World, Writing, Wealth discussion
The Lounge: Chat. Relax. Unwind.
>
Any reason to be paranoid about restrictions re COVID19?
message 1:
by
Scout
(new)
Mar 26, 2020 08:59PM
A person in my town recently posted an article questioning whether the restrictions imposed by the govt - martial law-type restrictions on gatherings over 10 people, curfews and closing restaurants, businesses, etc. - might lead to people not questioning such restrictions in the future. Any worries there, or unwarranted?
reply
|
flag
Unwarranted, I believe, although some of the agencies might develop a strong device tracking appetites
The last thing we need as a species is to pass through this crisis into a world dominated by abject tyranny.
I think this will still impact how we approach large gatherings of people into the future: imagine a world where the airlines give you plenty of leg and elbow room, restaurants with a little more space between tables, concert and sporting events where you didn't have to smell the perspiration of the people jammed around you, doctor's waiting rooms where you are given your own room and not made to sit with the people sicker than you. Scary.
Just read a news item that Singapore may jail people who stand close to each other for six months.
Until those jails get so crowded that the people in them are forced to be close to each other.
Not so sure they'll be concerned with prison crowding.
I had a bad moment when my dad told me that his friend told him that the State Patrol were stopping old people on the road and telling them to go home. Not sure this ever happened, but I didn't like the sound of that.
Just wait until governments currently in power decide that it's in the public interest to suspend elections ... indefinitely.
Well they are stopping people trying to cross over into our state of Florida by vehicle. There are state troopers and deputies patrolling the state line on the interstates. They are making people that are entering to pull into way stations to be tested before they are allowed into the state. Now here is some interesting ponderings - what do they do to people if they test positive? Do they make them turn their vehicles around and go back to wherever they came from or do they take them right away to some kind of quarantine site and not let them go anywhere for awhile? The news didn't say what happens to the people if they are sick with the virus.
Hmmm. I'd like to know the answer to that.
It seems that in times of national emergency, the govt expands its powers of infringing on privacy. After the emergency is over, are those powers automatically rescinded? Do they have a time limit?
Scout wrote: "It seems that in times of national emergency, the govt expands its powers of infringing on privacy. After the emergency is over, are those powers automatically rescinded? Do they have a time limit?"The sunset clauses in the UK have put time limits; however, many of the MPs would want these clauses permanently in place so I'm not holding my breath that they will be automatically rescinded. The police of course love the extra power. Now police can demand to know why you are in a location. Previously you could tell them (politely) where to go. Now you will be fined if you do not meet their understanding of essential travel. A lady who refused to answer their question on Monday was fined yesterday and now has a criminal record to boot
My excuse for travel, "Officer, I have a reverse agoraphobia, I have to be outside!"(It might not work...)
There are/will be a lot of "saviors" . Important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater in an attempt to get saved.
Graeme, that excuse will not work.My view is the restrictions should be hard, but absolutely temporary. If some selfish person for no god reason wants to share a disease that down the chain kills several people, then anything that stops him is great.
I know there is a danger some of these rules could last much longer than they should, but that is in the people's hands - vote out the offending politicians.
Well, now we're probably facing being stopped on the road by police asking us to justify why we're driving somewhere. This seems like nonsense to me. They'll have to take your word for it if you say you're headed to the grocery store or to check on your Aunt Sally, unless they intend to follow each person to his/her destination. As I said previously, I'm going for a ride in the country now and then and pose no threat to anyone, and if I'm stopped, I'll say so. Arrest me. Now, if they want to stop teenagers, go for it. They have no reason to be out riding around with their friends.
Read today that a man has been shot to death in the Phillipines for disobeying restrictions.The president had already warned of this.Wonder if this will start happening elsewhere too.
Who knows? That's why I started this thread. Things seem to get out of hand when we have the best of intentions.
And if poor,hungry people start rioting too,will they be shot ?
W wrote: "And if poor,hungry people start rioting too,will they be shot ?"Without doubt. Give people a gun and orders, and guess what happens.
As much as it is suppose to be lockdown here in Tampa (Florida) there are people out driving around. I had to run up the street yesterday morning to pick up something from the store and it looked like a typical Monday morning with traffic. It was the most traffic I have seen since the lockdown went into effect over a week ago. No police cars anywhere in sight! But over across the bay in another city they will arrest people if they do not have a good reason of why they are out and about. Also in that city I just saw on the news last night that they will not only arrest them they will put them in jail without bond just to keep them there. It makes me wonder how long they will keep them without letting them out.
Just pile more into the jail - they can share the virus!The problem with a lockdown is it is a waste of time unless everyone does it at the same time. The good news in NZ is ours seems to be working. Two weeks in, and if you plot new cases versus time, for a few days the second differential has been negative (the slope is decreasing, not increasing) and for one day the first differential is negative (fewer cases than the day before). The last one could be statistical aberration, but I think it is encouraging, especially since testing is increasing rapidly.
Good news, Ian. And my question about stopping people and asking them where they're going is - won't they lie? And how will police know that unless they follow them to their destination, which will of course be a grocery store. I guess it may deter some people from leaving the house, but it seems unenforceable to me if going to the pharmacy or grocery store is a valid reason to be out, which it must be.
It is not so much while they are travelling, but rather when they stop. If there is a group of them somewhere else, then they can be arrested.
I see, and that makes more sense than stopping people who are driving somewhere.
