walkhighlands

This forum is for general discussion about walking and scrambling... If writing a report or sharing your experiences from a route, please use the other boards.

New Coronavirus Law

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby Essan » Fri Jun 12, 2020 4:26 pm

flyfifer wrote:A woman fell into the Walton burn, near Castlecary today.
Several Scottish Fire and Rescue units attended with the woman being taken to hospital in Glasgow.
No mention of Reckless and Fellonious conduct or Police laying charges against the woman.
It seems clear that SFandR are less likely to be affected by Covid than SMRS folk.🤔🤔



Did she drive 60 miles to get there, for no valid reason at all, and then set off without appropriate equipment or the ability to determine where she was going, knowing that doing so not only put her at risk but also anyone else should she then encounter difficulties or have an accident (that would have been prevented had she followed the law) ?
User avatar
Essan
 
Posts: 534
Munros:98   Corbetts:52
Grahams:7   Donalds:2
Sub 2000:4   Hewitts:88
Wainwrights:24   Islands:5
Joined: Jul 1, 2010
Location: Evesham, Worcs

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby iain_atkinson_1986 » Sat Jun 13, 2020 2:13 pm

For those of you interested in what's happening further north, I did the Corbett Sail Mhor this morning. I was the only person on the hill and there were no other cars in the layby.

En route home there were 5 cars at Corriehallie, 8 at the access point for the western Fannichs but only 3 for the eastern. Any lingering guilt I had about being out was obliterated when I saw the Ben Wyvis car park. Easily the most hoaching I've ever seen it. Folk boxed in, cars parked on the verges and even the massive layby up the road was packed. I'd imagine people were, like me, coming from Inverness and surrounding area but I was surprised the Wyvis car park was even open!
iain_atkinson_1986
Munro compleatist
 
Posts: 154
Munros:16   Corbetts:96
Grahams:1   Donalds:2
Sub 2000:4   
Joined: Jul 27, 2016

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby Silver Bear » Sat Jun 13, 2020 2:28 pm

[quote="iain_atkinson_1986"]For those of you interested in what's happening further north, I did the Corbett Sail Mhor this morning. I was the only person on the hill and there were no other cars in the layby.

En route home there were 5 cars at Corriehallie, 8 at the access point for the western Fannichs but only 3 for the eastern. Any lingering guilt I had about being out was obliterated when I saw the Ben Wyvis car park. Easily the most hoaching I've ever seen it. Folk boxed in, cars parked on the verges and even the massive layby up the road was packed. I'd imagine people were, like me, coming from Inverness and surrounding area but I was surprised the Wyvis car park

All car parks need to be re-opened as people are travelling anyway and more likely to park on a verge or side of the road thus creating a danger to road users

Good to see people getting out on the hills as well
Silver Bear
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Apr 8, 2020

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby Moriarty » Sat Jun 13, 2020 2:39 pm

iain_atkinson_1986 wrote:......En route home there were 5 cars at Corriehallie, 8 at the access point for the western Fannichs but only 3 for the eastern. Any lingering guilt I had about being out was obliterated when I saw the Ben Wyvis car park. Easily the most hoaching I've ever seen it......


It's been interesting watching discussion across social media.

I think one of the most illuminating issues has been the sight of posters who would previously postured and virtue signalled their frustrations that (other) people were not prepared to pay or sacrifice for the greater/common good who have been screaming like weans wi' skint knees at being asked to sacrifice something for the greater or common good (not related to the post quoted).

This is simply that - being asked to sacrifice a little for the common good. Whether you've risk assessed your activity and given yourself a clean bill of health isn't relevant as societal action is weakened by breaches as it then empowers others to also breach. The action collapses as adherence fails and negative consequences follow.

...but on the plus side it does give me a laugh that some of the more virtuous at asking others to give have shown their true colours when finally asked if it applies to them. ;)
Moriarty
 
Posts: 278
Joined: Dec 15, 2013

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby iain_atkinson_1986 » Sat Jun 13, 2020 3:09 pm

Moriarty wrote:
iain_atkinson_1986 wrote:......En route home there were 5 cars at Corriehallie, 8 at the access point for the western Fannichs but only 3 for the eastern. Any lingering guilt I had about being out was obliterated when I saw the Ben Wyvis car park. Easily the most hoaching I've ever seen it......


