Hancock's Half Hour

[Chris152]

Try and put things into context

Context: this is the man who wrote the rules and acted against what the people (reasonably) understood those rules to mean. Polls show 60+% of people would now be less inclined to follow lock down rules in future (Liason Committee currently taking place). That means getting the virus back under control when it next gets out of control will be harder and more people presumably will die as a result. Surely that's the context?

 

[Rorschach]

What happened to personal responsibility?

 

[Chris152]

What happened to personal responsibility?

Exactly!

 

[Rorschach]

What happened to personal responsibility?

Exactly!

I meant for everyone else you are talking about.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Objective reflection of DC actions would be:

- going north 250+ miles to isolate with kiddie - completely understandable
- trip to Castle Bernard to test eyes - seems implausible for lots of reasons

He may have been better off to acknowledge the CB jaunt and apologise. But there is no evidence that anyone was put in any danger through his actions.

The media by contrast have conducted themselves appallingly. In particular the scrum outside his house was completely beyond any interpretation of the rules. There is audio and video evidence to arrest the lot of them.

We need to appear very clear (irrespective of political affiliation) who should be running the country:

- politicians who at least can be fired or re-elected every five years
- the media ,often in pursuit of trivia, who act as a pack of dogs after a fox
- political advisors & elites - the former can be fired by the PM (in theory)

For all their weaknesses I still prefer the democratic process :mrgreen:

 

[thetyreman]

cummings should be at very least fined, ideally though sent to prison, but no... one rule for them, different rules for us.

 

[Chris152]

I think my head's going to explode! Today's Hancock's half hour (currently broadcasting) is pleading with the British people to 'do the right thing' and, if you have symptoms, not to leave home. Where's that brown paper bag, I need to do some heavy breathing.

 

[RogerS]

.... But there is no evidence that anyone was put in any danger through his actions.

But irrelevant in the broader context. It's all about perceptions - pls see above.

The media by contrast have conducted themselves appallingly. In particular the scrum outside his house was completely beyond any interpretation of the rules. There is audio and video evidence to arrest the lot of them.
...

Hopefully they will be but don't hold your breath.

 

[Chris152]

He may have been better off to acknowledge the CB jaunt and apologise. But there is no evidence that anyone was put in any danger through his actions.

Well, except that driving with potentially dodgy eyesight is clearly a threat to other people's safety.

 

[Garno]

Garno, you make some valid observations but the one critical factor that you've overlooked is not whether what he did was right or wrong, legal or illegal, whether he should be sacked or not...all of these matter not one jot. What matters is how his actions are perceived by the general public. We are being asked to carry out a certain way of life for the moment, lockdown etc. But when we see someone in his position doing whatever he wants and not perceived to be 'obeying' the same 'rules' as the rest of us, then it is human nature to say 'Damn that...if he can do that then so can I'.

And therein lies the danger. You only have to look at what happened in the last few days at Weston Hospital to see just how easy things can go pear-shaped quite quickly.

I hear what you are saying but could the same not be said about the labour MP's who also broke lockdown guidance rules before DC? These are MP's they play an important role in how the country is run no matter what side they fall on. What about the thousands of people who broke lockdown rules as mentioned in my previous post before DC did this?

I give the members of public more credence and do not believe anyone decided to do what DC did because of his actions, and if they did then more fool them. The media are making more out of this than it actually is, it is easy to say you would not of done the same to potentially protect your children when not faced with having to make that choice. If my children were young (They are in their 40's now) and I was faced with the same choice I would do the same even though I am one of the vulnerable, the difference is I would of been nicked for speeding.

I give you a lot of credit Roger and respect what you have to say with all your posts but if you really believe that the problems Weston Hospital has faced over the last few days have anything what's so ever to do with DC driving his children somewhere a few weeks ago, then Sir I feel for you. How does the conversation go " Lets go to Weston because DC took his children to safety when he should of really put them at risk when he had Covid19" again DC would of been very low down on the list of excuses for all of the idiots who attended.

 

[Garno]

I think my head's going to explode! Today's Hancock's half hour (currently broadcasting) is pleading with the British people to 'do the right thing' and, if you have symptoms, not to leave home. Where's that brown paper bag, I need to do some heavy breathing.

So what should he be saying then?
If you have symptoms go out and infect everyone? or would you prefer him to not give any advice and keep on the same DC topic?

 

[RogerS]

Garno, you make some valid observations but the one critical factor that you've overlooked is not whether what he did was right or wrong, legal or illegal, whether he should be sacked or not...all of these matter not one jot. What matters is how his actions are perceived by the general public. We are being asked to carry out a certain way of life for the moment, lockdown etc. But when we see someone in his position doing whatever he wants and not perceived to be 'obeying' the same 'rules' as the rest of us, then it is human nature to say 'Damn that...if he can do that then so can I'.

And therein lies the danger. You only have to look at what happened in the last few days at Weston Hospital to see just how easy things can go pear-shaped quite quickly.

I hear what you are saying but could the same not be said about the labour MP's who also broke lockdown guidance rules before DC? These are MP's they play an important role in how the country is run no matter what side they fall on. What about the thousands of people who broke lockdown rules as mentioned in my previous post before DC did this?

I give the members of public more credence and do not believe anyone decided to do what DC did because of his actions, and if they did then more fool them. The media are making more out of this than it actually is, it is easy to say you would not of done the same to potentially protect your children when not faced with having to make that choice. If my children were young (They are in their 40's now) and I was faced with the same choice I would do the same even though I am one of the vulnerable, the difference is I would of been nicked for speeding.

I give you a lot of credit Roger and respect what you have to say with all your posts but if you really believe that the problems Weston Hospital has faced over the last few days have anything what's so ever to do with DC driving his children somewhere a few weeks ago, then Sir I feel for you. How does the conversation go " Lets go to Weston because DC took his children to safety when he should of really put them at risk when he had Covid19" again DC would of been very low down on the list of excuses for all of the idiots who attended.

No, I didn't say that at all..you misinterpreted what I wrote. And you still are missing out on how the public perceive his actions. It's all to do with the psychology of the mob.

 

[Chris152]

I think my head's going to explode! Today's Hancock's half hour (currently broadcasting) is pleading with the British people to 'do the right thing' and, if you have symptoms, not to leave home. Where's that brown paper bag, I need to do some heavy breathing.

So what should he be saying then?
If you have symptoms go out and infect everyone? or would you prefer him to not give any advice and keep on the same DC topic?

Again, I think you've missed the context Garno. he should be saying all those things but not against the background of a pm who's belligerently standing by a senior advisor who didn't do what H is asking the rest of us to do.

 

[Garno]

Try and put things into context

Context: this is the man who wrote the rules and acted against what the people (reasonably) understood those rules to mean. Polls show 60+% of people would now be less inclined to follow lock down rules in future (Liason Committee currently taking place). That means getting the virus back under control when it next gets out of control will be harder and more people presumably will die as a result. Surely that's the context?

And who was surveyed? I ask that because if you did a survey with the most vulnerable you would no doubt get 95+% saying they would follow it. If you survey the Labour party members and asked them with the added bit it would mean DC being sacked then 98+% would say they were less inclined. If you surveyed the 18 - 25 yr olds You would get a higher figure again.

You say he wrote the rules, are you sure of that? or does it fit your arguement better saying that. If 60+% of people are really not going to follow any future lockdowns then why have they not all gone back to work instead of going to Weston. If 60+% of people do not think this virus is serious enough that they would not support another lockdown then why are they moaning so much about what DC did? If 60+% of people are not going to support another lockdown then the people of this country need to take a long hard look at themselves. When people start dying in droves they can say it's all because of DC, they can sleep well at night knowing they had not infected too many others.

 

[Chris152]

All possible Garno. I think the best we can do is to assess the evidence and draw our own conclusions.

 

[RogerS]

If Cummings was so squeaky clean then why did he go and make an amendment to his blog to try and make him look like 'The Good Guy' ?

 

[Chris152]

Yep, that's an odd one - did he think people wouldn't notice?And is it of any importance really?! Very odd.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

I watched some beeb today whilst stuffing sausages - they seemed very clear that I should be incensed over the actions of Mr Cummings.

If you tell the public that they should be very angry about something, quite a lot of people will get quite agitated. The media seem to be flogging the horse pretty hard, and from my perspective, said horse doesn't look to be getting up any time soon. My question is why push the righteous indignation narrative? What are "they" hoping to gain, and who are "they"?

All of this reminds me a lot of The Life of Brian balcony scene - to misquote: "You are all individuals....you've got to think for yourselves...you are all different."

"I'm not!"


[youtube]QereR0CViMY[/youtube]

Hands up who is an individual...

 

[Rorschach]

Has anyone written to their MP, apparently lots are according to the BBC.

I wrote to mine after I heard that.

 

[doctor Bob]

Has anyone written to their MP, apparently lots are according to the BBC.

I wrote to mine after I heard that.

The mental is strong at present, once one in 5 lose their jobs and they realise the holiday is over and universal credit is rubbish, they will start to realise there are more important things to sh!tt yourself over.
I'd genuinely say if you're not in discussions with your boss about returning to work then your job is very much on the line.