Relaxation of restrictions Part II

Mr.S wrote: »

Restrict time spent out-doors (let's say, 1 hour max. enforced with fines and arrest)

Documentation required every time you leave the house with only specific reasons allowed (printed form confirming where you are going, the reason and who you are)

Overnight curfew to restrict movements (let's say 10pm to 4am)

Alcohol sales prohibited (to avoid gatherings / public order offences taking up police / hospital time)

Closed borders only allowing citizens / residents / cross border workers in

Children to remain indoors

Failing to see how you see our restrictions as a lockdown, but anyway. As Leo said, people interrupt the word very differently.

All you have to do is look outside your window and see there is no lockdown in it's true sense here. I can go to my local coffee shop and spend all the day in the park if I want to

Dear god, what is wrong with some of you people. Mods should have a different account to post drivel.

drunkmonkey

niallo27 wrote: »

So when we do relax and numbers creep up, do people think we will just panic and lockdown again over the smallest increase. That's my worry.

I'm not overly concerned over the summer but come winter with no treatment available were in trouble and quite possibly in for another lockdown, that can be mitigated if the flu can't travel here from abroad. Without strict quarrintine and border restrictions it's going to be a calamity.

LiquidZeb

Mr.S wrote: »

Restrict time spent out-doors (let's say, 1 hour max. enforced with fines and arrest)

Documentation required every time you leave the house with only specific reasons allowed (printed form confirming where you are going, the reason and who you are)

Overnight curfew to restrict movements (let's say 10pm to 4am)

Alcohol sales prohibited (to avoid gatherings / public order offences taking up police / hospital time)

Closed borders only allowing citizens / residents / cross border workers in

Children to remain indoors

Failing to see how you see our restrictions as a lockdown, but anyway. As Leo said, people interrupt the word very differently.

All you have to do is look outside your window and see there is no lockdown in it's true sense here. I can go to my local coffee shop and spend all the day in the park if I want to

**** it let's just board up everyone's doors and windows. Have a soldier posted outside ready to shoot anyone who tries to get out.

scamalert

Think once easing starts there wont be peddling back, as simply we wont be able to shut down parts of businesses again just because theres clusters in one area or increased infections, as simply putting people on 350 or whatever while rest have to grind will become a bit of a joke, that some wont stand it.

as state splashing cash while stomping economy is digging massive hole for years to come, doesnt take genius to do maths, for couple on even 200e a week to have 1600 tax free income, instead of 40h week grind and spending half on commutes bills, time wasted is quite comfortable living if one has no debts.

Could easily see situation where people will manipulate and blow things out of proportion to get time off from work schools etc, given we have egg shell generation as is, this thing will take it to another level for years to come.

Penfailed

Spencer Brown wrote: »

Dear god, what is wrong with some of you people. Mods should have a different account to post drivel.

The question was, "How could lockdown be harsher?" Person answers question. Person gets told answer is drivel without any explanation as to why...

gozunda

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Unless you're in Italy, this is a moot point.

I'm in Berlin where, as I said, the lockdown has been much milder, instigated at the same time, being routintely flouted and yet the figures of new cases and deaths are extremely low - 75-100 and 3-4 pre day respectively.

In Stockholm, they've had NO lockdown and they've had less cases than Ireland.

In New York, they've had lockdowns and had MORE cases than Ireland.

There is ultimately NO evidence to suggest a stricter lockdown woud make any difference. It depends on the location and the specific social, geographic, features faced by the location in question.

Conclusion: In order to argue for an extended lockdown in a specifci location (Ireland) you need to argue what specific issues said location has that make it nessecary. With evidence.

Italy is valid example of a country with a lockdown to be fair.

Germany closed its borders with a number of other countries and instigated some fairly ott stuff that was not done here. It also has massive medical resources to cope with the outbreak. That's evidently had a positive outcome at helping reducing their death rate.

Stockholm is not a county - it's a city. Not much point to compare a city with an entire country ie Ireland

Sweden hasn't been doing much proactive testing as far as I can see - so god knows what the real state of infection is there.

Again NewYork is a major world city. Again not possible to compare a city with an entire country ie Ireland. Perhaps compare it to another city eg. Dublin

I dont think anyone is looking for a stricter 'lockdown' here. Another poster was claiming that we had an actual 'lockdown' here. Taking a look at restrictions elsewhere eg Spain and Italy - would suggest that we've had relatively light restrictions here imo.

As for Ireland. Imo the only reason we are not looking at immediate easement of restrictions atm - is that the spread of Covid-19 here was later arriving than most other EU countries. We are getting there. People in this country need to unbunch their panties tbh.

ek motor

niallo27 wrote: »

So when we do relax and numbers creep up, do people think we will just panic and lockdown again over the smallest increase. That's my worry.

I think there will be a certain 'accepted' level of cases/deaths once restrictions are eased. Once this level is surpassed, restrictions will be re-introduced. It will continue this way until a vaccine/anti-viral drug is found.

Penfailed wrote: »

But it could be more restrictive. That's the point that you are ignoring.

Of course it could be more restrictive because we have allowed our constitutional rights of liberty to be removed in the name of the well being of the nations health.
Now I still can't understand why those rights of liberty have not being reinstated with urgency following the recent numbers and ICU capacity. Our rights have been removed by an unelected Dr who continues to patronise the nation without accepting responsibility for the care home fiasco.

easypazz wrote: »

For the umpteenth time.

Take a look at the list and tell me what further measures can be implemented to increase the lockdown on Joe Public.

Apart from restricting exercise there is nothing else that can be done. And you have failed to come with one single thing.

Restrict fuel supplies, ffs.

You are the one saying this is the most restrictive things can get despite people advising of numerous things that can make it more restrictive. I've advised a number myself yet you deflect. Nonsense stuff from ya.

LiquidZeb wrote: »

**** it let's just board up everyone's doors and windows. Have a soldier posted outside ready to shoot anyone who tries to get out.

It’s so weird. Imagine pleading for a police state.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Unless you're in Italy, this is a moot point.

I'm in Berlin where, as I said, the lockdown has been much milder, instigated at the same time, being routintely flouted and yet the figures of new cases and deaths are extremely low - 75-100 and 3-4 pre day respectively.

In Stockholm, they've had NO lockdown and they've had less cases than Ireland.

In New York, they've had lockdowns and had MORE cases than Ireland.

There is ultimately NO evidence to suggest a stricter lockdown woud make any difference. It depends on the location and the specific social, geographic, features faced by the location in question.

Conclusion: In order to argue for an extended lockdown in a specifci location (Ireland) you need to argue what specific issues said location has that make it nessecary. With evidence.

The evidence won't be fully available till after the events have taken place. Would you rather wait and do nothing until evidence is available.

Penfailed wrote: »

The question was, "How could lockdown be harsher?" Person answers question. Person gets told answer is drivel without any explanation as to why...

That poster is scraping the bottom of the barrel for things that will make minimal to no difference to the spread of this. Some might even make things worse by forcing people to shop during a shorter window each day.

Spencer Brown wrote: »

It’s so weird. Imagine pleading for a police state.

Jesus Christ. No one is pleading for a police state.
One idiot poster said their rights were all gone and this was as restrictive as it could get......pretty much all of my posts since we're trying to put some context on the current levels of restriction.

LiquidZeb

Spencer Brown wrote: »

It’s so weird. Imagine pleading for a police state.

I honestly think some people are fulfilling some brownshirt fantasy here. Who would honestly want to live under a regime like that?

Spencer Brown wrote: »

That poster is scraping the bottom of the barrel for things that will make minimal to no difference to the spread of this. Some might even make things worse by forcing people to shop during a shorter window each day.

You think enforced quarentine of medical staff and hospital workers from their families would make minimal difference and isn't more restrictive than what we have?

kippy wrote: »

Jesus Christ. No one is pleading for a police state.
One idiot poster said their rights were all gone and this was as restrictive as it could get......pretty much all of my posts since we're trying to put some context on the current levels of restriction.

Do you think putting an hour limit on exercise is going to make a difference to anyone? It’s so absurd and impossible to in force that I can’t believe it was suggested. Kids not allowed outside at all ffs. What sort of person even comes up with an idea like that.

kippy wrote: »

You think enforced quarentine of medical staff and hospital workers from their families would make minimal difference and isn't more restrictive than what we have?

Wasn’t mentioned at all in the post I replied to.

Spencer Brown wrote: »

Do you think putting an hour limit on exercise is going to make a difference to anyone? It’s so absurd and impossible to in force that I can’t believe it was suggested. Kids not allowed outside at all ffs. What sort of person even comes up with an idea like that.

I didn't mention anything about exercise quotas.
That said the restrictions you speak of have been in place else where. So there's merit in then.

drunkmonkey

kippy wrote: »

You think enforced quarentine of medical staff and hospital workers from their families would make minimal difference and isn't more restrictive than what we have?

It should happen and they should be immediately stopped from working in different hospitals on different days of the week. They seem to have learned nothing with the nursing homes. Health workers are the biggest threat to the general public right now.

LiquidZeb wrote: »

I honestly think some people are fulfilling some brownshirt fantasy here. Who would honestly want to live under a regime like that?

Nobody. But let's not deflect from the actual conversation.

kippy wrote: »

Jesus Christ. No one is pleading for a police state.
One idiot poster said their rights were all gone and this was as restrictive as it could get......pretty much all of my posts since we're trying to put some context on the current levels of restriction.

Putting your view of context on the restrictions. Some people actually think the restrictions are now having an effect on Covid. Seen a video on twitter of a line of people doing rock the boat on some road in Dublin. One of the most popular comments under the video was along the lines of "When all those are in ICU next week they won't be so happy". People using the rhetoric that this is a death sentence are the same people who believe the restrictions are beneficial because we have not seen 120k deaths in Ireland

Mr.S wrote: »

In all seriousness though, if you think we are in a lockdown state, talk to people in France or Spain.

Where construction has reopened? I fail to see why compare ourselves to nations with vastly greater populations who have only restricted the urban centres

BanditLuke

kippy wrote: »

How?
In many many ways. If you can't even think of one way it could be more restrictive I'd suggest you are only here to wind people up.

I hope that's true because I'd be concerned for him come the 5th otherwise. We are all just giving our opinions here but he is taking this far to seriously and needs to step away for a day or two imo.

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Putting your view of context on the restrictions. Some people actually think the restrictions are now having an effect on Covid. Seen a video on twitter of a line of people doing rock the boat on some road in Dublin. One of the most popular comments under the video was along the lines of "When all those are in ICU next week they won't be so happy". People using the rhetoric that this is a death sentence are the same people who believe the restrictions are beneficial because we have not seen 120k deaths in Ireland

Not 'my view of context' - actual context.

BanditLuke wrote: »

he is taking this far to seriously and needs to step away for a day or two imo.

I look forward to all your posts where irony is not spared

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Where construction has reopened? I fail to see why compare ourselves to nations with vastly greater populations who have only restricted the urban centres

If you don't get the numbers at this point there's not much point explaining it further.
We only have so many hospital beds, ICU beds, staff and equipment. These have been increasing but if you look where things are at we don't have that much spare capacity, that's the issue. So one has to limit the spread to manageable numbers. How do you do that?
Pretty much by doing what we are doing.
Granted certain activities and restrictions on them may be loosened.

kippy wrote: »

Not 'my view of context' - actual context.

No its your view. You said the restrictions could be worse to give context. Another context is that Covid could be worse and kill fit and healthy people. The more we are learning about Covid its not the danger we were lead to belive