Corona Virus Treatment

If he got into trouble and other people may have to go out to him, so then there could be more then 6 people helping and 2m rule broken

 

true, though I think there are exemptions for emergencies and medical help etc. However, if he knew he shouldn't have been doing it but did so, he's in the wrong.

 

See the poor old poverty stricken North are taking a bashing again.

 

The rules are there to be complied with - we can't have a position where people are free to breach them because they believe that it is OK to do so. It's the same a saying, "Yes Officer I was doing 120 mph through the vilage - but it's OK because it's 2 a.m. and no one else was on the road at the time." My justification for breaching the rules may look like utter nonsence to someone else. Not everyone has the same moral standards.

 

Assuming you mean "thought it was ok to do so," as in "I know I'm breaking the rules but for some reason I think I am exempt in these circumstances." If on the other hand someone accidentally breaches a restriction, especially when they have only just changed (again) and genuinely thought they were not doing so, and upon finding they did undertakes to be extra-vigilant from then on, it is a different story. Just as not everyone has the same moral compass, not everyone's life is as simple and not everyone is in a position to immediately learn a new set of restrictions within a couple of days. Ignorance of the law is not a defence against having broken it, but breaking it is not a definite guarantee of legal comeback. I can think of some instances where you would be likelierto be done for wasting police time reporting minor breaches than the breacher be prosecuted. Compliance is not always easy, though in this case of the driver/walker it is quite a ludicrous breach and he clearly knew what he was doing.

 

I like strong basic laws/rules with no grey area's, but if the law/rules changes then they must be very clear

 

See they have now said that they have found that the anti bodies only give you immunity for a short time, possibly 3 months, but hang on a minute, the old stuff they have been churning out since this lot started was that they possibly didn't give you any immunity?

But they are starting to crack, and suggesting if you were to get it at a later time it probably wouldn't be so bad as the first time round.
This is starting to sound suspiciously like .................some kind of virus, to me.

 

Hardly! There are about 1500 McDo's in France. It's a worldwide plague.

 

Arrrrr, no, they added that vaccines work in a different way and are more likely to be longer term.
The plot thickens.

To be fair they did say that immunity does not rely totally on anti bodies there are other ways that the white blood cells kill off virus once exposed.

 

Its called cutting edge propaganda.