The kid with the basketball goal on the curb by my house had six kids out in the street playing yesterday. Would that qualify? I know, I shouldn't be petty, but this used to be a quiet neighborhood. I can dream of a police raid :-) but of course won't call. Back to more serious matters.
Six kids from different families would qualify here. The object is to minimise the variation in contacts
Thanks for the info, Ian. Sorry for venting. On to more important things. So far, no one around here has been stopped by police for ignoring restrictions. Most people are staying home. I did ride around town today after the good news from the Trump press conference, and there were lots more cars on the streets. Maybe giving the good news has made people brave enough to go out.
Too soon I fear. Being hopeful and optimistic is good politics but probably the wrong message when you want people to follow the guidance without using draconian powers
I didn't invite him, but Eddie still wanted to weigh in on the subject you raise :)https://www.businessinsider.co.za/edw...
Nik wrote: "I didn't invite him, but Eddie still wanted to weigh in on the subject you raise :)https://www.businessinsider.co.za/edw..."
He may be proved right. Unless the emergency legislation has automatic sunset clauses then the legislature will have to vote to remove it. Always harder to vote to remove something with all the protagonists able to claim what do we do if the virus/terrorism/climate change come back
And the chances are it will come back because total elimination throughout the world will be extremely unlikely. We have Spain and Italy intending to relax restrictions now, but they have not eliminated the virus, and it only takes the odd spreader to reignite it. Anyone believe colds are ever eliminated?
You guys know how I feel about overpopulation. Here's a quote from an article in Scientific American, with the link to follow, if you're interested."The sheer number of people, their interactions with animals and ecosystems, and the increase in international trade and travel are all factors that will likely change the way humanity deals with preventing and treating epidemics, experts say. In fact, the unprecedented growth of the human population in the second half of the last century — growing from 2.5 billion to 6 billion — may have already started changing how infectious diseases emerge."
https://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...
People are beginning to protest the restrictions. What do you think?
Scout wrote: "People are beginning to protest the restrictions. What do you think?"They will look the part for protest. Since hairdressers are not allowed to work there will be plenty of long hair
Scout wrote: "People are beginning to protest the restrictions. What do you think?"I think it's way too soon to reduce the restrictions. I think the protesters are a bit delusional, actually.
The problem is, the concept of the lockdown is to extinguish the virus. If you fail, and cannot track and stomp on anything mixed, the whole exercise was a waste of time and all the people you have hurt along the way was for nothing. On the other hand, if you keep going too long you wreck a lot of lives economically. The small business owners get no help, they go bankrupt and in this country at least will usually lose their homes as well if they have put them up as collateral for bank loans.It will be an interesting decision that has to be made here on Monday (government has promised to make a decision ) because we have now had about three days with new cases in single figures, and most of them are consequences lof known clusters. I await developments, but if they do release controls, it will be a fairly narrow release and won't make much difference for me. It is mainly certain businesses that get relief, where people don't come in close contact.
I think this virus has replaced Brexit in saturating the media. Whenever someone switches the television or radio or pick up the paper to find some escapism there's constant overwhelming doom and gloom. People understand how serious it is and how many people we are losing. Maybe people need more hope and encouragement to persevere.
Blood tests may be required to board planes. Are you ok with this?
Scout wrote: "Blood tests may be required to board planes. Are you ok with this?"No. I am against anything that will give the government access to information about my DNA. Imagine what that can lead to. Currently, convicted felons have to proved their DNA. With sex offenders and murderers I understand it. For a non-violent crime, I disagree.
I can picture some law enforcement, such as our previous Sheriff Joe, using a blood test to decide someone is Hispanic and therefore must be illegal. He was found in violation of making that decision just based on racial profiling and the State had to pay huge fines because of his behavior, which he continued.
Arizona said stay at home too. I left and went to Yuma (the opposite side of the state) to pick up a friend who was also alone. I worried about Border Patrol as we can't leave our county without going through their check point. They never asked anything other than the usual "are you a US citizen?" There were a lot more police on the highways. None stopped me (even when they could have for speeding). To get to the section of Yuma that my friend lives in, I had to cross in CA and then back into AZ. I was worried there would some sort of blockade on the state line to prevent people from doing so or at least question me about it. Nothing.
I brought her back to my house and then 15 days later returned her to Yuma. So 4x across the State of Arizona and 10x crossing the State Line and no one questioned me being out and about.
Many passed their fingerprints and facial recognition to cell companies in order to operate their spyphones. I'm not sure we'll go as far as blood tests at the airports, and if yes - who's gonna process the samples (private company/government?), but if passing a test exempts from a 14 days self-isolation requirement in the arrival destination, currently instated in many countries that could be a deal
Australia, and many other countries already have Yellow Fever regulations. https://www1.health.gov.au/internet/m...
if they come up with an on the spot test for which they are not testing anything else and not retaining a sample, I wouldn't object. A retained biological sample by a private company would still be discoverable which means others could legally obtain it or results. That is an issue. For instance maybe they decide to run other tests for their own research reasons. It shows some other health situation such as pre-diabetic or kidney function reduction. I have no knowledge of those test results. I buy a health insurance or life insurance policy, the provider obtains that info, accuses me of having an undisclosed preexisting condition, and denies my claim for medical care or payment upon death to my beneficiary.
IMO it just has too much potential for abuse.
You cannot disclose a pre-existing condition of which you are unaware.
I'm not willingly giving my DNA info away. I'll protect my privacy in any way possible. And for those who say that if you have nothing to hide, why should you care, I'll say that any info you give to a government agency can be used against you in the future in ways you can't imagine today.
