a risk I'm not prepared to say that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Swan Red said:

That BBC article was posted in response to CC who was saying the police wouldn't be responsible for enforcement in shops.

The point is about whether we are serious about looking outside of policing for addressing the needs of communities because the police are not our friends and are racist as f***. 

I didn't say they weren't going to be responsible for policing it, I said they were not going to be doing that. Big difference.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, charlie clown said:

I didn't say they weren't going to be responsible for policing it, I said they were not going to be doing that. Big difference.

But the quote I posted suggested they would be.

Quote

The latest rules for shops will be enforced by the police, with anyone disregarding them at risk of a fine of up to £100. This will be reduced to £50 if people pay within 14 days.

So you're either speculating or you missed this

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, cymrococh said:

If masks are compulsory, are they going to provide them?

No, but worth noting that the rule is for face coverings, not specifically masks. Scarves, pulled up jumpers, all manner of home made varieties are allowed. I’d agree making commercially sold masks compulsory would be economically discriminatory, but this is less so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironic that the people most likely to be challenged over not covering their face will be the same people who've been harassed by the police for years for doing so.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Swan Red said:

And we also saw the racist implications of having police fine people for failing to socially distance and I have no reason to believe that this won't occur again. If our preferred solution to serving a communities needs is increased police authority we must be prepared to say that we accept that this increased authority will be implemented in a discriminatory manner. Given there is so much we don't know and given we are going to fine people who do not constitute a risk I'm not prepared to say that.

I don't disagree with any of that, and of course granting more police powers, making more (for want of a better phrase) social activities subject to legal constraints, can never be a good thing,  especially when, as you say, those enforcing the legalities are demonstrably prejudiced. It has to be scrutinised and treated with caution. But the more fundamental thing here is a massive public health issue and, as we've picked up on other posts, I don't know how you make the dissemination of that message work in an effective and timely way without some big statement legislation.   

9 minutes ago, Swan Red said:

But the quote I posted suggested they would be.

So you're either speculating or you missed this

You only posted that after my initial post so of course I missed it.

But I wasn't speculating I was going off the evidence of what we saw, and are still seeing, around the policing of social distancing and mass gatherings. The vast, and it really was/is, vast number of incidents are going undetected and unpoliced. I don't think it speculative to say the same would happen again with mask wearing, it's a simple enough extrapolation.

 

 

Edited by charlie clown
Link to post
Share on other sites

In practice, the police aren’t going to be patrolling the entrances to every shop in the land, if only because of a lack of resources. Individual shop owners will make the call on who they do or don’t admit to their private premises, with police involvement only likely in the event of things getting disruptive. Granted that just makes shoppers vulnerable to discriminatory shopkeepers more than discriminatory police officers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, charlie clown said:

I don't disagree with any of that, and of course granting more police powers, making more (for want of a better phrase) social activities subject to legal constraints, can never be a good thing,  especially when, as you say, those enforcing the legalities are demonstrably prejudicial. It has to be scrutinised and treated with caution. But the more fundamental thing here is a massive public health issue and, as we've picked up on other posts, I don't know how you make the dissemination of that message work in an effective and timely way without some big statement legislation.   

I think discerning some tension between the massive public health issue and the way in which a state policies residents within its jurisdiction relies on a false dichotomy. Both are about the relationship between a resident and the state in which they reside. 

There are numerous ways in which this could have been addressed and the selection of making masks compulsory is a political choice among many that could have a more significant impact than the difference in advocating mask use and making them compulsory, making masks available, effective tracking better furlough schemes redistribution of resources into an ailing NHS, better support for those cocooning and those needing to isolate etc etc.

9 minutes ago, Gilps said:

In practice, the police aren’t going to be patrolling the entrances to every shop in the land, if only because of a lack of resources. Individual shop owners will make the call on who they do or don’t admit to their private premises, with police involvement only likely in the event of things getting disruptive. Granted that just makes shoppers vulnerable to discriminatory shopkeepers more than discriminatory police officers.

Sure but I'd still expect the police to compound the discriminatory shopkeepers discrimination when called upon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Swan Red said:

I think discerning some tension between the massive public health issue and the way in which a state policies residents within its jurisdiction relies on a false dichotomy. Both are about the relationship between a resident and the state in which they reside. 

There are numerous ways in which this could have been addressed and the selection of making masks compulsory is a political choice among many that could have a more significant impact than the difference in advocating mask use and making them compulsory, making masks available, effective tracking better furlough schemes redistribution of resources into an ailing NHS, better support for those cocooning and those needing to isolate etc etc.

On your first para you're probably right but conflating concerns over policing methods and practices with public health is the flipside to that. 

I agree wholeheartedly that all of those measures would have meant that we maybe wouldn't have got to this stage of developments but the evidence from other countries suggests that mask wearing needs to be part of any effective anti-covid measures. And in most cases those other countries have had job, health and social care measures that have been much more effective than those in the UK and, more specifically, England.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cymrococh said:

If masks are compulsory, are they going to provide them?

The responsibility and cost will without doubt fall to the shops and if you are having to pay for a mask for someone to buy a pint of milk there not much point opening

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, charlie clown said:

On your first para you're probably right but conflating concerns over policing methods and practices with public health is the flipside to that. 

I agree wholeheartedly that all of those measures would have meant that we maybe wouldn't have got to this stage of developments but the evidence from other countries suggests that mask wearing needs to be part of any effective anti-covid measures. And in most cases those other countries have had job, health and social care measures that have been much more effective than those in the UK and, more specifically, England.   

Policing methods and practices are public health concerns given there are plenty of examples of strong arm policing.

The point is for me do we want as a society to increase the authority of a police force that we know to discriminate in a number of ways against different communities by outsourcing enforcement of mask wearing or do we want to look at how we as people in communities can insource it. What other models are available, if we are saying in the short term there are no other options but to increase the powers of the police force then we have to accept that the police will enforce this in the manner we know them to, with all those different prejudices impacting different communities. I don't accept this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're in violent agreement with each other, Vic. I don't like it any more than you do but this is where we are. I just don't see the police enforcing it by and large, but, as you suggest, given that they use any/every opportunity to target minorities, some people - and most likely black, urban communities - will come off a lot worse than others. 

It's another corollary of an incompetent, racist, flip-flopping government. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   1 member


×
×
  • Create New...