Face coverings compulsory on public transport in England from 15 June

[NorthOxonian]

A thirty-second search of Twitter found https://twitter.com/10downingstreet/status/1269315615820521472?s=21

I'd been checking the Boris Johnson account but couldn't find it. I'm just frustrated at this point - looks like we're spending the next few years in a masked society, hooray!

 

[nedchester]

I'd been checking the Boris Johnson account but couldn't find it. I'm just frustrated at this point - looks like we're spending the next few years in a masked society, hooray!

The public will decide when its had enough.

 

[Journeyman]

What I think certainly doesn't come into it. You were expressing indignation as to why so many people disagree vehemently with your views. I was explaining that it was in many cases because of your refusal to accept the fact that only collective action is effective against the disease. You chose not to put any facts based defences up as to why you are outraged in your opposition to collective action. By definition therefore, the reason why you're finding so much opposition is because your arguments have been presented in a way which paints you as rather self centered.

It suits your narrative to present me that way. I've attempted to explain as carefully as I can why I'm opposed to compulsory mask-wearing. In fact, your reaction to my posts indicates a very serious problem, which is that those who disagree will be pressured into compliance by shaming and societal pressure.

I've stated frequently that I have no intention of breaking the law, because it's not fair of me to cause grief over this - those enforcing are not responsible for policy. But having considered it at length, I consider it a stupid kneejerk policy from a clueless government that feels a desperate need to be seen to be doing something.

 

[Starmill]

It suits your narrative to present me that way.

I'm commenting on external facts and your posts. You're loudly waiving your own op-ed around on here, based just on your opinions. I'd suggest that the 'narrative', such as it is in this thread, has been written by you.

 

[6Gman]

I was initially dubious but personally having been doing it for a few weeks at work on board trains I'm actually finding that it doesn't bother me. I use a bit more thought with my hand gestures, verbal comms and announcements and haven't had any issues.

Once it stops being mandated (as I am certain it will, it's too much of a pain in the backside to maintain) there needs to be an alternative solution to provide some of the benefits, like allowing me to strike any individual once hard on the nose whom coughs repeatedly without covering their mouth inside a railway carriage or puts a ticket or bank note in their mouth before handing it to me.

I catch every bug going spending much of my life inside a train observing disgusting habits and anything that makes the trampier individuals in society think a bit more about their actions has to be a good thing for me.

LowLevel, I love you. Will you come and be the Guard on all trains I use?


(Do people really put tickets in their mouths then hand them to you? Yes, I suppose they do. Uugh!)

 

[sjpowermac]

It suits your narrative to present me that way. I've attempted to explain as carefully as I can why I'm opposed to compulsory mask-wearing. In fact, your reaction to my posts indicates a very serious problem, which is that those who disagree will be pressured into compliance by shaming and societal pressure.

I've stated frequently that I have no intention of breaking the law, because it's not fair of me to cause grief over this - those enforcing are not responsible for policy. But having considered it at length, I consider it a stupid kneejerk policy from a clueless government that feels a desperate need to be seen to be doing something.

I see that you have some very serious reasons from your past that have led to you holding the views you do. I genuinely admire your bravery for being so open about them.

I still don’t agree with you about masks, but hats off, (or if you prefer masks off!) to you for giving the background.

I’m largely indifferent about the masks. If they do help, then all well and good. I seriously doubt they will be around for long. The public sort of led us into lockdown, they’ve definitely led us out of it and I think with masks it will be the same thing.

Anyhow, I’m self isolating from railway forums for a bit but I just wanted you to know that I admire your courage in opening up.

 

[sjpowermac]

I was initially dubious but personally having been doing it for a few weeks at work on board trains I'm actually finding that it doesn't bother me. I use a bit more thought with my hand gestures, verbal comms and announcements and haven't had any issues.

Once it stops being mandated (as I am certain it will, it's too much of a pain in the backside to maintain) there needs to be an alternative solution to provide some of the benefits, like allowing me to strike any individual once hard on the nose whom coughs repeatedly without covering their mouth inside a railway carriage or puts a ticket or bank note in their mouth before handing it to me.

I catch every bug going spending much of my life inside a train observing disgusting habits and anything that makes the trampier individuals in society think a bit more about their actions has to be a good thing for me.

A thumbs up from me too. Great to read such a balanced post and someone just quietly getting on with things, doing their best.

 

[Journeyman]

I'm commenting on external facts and your posts. You're loudly waiving your own op-ed around on here, based just on your opinions. I'd suggest that the 'narrative', such as it is in this thread, has been written by you.

But it still remains that you've jumped to conclusions. It's happened before, and it happens all the time - people consider those who disagree with their deeply-held views to be the epitome of evil.

My mother-in-law is a fanatical Scottish nationalist. I'm committed to the union. She decided to conclude that I'm obviously some sort of fanatical Brexiteer Tory, which is insultingly inaccurate. I just hold strong views on personal freedom and responsibility, and that doesn't make me some sort of evil self-centred idiot. I'll say it again - I will not break the law.

 

[Journeyman]

I see that you have some very serious reasons from your past that have led to you holding the views you do. I genuinely admire your bravery for being so open about them.

I still don’t agree with you about masks, but hats off, (or if you prefer masks off!) to you for giving the background.

I’m largely indifferent about the masks. If they do help, then all well and good. I seriously doubt they will be around for long. The public sort of led us into lockdown, they’ve definitely led us out of it and I think with masks it will be the same thing.

Anyhow, I’m self isolating from railway forums for a bit but I just wanted you to know that I admire your courage in opening up.

Thanks, I really appreciate you saying that, especially because some people have turned quite abusive.

 

[Starmill]

But it still remains that you've jumped to conclusions.

I've simply explained how what you've written shows crassness and an expression of your wish not to consider others. That's perfectly lawful, you're entitled to have that view. But note that you didn't present any factual rebuttals to me or anyone else when we explained, again and again, that only collective action can keep people safe against this particular threat. You've expressed your strong opposition to social pressure to do selfless things such as wear masks or stay at home. Now you say I've jumped to a conclusion. All I have done is reflect on the nature of your posts here, not made a wider judgement of who you really are. You've also had many opportunities to explain how it's not selfish to recognise that individual risk assessment is impossible in the face of this threat, too, but I haven't seen you try...

 

[Huntergreed]

After some consideration, I’ve come to realise that there are three ways to approach the future of this epidemic:

We remain in lockdown, which is entirely unsustainable, will cause total economic collapse, and cause damage several orders of magnitude greater than the damage that the virus would cause even without a lockdown.

We continue as a socially distant society, with enforced 2m distancing in all settings including transport. This would result in a completely insufficient level of capacity in many settings and is an approach that is simply impractical and unsustainable.

We enforce mask wearing in many of the settings where social distancing isn’t possible, and where it is we reduce the distance to something more practical (1m or 1.5m). This may cause some personal discomfort and “look strange”, but this is by far the most economically beneficial approach and it allows us to return to “normal” (or some variant of this) more than any of the other two approaches.

I admit it’s not my ideal society, indeed a society without facial expressions may even be considered “Orwellian” or a form of “Dystopia”, but this isn’t a fantasy tale, this is reality, and given that we really need to get the economy going again as a matter of urgency whilst further suppressing the virus, the mask option seems by far to be the most logical and sensible to take at this point.

 

[Journeyman]

I've simply explained how what you've written shows crassness and an expression of your wish not to consider others. That's perfectly lawful, you're entitled to have that view. But note that you didn't present any factual rebuttals to me or anyone else when we explained, again and again, that only collective action can keep people safe against this particular threat. You've expressed your strong opposition to social pressure to do selfless things such as wear masks or stay at home. Now you say I've jumped to a conclusion. All I have done is reflect on the nature of your posts here, not made a wider judgement of who you really are. You've also had many opportunities to explain how it's not selfish to recognise that individual risk assessment is impossible in the face of this threat, too, but I haven't seen you try...

I'll repeat it again - I've stuck religiously to the lockdown rules, at great cost to myself, and I won't break the law. I understand serious actions need to be taken. But - when being forced to do something that I find deeply unpleasant, for reasons you may or may not agree with - I need to know that there's solid reasons behind it. So far, Grant Shapps has basically said "we don't know if it does any good, but it might make people feel better".

Sorry, that isn't good enough at all.

 

[ashkeba]

with no underlying health conditions and

Don't you mean no known underlying health conditions?

That's something the optimistic are often missing. I could have written the above once but it would have been incorrect. I just didn't yet know about my health condition.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Nobody should condemn anyone for not wearing a face mask (which seems to be happening on here)

The government have lost the war on lockdown and now see us as peasants to be ordered around. They didn't seem to think face masks were that important at the start of the pandemic and their (mis)handling of PPE for hospitals, in my opinion was utterly disgraceful. Their stance is now "you had better obey or be shamed for as the non-confirming plague superspreader. This will become the "new normal" and so, get used to it"

This is probably my biggest reason for resisting wearing a mask.

 

[Journeyman]

Don't you mean no known underlying health conditions?

That's something the optimistic are often missing. I could have written the above once but it would have been incorrect. I just didn't yet know about my health condition.

Great, another snide dig. I saw you put "arrogant" on there before changing it.

 

[ashkeba]

I'll repeat it again - I've stuck religiously to the lockdown rules, at great cost to myself, and I won't break the law. I understand serious actions need to be taken. But - when being forced to do something that I find deeply unpleasant, for reasons you may or may not agree with - I need to know that there's solid reasons behind it. So far, Grant Shapps has basically said "we don't know if it does any good, but it might make people feel better".

Sorry, that isn't good enough at all.

Shapps is an idiot sometimes. https://docs.google.com/document/d/...oFDBhsC_jpblXpNtQ/edit#heading=h.9yzpxufkt5ow is one summary of the research.

 

[underbank]

They didn't seem to think face masks were that important at the start of the pandemic

They weren't needed when most people were locked down and relatively few were on public transport etc. Now, as we come out of lockdown (assuming you want us to come out of it), more and more people are out and about, on trains/buses, etc., but the virus is still out there, hence why face coverings are NOW thought to help restrict infections. There really is no need for a facemask if you're the only person on a bus, but if it's full and you can't SD, then face masks seem a sensible precaution to at least reduce viral load.

 

[ashkeba]

Great, another snide dig. I saw you put "arrogant" on there before changing it.

And I changed it because it was not the correct word for someone who seems not to think this virus can kill them. English is not my first language.

It is not a side dig. It is an attempt at a full frontal wake up call.

 

[Starmill]

I need to know that there's solid reasons behind it.

Solid reasoning has been given, including advice by the World Health Organisation, peer-reviewed papers, and decades of experience abroad. Grant Shapps isn't the sole proponent, as you hint, when doctors professional organisations such as the BMA support the policy too. Indeed, your false claims there's "no evidence" were what started all of this off. We must hold debate in the same objective reality as one another, which frankly you're rejecting. I won't continue with this as many people explained the facts of the matter and all of the different attendant points of view all now enough times now. You cannot simply call black white and expect to have reasonable debate by saying that's your opinion.

 

[Journeyman]

And I changed it because it was not the correct word for someone who seems not to think this virus can kill them. English is not my first language.

It is not a side dig. It is an attempt at a full frontal wake up call.

Please stop patronising me.

 

[Cowley]

OK. This is all getting a bit personal and unpleasant so I think it’s time to turn the temperature down a little.
No more personal digs please...

It’s completely understandable that people have extremely different opinions on this subject but rather than attacking each other for them perhaps it’s time to show a bit of understanding of each other’s viewpoint.
I can see both sides of the argument here but I don’t (and I’m sure others that aren’t contributing at the moment don’t either) want to get involved with a discussion that’s rapidly turning toxic.

We need to work together and it really is that simple.
I respect the views of a lot of people on here but we need to show respect for each other too.

 

[6Gman]

After some consideration, I’ve come to realise that there are three ways to approach the future of this epidemic:

We remain in lockdown, which is entirely unsustainable, will cause total economic collapse, and cause damage several orders of magnitude greater than the damage that the virus would cause even without a lockdown.

We continue as a socially distant society, with enforced 2m distancing in all settings including transport. This would result in a completely insufficient level of capacity in many settings and is an approach that is simply impractical and unsustainable.

We enforce mask wearing in many of the settings where social distancing isn’t possible, and where it is we reduce the distance to something more practical (1m or 1.5m). This may cause some personal discomfort and “look strange”, but this is by far the most economically beneficial approach and it allows us to return to “normal” (or some variant of this) more than any of the other two approaches.

I admit it’s not my ideal society, indeed a society without facial expressions may even be considered “Orwellian” or a form of “Dystopia”, but this isn’t a fantasy tale, this is reality, and given that we really need to get the economy going again as a matter of urgency whilst further suppressing the virus, the mask option seems by far to be the most logical and sensible to take at this point.

I think this hits the nail on its head.

If we are to restart the economy we need public transport to function which is pretty well impossible with 2m social distancing. I suspect that in combination with face covering we may see social distancing rules relaxed on public transport, or perhaps more generally.

We have a long way to go but this may just be a way of edging toward whatever the "new normal" will look like. I hope it will be very similar to the old normal, but who knows.

 

[142blue]

Thank you. This has rumbled on for too long,could we please discuss the use of face coverings on public transport now...

 

[Gostav]

In Czechia the passenger must cover face on public transport, l don't understand why people resist face covering in this country.

 

[45107]

In Czechia the passenger must cover face on public transport, l don't understand why people resist face covering in this country.

Also the case in the Netherlands, and I believe Germany.
All 3 countries have had fewer cases & fatalities, both in total and pro-rata for population.

 

[LowLevel]

LowLevel, I love you. Will you come and be the Guard on all trains I use?


(Do people really put tickets in their mouths then hand them to you? Yes, I suppose they do. Uugh!)

Yes they do. Women keep them in their bras, men keep them in their socks, people put them in their mouths. I shudder to think what else happens. I stand in the doorway to release the doors and people splutter in my face. It's just life.

I try and take everything to do with work and indeed life in general in my stride. I have a habit of attracting problems not of my own making so I don't worry about them too much, just roll with them when they occur and do my best. Wearing a piece (well ok 3 pieces) of papery stuff over my face for a bit is a pain in it's own way but it isn't exactly world ending stuff. I wash my face a bit more thoroughly when I get up and when I get home with some exfoliating stuff and I've not noted my ears or skin becoming irritated from the straps.

I honestly believe most people will get on with it for a bit and then it'll go away.

As an after thought, a mask is no more uncomfortable than the 100% synthetic shirt and trousers I have to wear for up to 12 hours a day whatever the weather. Less so in fact.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

But didn't other European countries start wearing face masks early on?

Our government advised told us early on not to wear face masks as they were needed for the NHS (who couldn't get them in any case); now that there is spare capacity; suddenly, the government now do a u-turn and mandate them?

 

[Bletchleyite]

@LowLevel As someone else said, I wish you guarded every train, as you have a very sensible approach to things! Would be a bit much work for you though

 

[sheff1]

If stepping on the cracks in the pavement wasn't Government advice I'd agree, but face masks already are in Scotland even though they are not legislated.

Government advice is to avoid drinking more than 14 units of alcohol a week. Police have no business monitoring people's drinking habits and asking them why they are not following governement advice.

Police have no more business asking why someone is not following advice on mask wearing than they had demanding to see the contents of people's supermarket trolleys. The latter was rightly called out - police should stick to enforcing the law.

 

[43066]

No, the problem is that some people do not seem to be able to make rational decisions without being menaced with loss of service, money or liberty, as this whole farce has shown repeatedly, from the government use of emotional blackmail to make people take wild isolation actions to now how some people are refusing to cover their mouths and noses not because they have some breathing or skin problem with them but just because they do not like the idea of scarves and do not care if they infect other people.

Which is a perfectly rational decision, assuming that high risk people are following the guidance and isolating. I’m not concerned about contracting the virus myself, neither am I particularly worried about giving it to someone else who is low risk.