N1120A

I know plenty who had no issue.

Flight bans wouldn't have saved anyone.

EsherFlyer

So you know some people who evaded enforcement. With most legislation some people achieve that. Hence both views are correct, and that isn't unsurprising. In case it helps a family member of mine had the enforcement team knocking on her door 3 days after her return.

orbitmic

I'm sure you do and I do too, but I'm not sure what difference it makes? I know plenty of people who similarly didn't get calls when undergoing quarantine whilst I know others who did, I know plenty of people who travelled across the UK further than allowed during the first lockdown (well, we've all heard of one at least) without being caught, but some people were, and for that matter, I know plenty of people who've gone above the speed limit without being fined and others who have had.

Outside of totalitarian regimes, there is effectively almost never an intention (or capability) to ensure 100% enforcement on any rule and in the UK, police numbers are in fact quite limited and the infrastructure is such that many people will manage to slip through the net on any movement control policy in particular because the workforce is based on a "normal" system where there are normally no exit controls and where most nationals get automated entry control. But your suggestion was that the the ban on foreign (and long distance) travel was not enforced, and it was, with the means available. Some people did get caught and fined, just not everyone who tried to ignore the rules on movement control (exactly as was the case in France, Italy, and other countries with similar measures. I guess the only countries which were close to 100% control were those with such drastic measures that almost nobody at all was allowed to travel regardless of reason for a period of time (e.g. Australia, New Zealand) or those which include a face to face interview of every single incoming or outgoing traveller for safety reasons such as Israel.

Maestro Ramen

Empiric hard disagree. It would have saved me - I flew in march '20 and got covid,

I survived eventually, and this is veering into the omni territory so leaving it here.

the810

And at the same time, some other countries did the exact opposite precisely because banning people from leaving would be illegal. That means that even during lockdowns, leaving the country was a valid reason to go out as it can't be legally forbidden.

EsherFlyer

...in those countries.

There is no universal right to leave a country in (say) UNDHR, as per Article 29: https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/...23999&LangID=E

orbitmic

Any particular country in mind where the Government considered forbidding exit but had to reconsider due to illegality?

I'm not saying that it doesn't exist, so it is genuine interest, but to be honest, I think that most countries have had no interest in banning exit , just like most countries have had no interest in "rules of 6", and no countries have had no interest in Wuhan style lockdowns, etc because which decisions to focus on is (usually) primarily a political choice on what to pick among a fairly large number of legal possibilities which all have significant impact on society, the country's spirit, different groups of individuals, and of course the economy.

That said, national legislations do differ, so yes, sure, the "rule of 6" was legal in England whilst legal advice in France determined that it would be illegal to impose a limit on the number of people who could meet in private households (which is part of the reason why France put strict limits on movement instead), so if looking at comparative legal frameworks, you will find plenty of quirky differences which mean that some restrictions can be imposed in some countries but not others, and in fact, even within the UK, there are plenty of differences between what has been deemed feasible in the various nations.

N1120A

I flew in March 2020 and didn't get COVID. I also have gone to the gym during every period they have been open and not gotten COVID. I've not gotten COVID in 2+ years of the pandemic and still am now triple vaccinated. Travel bans are nothing but xenophobic solutions to public health problems.

StingWest

I'm very glad that you (and I) did not contract covid, but IMHO travel bans (in the early stages of a new variant) and lockdowns can and do help control the numbers of infections - it's only logical. It's not about stopping the infections completely. It's about (a) buying time to make/alter vaccines before the numbers get out of control, and (b) keeping hospitals and health care workers from being overwhelmed!

Maestro Ramen

[mod edit]

Nice to see the complete lack of empathy towards those who caught covid while travelling and died of it - or as in my case, could well have.

I'm not trying to argue or ask a question. FACT: if I hadn't been allowed to travel, I would not have caught covid when I did. Period.

Back on topic: being next to impossible to prove that you have the right to stay in the UK, when you are not in the UK yourself.

NewbieRunner

Thread closed as it is way off topic and wandering into OMNI/PR territory.


NewbieRunner
forum mod