It's been interesting watching discussion across social media.

I think one of the most illuminating issues has been the sight of posters who would previously postured and virtue signalled their frustrations that (other) people were not prepared to pay or sacrifice for the greater/common good who have been screaming like weans wi' skint knees at being asked to sacrifice something for the greater or common good (not related to the post quoted).

This is simply that - being asked to sacrifice a little for the common good. Whether you've risk assessed your activity and given yourself a clean bill of health isn't relevant as societal action is weakened by breaches as it then empowers others to also breach. The action collapses as adherence fails and negative consequences follow.

...but on the plus side it does give me a laugh that some of the more virtuous at asking others to give have shown their true colours when finally asked if it applies to them. ;)


I was in the "we should all stay home" camp but I think hundreds of people protesting in Edinbugh and Glasgow without really social distancing and also being a huge burden on the emergency services swung it for me.
iain_atkinson_1986
Munro compleatist
 
Posts: 154
Munros:16   Corbetts:96
Grahams:1   Donalds:2
Sub 2000:4   
Joined: Jul 27, 2016

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby BigTed » Sat Jun 13, 2020 3:31 pm

Essan wrote:
flyfifer wrote:A woman fell into the Walton burn, near Castlecary today.
Several Scottish Fire and Rescue units attended with the woman being taken to hospital in Glasgow.
No mention of Reckless and Fellonious conduct or Police laying charges against the woman.
It seems clear that SFandR are less likely to be affected by Covid than SMRS folk.🤔🤔



Did she drive 60 miles to get there, for no valid reason at all, and then set off without appropriate equipment or the ability to determine where she was going, knowing that doing so not only put her at risk but also anyone else should she then encounter difficulties or have an accident (that would have been prevented had she followed the law) ?


The distance is irrelevent. It wasn't against the law. It's a bad precedent charging people for being inexperienced or incompetent. The Crialarich Two broken no specific law which is why the polis had to dredge up a common law charge. Since there are laws covering legal and illegal behavious in relation to the Covid restrictions those are the laws that should be used, if they apply. If they don't apply don't start finding other laws.

The culpable and reckless while hillwalking might be for example rolling boulders down a hillside where there is a direct risk from the action.

Maybe we should charge drivers who break down without a warning triangle in the car. No law broken but more risk to others?

What next? Charge anyone that needs rescued by a beach lifeguard?
BigTed
Mountain Walker
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Aug 18, 2017

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby Gareth Harper » Sat Jun 13, 2020 3:38 pm

I was in the "we should all stay home" camp but I think hundreds of people protesting in Edinbugh and Glasgow without really social distancing and also being a huge burden on the emergency services swung it for me.


Scotland is still in lockdown. You can find offical advice here - https://www.gov.scot/coronavirus-covid-19/

It's not difficult.

I’d love to head to the hills, but we are in the middle of a global pandemic and people right across the country are making considerable sacrifices.
Gareth Harper
 
Posts: 367
Munros:166   Corbetts:49
Grahams:18   Donalds:33
Sub 2000:5   
Joined: Aug 25, 2013
Location: Ayrshire

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby Raynor » Sat Jun 13, 2020 3:39 pm

BigTed wrote:
Essan wrote:
flyfifer wrote:A woman fell into the Walton burn, near Castlecary today.
Several Scottish Fire and Rescue units attended with the woman being taken to hospital in Glasgow.
No mention of Reckless and Fellonious conduct or Police laying charges against the woman.
It seems clear that SFandR are less likely to be affected by Covid than SMRS folk.🤔🤔



Did she drive 60 miles to get there, for no valid reason at all, and then set off without appropriate equipment or the ability to determine where she was going, knowing that doing so not only put her at risk but also anyone else should she then encounter difficulties or have an accident (that would have been prevented had she followed the law) ?


The distance is irrelevent. It wasn't against the law. It's a bad precedent charging people for being inexperienced or incompetent. The Crialarich Two broken no specific law which is why the polis had to dredge up a common law charge. Since there are laws covering legal and illegal behavious in relation to the Covid restrictions those are the laws that should be used, if they apply. If they don't apply don't start finding other laws.

The culpable and reckless while hillwalking might be for example rolling boulders down a hillside where there is a direct risk from the action.

