"It would wipe alot out in our towns if it became common here"
Without wishing to diminish the severity, I don't think it would do that. This is not H5N1 with a 33% mortality rate.
80% of cases have mild to moderate symptoms (some have none at all). 20% need hospitalisation - hence the governments attempt to manage the NHS load. But the actual mortality rate is around 1%. I imagine that the availability of ventilators for the really sick has an impact.
Either way, when you see a death, it probably means 100 times more people are actually infected. The really critical issue is the rate of infection. It can take 20 days from infection to death, so you can estimate that 20 days ago (or so) around 17,000 people were infected. By now the number will be four times that.
Managing the rate of infections impacts the NHS, hence the restrictions slowly being introduced, with the intent of protecting the majority of non-vulnerable while allowing non-vulnerable to gain immunity.
But isolating the vulnerable is the best way to reduce the mortality. If that can be achieved at some level of effectiveness, within 12 weeks you could see most of the population with immunity, and the vulnerable could be invited back into society. The best thing for everyone is to encourage the elderly and vulnerable (and that means anyone from 30 up with heart of respiratory issues, and those with inflammatory diseases like lupus and juvenile arthritis) to isolate themselves fully. They could need our help to do so. I'd actually bring in laws to enforce isolation for the sake of the younger sufferers.
If the plan works by August the UK could be back to normal, with some restrictions on inbound travelers. If it works. If it doesn't you could be looking at scenes like in Italy. Lets hope isolating the vulnerable combined with controlling the spread actually works.