Dionaibh wrote: » muzzles
one world order wrote: » Spending eternity in hell and being tormented by the Devil's demons. Is that really what you want?
brianhere wrote: » ii) Similar to this current panic, in the 1970s the state amended earlier WWII legislation to enable it to abolish jury trials. Of course it is still with us long after the troubles have ended.
Dionaibh wrote: » Thanks for that. Is there an end date for the mask mandate?
Meathman12 wrote: » I haven't seen any muzzles. And if you mean people are muzzled (prevented from speaking) that's it true.
GT89 wrote: » Both metaphorically and plainly speaking yes. It is very hard to hear people through a mask. You really have to listen closely to hear what people are saying otherwise often all you hear is a muffled voice which is impossible to understand. .
King Mob wrote: » So because it's slightly harder to hear people, they are muzzles? That's a very hyperbolic notion. Usually the moment anyone calls masks "muzzles" their credibility takes a sharp nose dive.
GT89 wrote: » No rational human being goes out and thinks it's a good idea to cover their face.
GT89 wrote: » And that being me on to my next point the masks are a methaphor for the silencing of opposing views.
GT89 wrote: » No rational human being goes out and thinks it's a good idea to cover their face. It is not a rational decision for people to wear masks they are worn by people for two reasons because people see others doing it monkey see monkey do or they are paranoid
Meathman12 wrote: » In many Asian cities people have worn masks or face coverings previously some for pollution reasons, some for religious reasons. Will you concede that it's amazingly hypocritical that some people at anti mask protests are seen wearing face coverings to prevent identification. Surely you'll condemn these people.
King Mob wrote: » But so far the "opposing views" we are seeing are along the lines of global conspiracy/religious apocalypse/anti science stuff. And the silencing is more along the lines of people pointing out those ideas are a bit silly. What opposing views and what silencing are you referring to?
They can help limit the spread of a virus during a pandemic.
GT89 wrote: » They haven't been proven to be any of the above.
GT89 wrote: » No ones studied the area of covid before
GT89 wrote: » Cases have gone up since their widespread adoption so that is not yet proven
King Mob wrote: » This is simply untrue. Untruths are common in conspiracy theories.
Ok. So why are experts and health professionals recommending their use? Are they not as informed as you? Are you just better at medicine and smarter than them? Are they spreading misinformation because of a global conspiracy?
GT89 wrote: » So are you saying that people have degrees in the area of covid now. It takes four years to get a degree and covid has only been around a year.
GT89 wrote: » What experts are you referring to? To say masks work in prevention against covid is pure guess work. The so called experts know about as much as you or in the field of covid as they have not studied it. They couldn't possibly study it as it's a new disease.
Airyfairy12 wrote: » And dont forget your tin foil hats!
cgq300 wrote: » I'd be more concerned of the health impacts the weight of wearing your tin foil hat will cause than the health impact of wearing a mask if I were you.
MrMusician18 wrote: » OP, I can't believe you forgot to mention the deep state controlling our minds with 5G. OMG, they have got to you already :eek:
greenspurs wrote: » totally expected.... Deniers have the usual retort for anyone that doesn't follow "government guidelines" Sheeple
Kaelyn Itchy License wrote: » Since last Thurs (24 Sept) businesses (designated types and organisations, including hospitality, close contact services, and leisure venues) in England, MUST (by law) display a QR Code Poster, at their entrance, or face a £1,000 quid fine if they don't. Since this introduction, there have been some situations where folks have been 'refused service' due to them not scanning such digital identifer codes on their mobiles (maybe they didn't have {smart}phones on them, it was out of battery power, or they just didn't want to scan them). For a business of course, it saves on staffing costs by not asking for a quick name and contact number, but for the common person this presents a pressure to always carry a smarthpone (not a dumb phone), and to leave digital signatures, perhaps until the end of the covid (which is like never). For marketeers this could be a wet dream, they can use a secondary QR to pester folks with offers once the relentless QR scanning thing becomes the norm.
miezekatze wrote: » This is not the norm though, you can generally scan it or you don't.
brianhere wrote: » Thats shocking Accumulotor, and I am pretty unshockable about this. Anybody who has eyes to see can surely see that we are turning into a Chinese Communist Party type of society, rapidly. The virus has nothing to do with it.
Kaelyn Itchy License wrote: » There have been cases already (reported in mainstream media, online newspapers etc) of people being refused access, denied service or goods because they didn't (or can't if no smartphone present). Yes there is the paper and pen option, however a business can decide to refuse entry if is already busy and does not have someone at hand to jot down details, hence: refused access and service. Many old folks have simple phones, in the coming months, as this does become the norm... they may well start to discover they're not wanted if some busy waiter etc. hasn't got a spare 5mins and pen, paper to attend to them. Of course you'd probably call this old wans nutters etc.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » I live in England, I havent scanned a single time anywhere i have been, your making it out like its compulsory when it's not.
Kaelyn Itchy License wrote: » Your making out you don't understand the previous post, or failing to understand simple facts, or twisting for dramatic effect.Certain categories of business or venues must by law (only since 24 Sept, Eng) have a QRCode Poster at their entry point, or they will be fined 1,000 notes (at first offence). Certain business owners within these, may choose, by themselves on their own accord (various reasons e.g. low staffing, no pen, no paper) to refuse service to anyone not scanning these posters on smartphone, or wanting to use pen and paper instead.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » can you show any business that has turned people away for want of pen/paper?
Kaelyn Itchy License wrote: » Yes, there are plenty of reports of denial of service, across various media (press and twitter) and it's only been introduced as a facility just days ago. It may be a small minority, but it does set a precedence. The issue around QRCode safety remains, anyone can stick a poster up with this usin custom code e.g. on a closed/vacant shop and use it for data hacks.