Maybe we should charge drivers who break down without a warning triangle in the car. No law broken but more risk to others?

What next? Charge anyone that needs rescued by a beach lifeguard?


Who knows what actually happened. It could easily have been a pair of numpties up from Glasgow that decided to wander up with a tent and a few bottles of buckfast then started making prank calls demanding a helicopter down.

If it was actually genuine hillwalkers that got into trouble (which seems unlikely), then I would imagine the arresting officer is soon to be an ex police officer. It would mean for instance fell running, in which you basically run up munros in trainers, shorts and t shirts is now an illegal activity.
Raynor
Wanderer
 
Posts: 164
Munros:58   Corbetts:8
Grahams:6   Donalds:1
Sub 2000:12   
Islands:4
Joined: Jun 11, 2017
Location: Paisley

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby Marty_JG » Sat Jun 13, 2020 3:46 pm

Gareth Harper wrote:I’d love to head to the hills, but we are in the middle of a global pandemic and people right across the
country are making considerable sacrifices.

Moriarty wrote:This is simply that - being asked to sacrifice a little for the common good.


It depends what you're being asked to sacrifice. If you are being asked to make sacrifices to limit the outbreak, totally fine. If you're being asked to make sacrifices that do not affect the outbreak but to give politicians "pose & posture" piccies for the papers and telly... not so much.

Cinemas and football and pubs and clubs are closed to the public, that's a reasonable sacrifice as they are avenues of high transmission (indoors, lengthy close proximity, innumerable touchable surfaces). Being asked (not even told-in-law, but asked) to not walk up a desolate hill is unreasonable.

Wee Nippy was 100% right to use your common sense and not go to places that are jam-packed. Fair enough. Even if that place is highly local if it's very busy, avoid it. The flipside of that common sense is it's reasonable to travel further to places that are not densely populated.
User avatar
Marty_JG
Backpacker
 
Posts: 812
Munros:8   Corbetts:2
Sub 2000:3   
Islands:3
Joined: Sep 12, 2016
Location: Glasgow

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby Moriarty » Sat Jun 13, 2020 3:53 pm

iain_atkinson_1986 wrote:I was in the "we should all stay home" camp but I think hundreds of people protesting in Edinbugh and Glasgow without really social distancing and also being a huge burden on the emergency services swung it for me.


Precisely - all societal action crumbles as individuals excuse their actions based on the perceived transgressions of others.

Marty wrote:It depends what you're being asked to sacrifice. If you are being asked to make sacrifices to limit the outbreak, totally fine. If you're being asked to make sacrifices that do not affect the outbreak but to give politicians "pose & posture" piccies for the papers and telly... not so much.


When you mark your own card and make your own judgements from a purely individual perspective you can forgive almost anything you do.

When you dismiss the erosive effect of individual actions on group cohesion you choose to ignore the reality of behavioural science.

Like it or not you're a member of a species that has herd/group behaviour. Your behaviour influences the herd/group.
Moriarty
 
Posts: 278
Joined: Dec 15, 2013

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby Sunset tripper » Sat Jun 13, 2020 5:06 pm

Not surprisingly hill walkers have fallen into different groups regarding the restrictions.
Some people need rules and these rules must be adhered to pretty much no matter what. The hazy rules/advice regarding the 5 miles doesnt suit some and has been converted to 5 miles maybe 7 maximum, and anyone travelling from Inverness to Ben Wyvis is selfish and irresponsible. :roll:

The summit from Ben Wyvis is about 7 or 8 miles as the crow flies from Dingwall. Probably acceptable to most of the strict rule/ advice obeyers. Once you get out of Dingwall up past the new distillery it would be possible to follow a fairly direct route to the summit, but a lot tougher task and a bit more risky than the usual route.
Here is where the rules/advice starts to fall apart at the seams for the people who think the rule is 5 miles.
The drive from Dingwall to the easy ascent of Wyvis is 18 miles :shock:
You are no longer in the broadly 5 mile category and are not heeding the advice, so you are fair game for criticism and if you had an unfortunate accident you are also fair game to be charged with a serious criminal offence.
If you had a similar accident because you took the extreme route as the crow flies from Dingwall it is all smiley happy faces. :roll:

In reality if you did drive from Dingwall or Inverness to climb Wyvis I would be very surprised if the police or MRT perceived you to be breaking any law, but probably best only to call them as a very last resort and try and help yourself or each other off the hill. :D

Regarding the spread or catching of the corona. I think the risk would be far smaller climbing Ben Wyvis than going for a drive through takeaway in Inverness.
So I have read the advice and rules and decided I wont be having a KFC tomorrow. :wink:
User avatar
Sunset tripper
 
Posts: 2042
Joined: Nov 3, 2013
Location: Inverness

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby rodderss » Sat Jun 13, 2020 5:57 pm

All this nonsense is now only been followed a minority.

I don't know anybody who is not breaking the guidelines ranging from slight bending to complete disregard.

Even my mum who is in late seventies and is normally a stickler is bending them.

In 4 weeks you can go on holiday, travel where you like and most probably sit in a restaurant or pub only 1 metre apert but today you can't drive 30 miles to walk up a remote hill.

What's different in 4 weeks.

Absolutely ridiculous, and laughable
rodderss
 
Posts: 100
Munros:37   Corbetts:8
Grahams:6   
Sub 2000:21   
Islands:2
Joined: Sep 2, 2016

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby al78 » Sat Jun 13, 2020 6:36 pm

I don't know about Scotland, but Horsham was almost rammed full this morning, just like a normal Saturday morning. Cycling there on the shared paths and quiet roads I was having to regularly give way to people. It was possible to keep my distance from others, but only just. It seems the lockdown is all but over here.

I don't agree with trying to dismiss the demands inflicted on people as "small sacrifices". We are talking about hundreds of billions in damage to the economy, high risk to mental health due to physical disconnection from loved ones, and inability to participate in hobbies, damage to young people's education, damage to children's social development because they can't see their friends, damage to everyone's job prospects, damage to pension pots because of the economic crash, health risk to people such as cancer patients scared to consume NHS resources, public transport being almost unusable because social distancing destroys its utility value (i.e. to transport large volumes of people between places), with obvious detrimental effects on people who don't drive, and a society now conditioned to live in fear of everyone they don't know. These are not small sacrifices, they are not insignificant consequences, and I would question have we gone too far?
User avatar
al78
Munro compleatist
 
Posts: 664
Munros:28   Corbetts:8
Donalds:1
Joined: Feb 1, 2018

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby Spade » Sat Jun 13, 2020 6:39 pm

An international pandemic is not nonsense, People are naturally waning with its duration and we must show a kindness for them. Unfortunately parts of Beijing have now gone in for a second lockdown. :(
We need to be patient and mindful, there is no known cure, there is no vaccine, all we have is our behaviour to fight this. That involves social distancing, necessary journeys only, stay at home, wash your hands and where necessary wear a face mask.

The recent protests does put strain on the emergency services - police officer, ambulance crew or others etc in attendance at these events with people ignoring social distancing rules and putting them and others at risk!! not to mention a-symptomatic carriers.

Stay home
Stay safe
Wash your hands
Stay patient
Look after yourself and be socially responsible.

https://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/coronavirus.shtml
Spade
 
Posts: 123
Munros:80   Corbetts:5
Joined: Sep 23, 2010

Re: New Coronavirus Law

Postby Marty_JG » Sat Jun 13, 2020 6:39 pm

Moriarty wrote:When you mark your own card and make your own judgements from a purely individual perspective you can forgive almost anything you do.


If you believe yourself to be ethical then that should be true anyway. Until 1989 in Scotland it was not a crime to commit "Marital Rape". Quite simply the law was wrong. Again in Scotland until 1981 it was illegal for same-sex adults to have sexual relations (and full equality didn't even start to be true until 2010). Once again, quite simply, the law was wrong. Something being legal shouldn't influence you to commit an unethical act, so too something being illegal shouldn't prevent you from engaging in an ethical act. To paraphrase MLK: in a civilised society it is the duty of men of good conscience to obey just laws, so too in a civilised society it is the duty of men of good conscience to disobey unjust laws.
User avatar
Marty_JG
Backpacker
 
Posts: 812
Munros:8   Corbetts:2
Sub 2000:3   
Islands:3
Joined: Sep 12, 2016
Location: Glasgow

PreviousNext



Walkhighlands community forum is advert free

We need help to keep the site online.
Can you help support Walkhighlands and the online community by setting up a monthly donation by direct debit?



Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests