Does Closing Beaches Make Any Sense?

Status
Not open for further replies.

oz_mark

Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 30, 2002
Posts
20,003
I think we have to very careful just how much basic liberty and common sense we sacrifice to this. Why would you uphold a fine for a driving lesson 30 km from home? How are two people in a car spreading a virus, unless they are actively sneezing out of open windows? I understand the need to keep it simple in order to minimize enforcement but a bit of perspective is in order and when they start penalising people (as opposed to a chat and a warning), for activities that do no harm, I start hearing alarm bells.

I suspect some of it is a case of police suddenly being asked to enforce powers they never expected to get, Mistakes will likely get made, but hopefully there's enough checks and balances in the system to have some fines withdrawn, or not upheld by courts.
 

drron

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Posts
30,337
I didn't use the words stupid, idiot or not intelligent. But I did make the observation that those 'confused' are really meaning 'I don't agree'. There's nothing to be confused about as the rules are pretty clear unless you are actively looking to create an excuse.
Several others have used those words.
And you missed my point. Some people are under a lot more stress because of the rules.it is quite possible that it will end badly for some.suicide rates go up in times of economic stress.They are not actively looking for an excuse.This fact needs to be taken into consideration when setting the "rules".
 

lovetravellingoz

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Posts
12,773
Even Churchill knew that beaches were important ;)

We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.
 

Himeno

Established Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Posts
4,183
I hate queues. Always have. Best part of being a super-traveller is avoiding queues in airports. But today there were queues at the entrance of woolies and coles. I choose to starve...
What stores did you go to? Maybe try a different store if possible, or a different time.
Woolworths limits are
small stores (under 2000sqm) 110 people
medium stores (2000-3000sqm) 200 people
large stores (over 3000sqm) 275 people
-/+ 10% allowed on those numbers at store manager discretion.
The Coles numbers are similar.

Those numbers are about 30-80% smaller then what the state governments max numbers for the stores are. eg The Hobart CBD store is allowed 200 people. Tasmania state gov allows 524 in that store.
 

MEL_Traveller

Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Posts
24,510
Several others have used those words.
And you missed my point. Some people are under a lot more stress because of the rules.it is quite possible that it will end badly for some.suicide rates go up in times of economic stress.They are not actively looking for an excuse.This fact needs to be taken into consideration when setting the "rules".

I didn't miss the point you made about stress. It is a tragic consequence of the pandemic that calls are up by 20% or so to Lifeline and similar agencies. It is a combination of financial stress, unemployment, worry about the effects of the virus on health of family and loved ones. But I'm not sure that leads to being *confused* about the rules. If your activity isn't essential, you should be at home. There's not much room for confusion in that, unless someone wants to create it, for example because they don't agree with the restrictions. That's a different issue.
 

drron

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Posts
30,337
No people who are susceptible to stress do not think the way you think.The stress takes over,they start having negative thoughts and they really are incapable of thinking about making excuses to get out of the house or whether they agree with the restrictions or not.
We are all different and react in different ways.But too many of us are not even aware that some are really suffering-not from Covid but the response to it.
 

Renato1

Established Member
Joined
May 1, 2015
Posts
1,930
That's the thing. There are enough police to enforce it, because only a few people are flouting the law.

If everyone made up their own rules, you'd be right - there wouldn't be enough police.

This is exactly what we were talking about a few days ago... that police have to enforce the law against those who should be at home self isolating. They don't have time to go chasing after a random car going off star gazing. They can't read your mind, they don't know why you are going somewhere, or your reasons. So they have to stop you.

Multiple you by 10,000 and the whole enforcement could be in jeopardy.
Not correct. The main flouters were back packers at Bondi and St Kilda beach. Easy enough to confront and set an example.

So - no fines for easily identifiable groups on beaches during Stage 2. Have a hissy fit on TV, immediately introduce Stage 3 - such that you are of the belief that Police should go chasing stargazers.
Regards,
Renato

Where does it say that this is not allowed?

The way the health order is written (as I mentioned above) is that you aren’t permitted outside the premises you ordinarily reside at, and the definition of premises includes land as well as buildings. Maybe it is being enforced differently to the way it is written?
There is an ambiguity.
Unfortunately, this means no fishing, no hunting, no boating, no camping, and no golf. Hang up your rods, leave the tinnie in the driveway, and clean your clubs at home,” Professor Sutton said. "
From Department of Health and Human Services Victoria | Media release Coronavirus update from CHO for Victoria - 2 April 2020
Which means no hunting.

Though some links leading to that page refer to not being able to leave home for hunting.

I guess the result of hunting at home, depends on the Police Officer that fines you, and whether you get a woke Magistrate if you appeal it.
Regards,
Renato

Also another thought, all the overzealous policing seems to be on or near to the Mornington Peninsula. Every one of the much publicised fines that were being portrayed as unfair (mountain bike rider, L plate driver, tip person etc) have been in/around that area. Probably due to the well publicised actions of the Aspen returned couple in the same area. Renato, you live down that way don’t you?
Mornington Peninsula Shire is 227 sq Km. With the current rate of infections that means the Shire has one infected person per four square kilometers - making it on a density basis, one of the safest areas of the Melbourne region.

Great to see the Police so focused on one of the safest areas in Melbourne.

I live across the road from Mornington Penisnula Shire in a far more dangerous area, with 1.6 infected people per square kilometer.
Cheers,
Renato

Most complied, but not enough.

Interesting that you are proposing a police state, where there are police at every corner enforcing the rules.




Do you really beleibe the government are 'happy; to do this?



In this case, I recognise that the requirements for society as a whole mean that some of our individual freedoms we take for granted are going to be impacted.

Just do the right thing.
Lets see,

There are helicopters, numerous news crews and Police at the sites where the transgressions on the beaches occurred - and when I say the Police should have fined those trangressors - you conclude I am advocating a Police state.

I don't think you are being serious.
Regards,
Renato

Renato maybe I wasn’t clear the first time

View attachment 212986
Yes I saw that.
The term "grandiosity" comes to mind.
Regards,
Renato

Sounds like he had no good reason to be out, until he eventually 'remembered' he was allowed to be out for exercise, and so used that?

"Why are you walking that Dog?"

"Uhm Uhm
Because I'm doing exercise,
Because I'm exercising the dog.
Because I'm exercising myself and the dog.
Because my dog will have poor bowel motions unless I walk it.
Because my kids wouldn't do it.
"

"Here is your $1000 fine"

I find it disturbing that you think it is fair enough that a citizen must provided a reason for doing something he is legally entitled to do.
Regards,
Renato

This has been explained to you numerous times in this thread. All you have to do is actually read what people have said.
I must have missed it somewhere in all those numerous responses, where they all explained to me why it was legitimate for a Police Officer to demand a reason from a citizen as to why he was doing something he was lawfully entitled to do.

Same as Police demanding reasons for why one is going into a supermarket, a pharmac_ or filling a petrol tank.

Perhaps you can elucidate the gist of those responses for me please?
Regards,
Renato

Not being able to get your story straight is a sure way to arouse suspicion. No surprise they concluded that his eventual exercise story was BS.
You accept the premise that Police are entitled to demand of citizens why they are engaging in lawful activities.
That is disturbing.

It doesn't occur to you that some people of lesser education, lesser intelligence, or with some anxiety of authority figures, may not be able to construct and verbalise the correct answer, namely,
"Because I am lawfully entitled to do so, and please provide me you name and badge number and advise me by what authority you are asking me to give a reason for doing what I am lawfully entitled to do".

Instead they may be intimidated, wonder if they've done something wrong, and be puzzled if this absurd question is some kind of trick question that could lead to a fine.

This sort of question is a Police State tactic.

But you and others here seem to shrug and think it fair enough.
Regards,
Renato

Don't forget you can't fix stupid


And....because this thread went quite for a bit..but is rampant again....
Don't feed the trolls.. especially if they watch fox news
If you feel I am a troll - why do you add to this thread - and do the exact same thing you advise others not to do.

The term "disingenuity" comes to mind.

