What Can I Give My Dog For Tooth Pain?
Animals & Nature1 min ago
Covid Rules
39 Answers
I am sticking to the rules. I live alone and am part of one daughters bubble. I don't see anyone else. My eldest daughter wants to bring Xmas gifts to me (at my disgretion). I am suppose to be going to youngest daughters house for Xmas day where her mum in law will be there too so that makes three households for that day. I find it confusing that you can go to a pantomime with possibly 600 people but I would be breaking the law to see one person (my daughter). I know I am not alone. Many face the same dilemma. Would like opinions
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by maggie01. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I can understand your confusion.
Hopefully you will realise that the chances of encountering an infected person among the small number that you hope to meet at Christmas are considerably less than you encountering one among the 600 at the pantomime. After that you need to consider the chances of actually contracting the virus from an infected person among those whom you meet (that's where "social distancing" and so on comes in). That's the likelihood dealt with. Then you need to consider the effect that the disease may have on you should you catch it. Do all that and you've assessed the risk to you personally. Don't do that at you're simply guessing.
Hopefully you will realise that the chances of encountering an infected person among the small number that you hope to meet at Christmas are considerably less than you encountering one among the 600 at the pantomime. After that you need to consider the chances of actually contracting the virus from an infected person among those whom you meet (that's where "social distancing" and so on comes in). That's the likelihood dealt with. Then you need to consider the effect that the disease may have on you should you catch it. Do all that and you've assessed the risk to you personally. Don't do that at you're simply guessing.
// If you dont mind taking the risk of infections then am certain will be arrested for hugging and infecting a vunerable person..///
Perhaps you could tell us (a) how a police officer will have reasonable grounds for suspecting that one person hugging another has infected them and (b) under what legislation he might have grounds to arrest them (assuming the person being hugged has agreed to it).
Perhaps you could tell us (a) how a police officer will have reasonable grounds for suspecting that one person hugging another has infected them and (b) under what legislation he might have grounds to arrest them (assuming the person being hugged has agreed to it).
//Tbh, I think if she couldn't, it wouldn't actually do her any favours either.//
Indeed. I've just this minute seen an inmate of a care home interviewed on the news. She was asked if she is tired of the Covid regulations. She said that she was and added "This is not a life - it is an existence." And so it is for many older people and many of them would prefer to take their chances rather than exist as they currently do.
Indeed. I've just this minute seen an inmate of a care home interviewed on the news. She was asked if she is tired of the Covid regulations. She said that she was and added "This is not a life - it is an existence." And so it is for many older people and many of them would prefer to take their chances rather than exist as they currently do.
prudie while you were on your high horse you missunderstood. All am trying to say is why pantos are okay because there follwoing some rules and will be inspected. If you want the same standards then do the same things. If you dont want to do that in your own homes then just do what you want but accept the risk
//So a correction was issued as soon as a noticed it. Its quite funny that you spent that time replying pointlessly//
What's even more funny is that you should deliver a post which states the exact opposite of what you really meant. Your correction was not visible when I began my reply. I can only respond to what I see. I accept now that you made an error and I responded to that erroneous post.
What's even more funny is that you should deliver a post which states the exact opposite of what you really meant. Your correction was not visible when I began my reply. I can only respond to what I see. I accept now that you made an error and I responded to that erroneous post.
//I'm even more confused by new judge. Haven't a clue what he's on about lol//
What I'm on about maggie is that the chances of you even meeting somebody infected with the virus is very low and the smaller number of people you meet the smaller the chances are of any one of them being infected (and so the smaller the chance you have of catching it). So your confusion stems from the fact that it is seemingly forbidden to go to a place where there are just six people but OK to go to a place where there are 600 people where the chances of any one of them carrying the infection is 100 times greater.
What I'm on about maggie is that the chances of you even meeting somebody infected with the virus is very low and the smaller number of people you meet the smaller the chances are of any one of them being infected (and so the smaller the chance you have of catching it). So your confusion stems from the fact that it is seemingly forbidden to go to a place where there are just six people but OK to go to a place where there are 600 people where the chances of any one of them carrying the infection is 100 times greater.
