Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf
Such a minor incident the police can't be bothered to pursue it, all this fuss and faux outrage for something that's not even worth a mention.
|
The law is designed to make prosecutions and fines the exception, not the rule. Had he been spoken to at the time he'd be told to go home, the fact it's now six weeks later makes it disproportionate for the police to pursue it now.
It's really not a matter of whether he broke the law to the extent we can haul him in front of the courts. There's no reason to do that - however some, perhaps a majority, will legitimately believe that he acted unreasonably.
And that's the point of lockdown. Government passed laws that met a minimum threshold to avoid legal challenge. It issued guidance that went further, Minister after Minister made statements that tried to define 'reasonable', and it asked the population to act in good faith during a public health emergency.
The political problem now for the Government isn't that he made minor infractions of a weakly written law that was open to interpretation. It's that "I read the what the regulations stated and deemed this to be reasonable, it's not my fault you aren't as clever as me" is exactly the kind of thing that irks anti-establishment, anti-elites.
Had he upon reflection held his hands up and said, yep I can see people's point and apologised, the police said they'd spoke to him case closed, we would genuinely have moved forward.