Regards,
Renato
 
Last edited by a moderator:

dajop

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 1, 2002
Posts
13,543
There is an ambiguity.
Unfortunately, this means no fishing, no hunting, no boating, no camping, and no golf. Hang up your rods, leave the tinnie in the driveway, and clean your clubs at home,” Professor Sutton said. "
From Department of Health and Human Services Victoria | Media release Coronavirus update from CHO for Victoria - 2 April 2020
Which means no hunting.


Yes, but 99% of Victorians wouldn’t be able to hunt at home anyway so it’s important to call out hunting that’s an activity that’s not permitted. There is nothing at all in the actual notice that prohibits you doing anything “at home” on your own premises, other than gatherings of people who do not ordinarily reside at those premises.

The press release also says no camping. Again directed at people who go somewhere to go camping. I know a few people who’s kids have been camping - in the backyard. The police wouldn’t have a leg to stand on if they started fining people for camping on their own land. If the government had required people to stay inside at all times (except for pre defined reasons) the Lawyers would have come up with appropriate wording in the notice for this to be enforced.
 

MEL_Traveller

Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Posts
24,510
No people who are susceptible to stress do not think the way you think.The stress takes over,they start having negative thoughts and they really are incapable of thinking about making excuses to get out of the house or whether they agree with the restrictions or not.
We are all different and react in different ways.But too many of us are not even aware that some are really suffering-not from Covid but the response to it.

I will concede the media seems to be a major contributor.

Billboards on all the roads in Melbourne 'stay at home'
Prime minister 'stay at home'
Premier 'stay at home'
Chief medical officer 'stay at home'

media: what does 'stay at home mean?', staying at home is so confusing. Being fined for not staying at home is unfair.

'stressed person' - omg I'm so confused.
 
Sponsored Post

This is an example of a Sponsored Post, one of the many ways you can advertise on the Australian Frequent Flyer.

Other options include banner advertisements on our content and forum pages or our newsletter. You can also purchase an audio message on our podcast - or if you just want to try it out, you can sponsor a thread.

If you'd prefer not to see any advertisements (including these sponsored posts), you can become an AFF Supporter from just $6 and instantly remove all advertisements from our website!

NoName

Established Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Posts
2,093
You accept the premise that Police are entitled to demand of citizens why they are engaging in lawful activities.
That is disturbing.

It doesn't occur to you that some people of lesser education, lesser intelligence, or with some anxiety of authority figures, may not be able to construct and verbalise the correct answer, namely,
"Because I am lawfully entitled to do so, and please provide me you name and badge number and advise me by what authority you are asking me to give a reason for doing what I am lawfully entitled to do".

Instead they may be intimidated, wonder if they've done something wrong, and be puzzled if this absurd question is some kind of trick question that could lead to a fine.

This sort of question is a Police State tactic.

But you and others here seem to shrug and think it fair enough.
Regards,
Renato


Wrong! I accept the premise that some fool who sets out across the country side and is too stupid to work out his story before hand is almost certainly doing so with no valid reason.
 

lovetravellingoz

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Posts
12,773
And yourself?

Well evidently flouting is a variable concept open to the re-interpretion of one poster of what is flouting, or more kindly re-interpreting what may have been said to try and have it as a loophole.
.
After he boasted that he "went down to Westhead and Flinders Ocean Beach today to do our exercise" I asked him if he drove there as by that time the Victorian Premier had made it clear that one can exercise but do it locally.

He refused at the time to say how far he drove, but I do note that he has now stated in a subsequent post " I live across the road from Mornington Penisnula Shire in a far more dangerous area,"

So even the closest municipal boundary is 30 odd km from Westhead and Flinders Ocean Beach.

That is not exercising locally. It's a scenic day trip.
 
Last edited:

dajop

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 1, 2002
Posts
13,543
Well Victoria police, down here on the Surf Coast I assume would not have been policing any beaches today, Easter Saturday.

Mother nature (or god if you are religious) gave them all a reprieve for the day. With some decent white caps, quite strong winds, and frequent rains, good luck to anyone doing anything on the beach today down here :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top