Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Covid 19 Part XXVIII- 71,942 ROI(2,050 deaths) 51,824 NI (983 deaths) (28/11) Read OP

1…245246248250251…328

Comments

  • #7412
    TomSweeney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    https://twitter.com/BrandonStraka/status/1331061473368567811?s=20

    Fair play to these police, these people out after curfew are literally murderers .


  • #7413
    bloopy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,332 ✭✭✭bloopy


    TomSweeney wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/BrandonStraka/status/1331061473368567811?s=20

    Fair play to these police, these people out after curfew are literally murderers .

    I can't tell whether comments like this are parody or serious anymore.
    This makes me sad.


  • #7414
    TomSweeney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    bloopy wrote: »
    I can't tell whether comments like this are parody or serious anymore.
    This makes me sad.
    Thats when you know an ideology is a load of utter crap, when you can't tell the parody from the serious


  • #7415
    Thierry12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Thierry12


    bloopy wrote: »
    I can't tell whether comments like this are parody or serious anymore.
    This makes me sad.

    None of those eejits are even wearing mask


  • #7416
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    political analyst wrote: »
    I'm not sure - does that mean the start of the 24-hour day of Tuesday 1 December or does it mean the morning of Wednesday 2 December? If it's the latter, then why don't they just say "from the morning of Wednesday, 2 December"?!
    This old chestnut again

    :pac:

    The brits make a balls of a lot of things, but at least they have the good sense to make big changes at 11pm, so there's no ambiguity about what day they're actually happening.

    Comical all the people wailing that pubs might not be open at Xmas. It's one year for jaysus sake. You will still be able to meet people and have a drink with people, you'll just need to be more creative and flexible. It won't kill you. There are more important things than restoring normality for Xmas.

    It'll be back to normal next year.


  • Advertisement
  • #7417
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    From The Examiner:
    "The Government is to allow people to visit their family members on Christmas Day — but hugging their relations will not be permitted."

    The government is utterly out of touch with reality.


  • #7418
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    polesheep wrote: »
    From The Examiner:
    "The Government is to allow people to visit their family members on Christmas Day — but hugging their relations will not be permitted."

    The government is utterly out of touch with reality.

    What is the reality?


  • #7419
    polesheep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,950 ✭✭✭polesheep


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    What is the reality?

    If you can't see the reality, you literally need your head examined.


  • #7420
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    polesheep wrote: »
    If you can't see the reality, you literally need your head examined.

    Why don't you tell us the reality?


  • #7421
    Treepole
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 486 ✭✭Treepole


    Any child who hugs their Grandmother on Christmas Day is looking at 2 to 3 years in juvenile detention.


  • Advertisement
  • #7422
    Peter Flynt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,135 ✭✭✭Peter Flynt


    Are Tony Holohan and Leo Varadkar allowing people to have sex with each other this weekend or do we have to ring up and ask for permission?


  • #7423
    TomSweeney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    Why don't you tell us the reality?


    The reality is people will hug at these events, I would personally keep my distance as a lot would, but a lot would hug - human nature.


    I live in Spain, I've seen people meet on the streets removing their masks for a kiss kiss greet.


    Madness I know, but human nature.


    And "forbidding" hugging at home is ridiculous, sounds like something from George Orwell's 1984.
    Advise people not to, "forbidding" it will just piss people off ...


  • #7424
    Ficheall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,038 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    polesheep wrote: »
    From The Examiner:
    "The Government is to allow people to visit their family members on Christmas Day — but hugging their relations will not be permitted."
    :pac:


  • #7425
    The HorsesMouth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 512 ✭✭✭The HorsesMouth


    polesheep wrote: »
    From The Examiner:
    "The Government is to allow people to visit their family members on Christmas Day — but hugging their relations will not be permitted."

    The government is utterly out of touch with reality.

    Will not be permitted or else what? Jesus such crap...it's actually laughable. You don't need permission from the government to hug people. You do it knowing the risk/benefit..it's not about "permission".


  • #7426
    MOR316
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭MOR316


    political analyst wrote: »
    The difference is that schools, unlike pubs, have discipline, thus ensuring adherence to distancing and face-covering, and don't facilitate the consumption of alcohol .

    I dont know what planet you're living on but, students go into and out of schools, in massive groups, with no masks, all mingling together and it's the same in the building. I've seen students share lunches, take drags off each other's cigarettes, mess fighting, there are numerous students of secondary schools, meeting up and still shifting the face off one another

    You're just saying this to suit your agenda, which makes your argument null and void. You ain't got a clue


  • #7427
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,186 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    TomSweeney wrote: »

    I live in Spain, I've seen people meet on the streets removing their masks for a kiss kiss greet.


    Madness I know, but human nature.

    No wonder they're ****ed at the moment.


  • #7428
    ElJeffe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 725 ✭✭✭ElJeffe


    polesheep wrote: »
    From The Examiner:
    "The Government is to allow people to visit their family members on Christmas Day — but hugging their relations will not be permitted."

    The government is utterly out of touch with reality.

    Anyone letting their kids hug their grandparents knows the risks and is a bit of an arsehole tbh. I don't think we need the government telling us that.


  • #7429
    MOR316
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭MOR316


    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Anyone letting their kids hug their grandparents knows the risks and is a bit of an arsehole tbh. I don't think we need the government telling us that.

    "Alright, you can come over for Christmas but, dont even dare think about hugging me" :D


  • #7430
    crossman47
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,600 ✭✭✭crossman47


    The HorsesMouth wrote: »
    Will not be permitted or else what? Jesus such crap...it's actually laughable. You don't need permission from the government to hug people. You do it knowing the risk/benefit..it's not about "permission".

    That's the Examiner's wording - not what government will say. I suspect they will just ask people to use their common sense but common sense is not common and we'll be back in trouble in January.


  • #7431
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Anyone letting their kids hug their grandparents knows the risks and is a bit of an arsehole tbh. I don't think we need the government telling us that.

    Calm down there buddy, it's not sophies choice FFS. If as you say they know the risks then that makes them well informed. so if they make a well informed decision that runs contrary to Gov guidelines (LIKE RTE LAST WEEK) aren't they just people who's had a "Lapse in judgement"... arseholes they are certainly not.


  • Advertisement
  • #7432
    Hulk Hands
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,023 ✭✭✭Hulk Hands


    Arghus wrote: »
    Is it not acceptable? Why?

    We had level 2 for a period earlier in the year and coming off even far lower case numbers than we have now cases still rose and rose, eventually requiring more stringent restrictions.

    Surely with that in mind level 3 has to be at least tried for a period first to see if it can actually work in terms of being effective in limiting the numbers of the virus, or at least keeping things ticking over, while still allowing the majority of retail to open and operate.

    Funny how you weren't saying that when we were actually in Level 3 six weeks ago, repeatedly admonishing Government for wanting to give level 3 a chance to work rather than move with NPHET's advice immediately to Level 5. Has since been proven that the bulk of the good work was done while in Level 3. How much debt has been added and jobs have been cost by that decision?

    Now though it's going the other direction it suits you to stick with 3 for a period, rather than the rush through the levels you wanted 6 weeks ago.


  • #7433
    FinglasFollain
    Closed Accounts Posts: 89 ✭✭FinglasFollain


    Hulk Hands wrote: »
    Funny how you weren't saying that when we were actually in Level 3 six weeks ago, repeatedly admonishing Government for wanting to give level 3 a chance to work rather than move with NPHET's advice immediately to Level 5. Has since been proven that the bulk of the good work was done while in Level 3. How much debt has been added and jobs have been cost by that decision?

    Now though it's going the other direction it suits you to stick with 3 for a period, rather than the rush through the levels you wanted 6 weeks ago.

    Great point. Level 3 is now all of a sudden a godsend despite it not being enough 6 weeks ago. Lots of mental gymnastics at play to justify keeping businesses closed and people on the dole.


  • #7434
    ElJeffe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 725 ✭✭✭ElJeffe


    rusty cole wrote: »
    Calm down there buddy, it's not sophies choice FFS. If as you say they know the risks then that makes them well informed. so if they make a well informed decision that runs contrary to Gov guidelines (LIKE RTE LAST WEEK) aren't they just people who's had a "Lapse in judgement"... arseholes they are certainly not.

    No they are arseholes.


  • #7435
    Russman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,979 ✭✭✭Russman


    FinglasFollain wrote: »
    Great point. Level 3 is now all of a sudden a godsend despite it not being enough 6 weeks ago. Lots of mental gymnastics at play to justify keeping businesses closed and people on the dole.

    Yeah, because that's what people want alright :eek:


  • #7436
    ACitizenErased
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,757 ✭✭✭✭ACitizenErased


    ElJeffe wrote: »
    No they are arseholes.
    Get a grip man, look at what you're saying. Worry about yourself.


  • #7437
    Eod100
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,181 ✭✭✭✭Eod100


    polesheep wrote: »
    From The Examiner:
    "The Government is to allow people to visit their family members on Christmas Day — but hugging their relations will not be permitted."

    The government is utterly out of touch with reality.

    They have to advise it whether people follow or not is their own business. Same with all the guidelines so far, it's all personal responsibility. Nothing new there in fairness.


  • #7438
    mloc123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,454 ✭✭✭mloc123


    cnocbui wrote: »
    The secondary school students leave their schools for lunch in droves and congregate outside supermarkets and shops, with none weraring a mask and the distance between those in each clump being being about 30cm on average.

    Any yet, even with this happening... cases continue to drop. Almost like it is not a major issue.


  • #7439
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    polesheep wrote: »
    From The Examiner:
    "The Government is to allow people to visit their family members on Christmas Day — but hugging their relations will not be permitted."

    The government is utterly out of touch with reality.
    That sounds like the examiner hyping up hysteria. All you have to do is put HUGGING in capitals and that could have been a line from The Sun.

    The government advice will be the same as before; visitors to homes are permitted, but social distancing guidelines still apply. Just the same as it has been for 9 months.

    You can interpret that as "Hugging will not be permitted" if you like, but clearly the government cannot ban hugging, and is not going to say that hugging is not permitted.


  • #7440
    John O.Groats
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 837 ✭✭✭John O.Groats


    political analyst wrote: »
    The difference is that schools, unlike pubs, have discipline, thus ensuring adherence to distancing and face-covering, and don't facilitate the consumption of alcohol .

    Absolutely and it beggars belief that many seem to be unable or unwilling to accept that.


  • Advertisement
  • #7441
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    John O.Groats wrote: »
    Absolutely and it beggars belief that many seem to be unable or unwilling to accept that.
    BuT It'S JUst cOmmOn sENSE. thiRtY kiDS CrammEd INto A sHOeBoX alL Day!!11


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement