ChatterBank1 min ago
Is Priti Patel Wrong?
I was under the impression you weren't allowed to meet in other peoples houses.Pritti Patel now says at latest briefing,On BBC/SKY News now, you will be fined £800 for having House Parties of more than 15 people. Am I missing something or are we allowed to meet in other peoples houses?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Unsureme. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//She isn't saying that house parties of any size are legal or advisable,she is announcing the new rates of fines from next week.//
Just where do they pluck these figures from?
Of course these are not fines. The police cannot impose fines, they can only offer Fixed Penalties. The alleged miscreants can always decline their kind offers and opt for the matter to be heard in court. There the court will impose a fine (a genuine fine) based on the seriousness of the offence and commensurate with the defendant's means.
Just where do they pluck these figures from?
Of course these are not fines. The police cannot impose fines, they can only offer Fixed Penalties. The alleged miscreants can always decline their kind offers and opt for the matter to be heard in court. There the court will impose a fine (a genuine fine) based on the seriousness of the offence and commensurate with the defendant's means.
It's a step to disincentive house party goers, especially to larger gatherings. It seems there has been more in the media about the organisers being fined a large amount, I've heard of a good few £10,000 fines being handed out.
Given nights out on the town are on hold for the foreseeable, I am guessing that some people who, pre-Covid, wouldn't think much of spending a lot on a big night out (factoring in taxis as well as drinks, food etc...), may see £200 as "worth the risk" to have a night out at a party. Just for the record, I don't think like that, and wouldn't spend that much on a night out!
£800, not so much, especially given all the smart phones with cameras and videos which could result in evidence, not just from at the party itself (often through ending up on social media) but taken by people who are reporting them. I've seen quite a few of both. Initially they seemed to be mainly of students around here.
I'm not saying the police are going to be combing social media or making appeals from photos/videos/bodycam footage, but, once the images are out there, more rule breakers who were at a gathering could be identified (shopped) than the police caught at the time.
Given nights out on the town are on hold for the foreseeable, I am guessing that some people who, pre-Covid, wouldn't think much of spending a lot on a big night out (factoring in taxis as well as drinks, food etc...), may see £200 as "worth the risk" to have a night out at a party. Just for the record, I don't think like that, and wouldn't spend that much on a night out!
£800, not so much, especially given all the smart phones with cameras and videos which could result in evidence, not just from at the party itself (often through ending up on social media) but taken by people who are reporting them. I've seen quite a few of both. Initially they seemed to be mainly of students around here.
I'm not saying the police are going to be combing social media or making appeals from photos/videos/bodycam footage, but, once the images are out there, more rule breakers who were at a gathering could be identified (shopped) than the police caught at the time.
//Would you prefer that they didnt have this new larger penalty notice//
You seem to have a basic misunderstanding about people who break laws like this - especially where a financial penalty is the only sanction available. They do so because they want to but they also do so because they believe they will not be caught. The size of the penalty is not a consideration for them. Somebody going to a house party currently does not expect to be caught and issued with a £200 fixed penalty. That same person will use the same logic if the penalty is increased to £800 (or any other amount for that matter). They do not expect to be caught so the amount is immaterial. There also comes a point where any increase in the penalty is meaningless because you cannot enforce a fine or fixed penalty which is beyond the means of the person told to pay it (hence my earlier remark about a fine imposed in court being "commensurate with the defendant's means) . This is yet another example of wanting to be seen to be "doing something."
You seem to have a basic misunderstanding about people who break laws like this - especially where a financial penalty is the only sanction available. They do so because they want to but they also do so because they believe they will not be caught. The size of the penalty is not a consideration for them. Somebody going to a house party currently does not expect to be caught and issued with a £200 fixed penalty. That same person will use the same logic if the penalty is increased to £800 (or any other amount for that matter). They do not expect to be caught so the amount is immaterial. There also comes a point where any increase in the penalty is meaningless because you cannot enforce a fine or fixed penalty which is beyond the means of the person told to pay it (hence my earlier remark about a fine imposed in court being "commensurate with the defendant's means) . This is yet another example of wanting to be seen to be "doing something."
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles13 mins ago
More Attacks On Freedom Of Speech
News20 mins ago
Crosswords43 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles52 mins ago