Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

CAMRA slams proposed ban on takeaway beer sales for pubs and brewers

TopCat said:
I have spent months just socialising in Brockwell Park with the Albert diaspora.

From the glorious sunshine on the grass, to the pissing rain, forced retreat up the hill to the park shelters.

It's a bit tricky now the clocks have changed. Getting out of the park can be a mission.

Its kept me and others sane. One bloke who never ever talks to anyone in the pub regularly came to the park and kept his silence throughout. Probably just needed to be around people.

Just mulling on whether to have a few in the Albert tonight. It would be sitting in a freezing garden but good to see a few people.
Click to expand...
I think we're going to have to rethink the park socials: go earlier, take brollies and blankets and possibly hand warmers. On the plus side: no need to take ice to keep the beer cool.
 
Yeah, I don't think you're allowed to meet more than 1 person outside this time. That was the restriction in the original lockdown too. Until it eased round May time IIRC.
:(
 
editor said:
It could just a selection of permitted one on one meetings, socially distanced from other, adjacent, one on one meetings.
Click to expand...

Yeah, no one is going to get arrested. You may get moved on but if its anything like last time the met have better things to do so will probably just turn a blind eye.
 
beesonthewhatnow said:
And this is why we’re going to be here forever.
Click to expand...

Not really. Schools, unis, pubs, food processing plants, garmentmanufacturing, all contributed more to the spread of cases. All those people outside in the summer pre July 4th, whilst the virus still spread, it didn't take off until the other stuff.

Sure it's one thing to obey the rules to the letter for cohesion sake, public solidarity etc but the facts are still that outdoor spread of the virus is relatively low risk.
 
xenon said:
Not really. Schools, unis, pubs, food processing plants, garmentmanufacturing, all contributed more to the spread of cases. All those people outside in the summer pre July 4th, whilst the virus still spread, it didn't take off until the other stuff.

Sure it's one thing to obey the rules to the letter for cohesion sake, public solidarity etc but the facts are still that outdoor spread of the virus is relatively low risk.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
And the mental health benefits for people living on their own or in unhappy households being able to get out meet someone else over a beer should never been underestimated.
 
editor said:
You think there's some kind of huge risk in people meeting outdoors in a park and keeping socially distanced? I feel safe in those environments and the science seems to support that.

Besides, there's far more riskier scenarios to get worked up about. Like schools.
Click to expand...
It’s not just this one thing though. The exact arguments you’re using are the same ones being used by every other “low risk” activity people want to do.
 
beesonthewhatnow said:
It’s not just this one thing though. The exact arguments you’re using are the same ones being used by every other “low risk” activity people want to do.
Click to expand...

Oh come on. The good for your mental health point was secondary. Meeting outdoors doesn't seem to be a big transmission vector at all.
 
scifisam said:
Oh come on. The good for your mental health point was secondary. Meeting outdoors doesn't seem to be a big transmission vector at all.
Click to expand...
That’s not the point. You lock down, or you don’t. The moment we add more and more “but this particular activity seems low risk” exceptions the whole thing collapses. Everyone will line up to justify why their particular thing is fine. And yes, on their own they probably are. But risk doesn’t work like that. Nothing about this can be viewed in isolation.
 
beesonthewhatnow said:
It’s not just this one thing though. The exact arguments you’re using are the same ones being used by every other “low risk” activity people want to do.
Click to expand...
No, they're not. I was quite specific in what I was referring to. Drinking outdoors in a park and socially distanced is extremely low risk. Lower risk than some of the activities you probably partake in.

beesonthewhatnow said:
That’s not the point. You lock down, or you don’t. The moment we add more and more “but this particular activity seems low risk” exceptions the whole thing collapses. Everyone will line up to justify why their particular thing is fine. And yes, on their own they probably are. But risk doesn’t work like that. Nothing about this can be viewed in isolation.
Click to expand...
Says the man in a nice, cosy comfortable personal position.
 
editor said:
No, they're not. I was quite specific in what I was referring to. Drinking outdoors in a park and socially distanced is extremely low risk. Lower risk than some of the activities you probably partake in.
Click to expand...
You referred to the idea of a load of two people meet-ups all happening to be in the same place. In other words, taking the piss out of the lockdown rules somewhat.

And yes, that, taken in isolation that is low risk. But then so would my parents going for a walk with their friends. So would my kids going to visit them etc. The point is that we have to stop viewing all these activities as individual things, risk simply doesn’t work like that.

Says the man in a nice, cosy comfortable personal position.
Click to expand...
Not sure working in a covid infested campus daily is particularly comfortable, but 🤷‍♂️
 
beesonthewhatnow said:
That’s not the point. You lock down, or you don’t. The moment we add more and more “but this particular activity seems low risk” exceptions the whole thing collapses. Everyone will line up to justify why their particular thing is fine. And yes, on their own they probably are. But risk doesn’t work like that. Nothing about this can be viewed in isolation.
Click to expand...

How the fuck do you think lockdown restrictions are decided on if it's not about deciding which particular activities are low risk?

The way you approach this subject is so extreme and authoritarian that I'm surprised you've never applied to be a cop.
 
scifisam said:
How the fuck do you think lockdown restrictions are decided on if it's not about deciding which particular activities are low risk?
Click to expand...
Errr, exactly? The risk of certain activities has been worked out. And for now we’ve been told to not meet up outside in any group larger than 2. Yet people are desperately trying to work out ways to push this limit or work round it.

The way you approach this subject is so extreme and authoritarian that I'm surprised you've never applied to be a cop.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

I’m more bemused at those wishing this to all be over but then seemingly unwilling to follow the rules that may help that happen.
 
editor said:
I think we're going to have to rethink the park socials: go earlier, take brollies and blankets and possibly hand warmers. On the plus side: no need to take ice to keep the beer cool.
Click to expand...
It's a lovely sunny day. Come and have a beer from 3pm. Green shelters at the top. Nice people :)
 
beesonthewhatnow said:
That’s not the point. You lock down, or you don’t. The moment we add more and more “but this particular activity seems low risk” exceptions the whole thing collapses. Everyone will line up to justify why their particular thing is fine. And yes, on their own they probably are. But risk doesn’t work like that. Nothing about this can be viewed in isolation.
Click to expand...
I mostly agree with your general point, but I think that the government's overall approach of prioritising the economy over people's health is in reality far more significant than any amount of individual bending of the rules. And if anything the government's over-riding of risk by other factors has actually encouraged people to find their own exceptions.

The real choice of locking down or not, when it was still early enough to do the most good, has been mishandled by the government, and a small number of people drinking beer together in a park, if that's what they decide to do, is mostly insignificant in comparison.
 
Last edited:
andysays said:
I mostly agree with your general point, but I think that the government's overall approach of prioritising the economy over people's health is in reality far more significant than any amount of individual bending of the rules. And if anything the government's over-riding of risk by other factors has actually people to find their own exceptions.

The real choice of locking down or not, when it was still early enough to do the most good, has been mishandled by the government, and a small number of people drinking beer together in a park, if that's what they decide to do, is mostly insignificant in comparison.
Click to expand...
In the overall level of risk? Sure. In the letting the government off the hook because they can turn round and blame the feckless hoards? Not so much.
 
beesonthewhatnow said:
In the overall level of risk? Sure. In the letting the government off the hook because they can turn round and blame the feckless hoards? Not so much.
Click to expand...
Not sure where you're getting these 'feckless hoards' from when all I've been talking about is a handful of socially distanced people meeting in a park for a drink.
Why aren't you as angry about schools being open?
 
andysays said:
The real choice of locking down or not, when it was still early enough to do the most good, has been mishandled by the government, and a small number of people drinking beer together in a park, if that's what they decide to do, is mostly insignificant in comparison.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Banging on and on - and blaming - individuals having a can in the open air when there's far, far worse things going on elsewhere seems ridiculous.
 
editor said:
Not sure where you're getting these 'feckless hoards' from when all I've been talking about is a handful of socially distanced people meeting in a park for a drink.
Click to expand...
You think that isn’t how it will inevitably be spun by this shitheap of a government? They will blame anyone and everything but their own incompetence.

Why aren't you as angry about schools being open?
Click to expand...
Who says I’m not? I’ve been very open about my desire for schools to be closed again.
 
beesonthewhatnow said:
You think that isn’t how it will inevitably be spun by this shitheap of a government? They will blame anyone and everything but their own incompetence.
Click to expand...
But you've pursuing this strawman argument. No one here is advocating that 'reckless hordes' should assemble in parks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

editor
  • Poll
Do you support pubs and venues demanding NHS Covid 'passports' (with the option to test on the door)?
2 3 4 5
Replies
135
Views
4K
Mation
Mation
S
Pubs open
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
313
Views
12K
hash tag
hash tag
danny la rouge
Hogmanay banned!
Replies
24
Views
664
gosub
gosub
MrCurry
Takeaway prices during UK lockdown
2 3
Replies
73
Views
3K
Teaboy
T
editor
Ministers target July 4th for reopening of England’s pubs and restaurants
30 31 32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
35K
cupid_stunt
cupid_stunt
Back
Top Bottom