Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX Read OP For Mod Warnings

suicide_circus · 08-03-2021 04:05PM

Deleted User wrote: »

They are being roundly ignored by anyone with influence

Anyone with anything but a "zero risk is permissible" attitude to covid is being roundly ignored.

d161 · 08-03-2021 04:06PM

gozunda wrote: »

Ding dong Gemma O'Doherty et al #Round 2?

Maybe, but at this stage I would support anybody who is against these restrictions.

I'll be contributing.

gozunda · 08-03-2021 04:10PM

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

It may well be the only way to prevent the Thomas Ryan and Sam McConkey sympathisers ruining the country

Lol.

Gemma for president!

growleaves · 08-03-2021 04:23PM

Is "Lol u r Gemma!!" the new basis for Level 5?

gozunda · 08-03-2021 04:26PM

growleaves wrote: »

I don't know. Does she lack credibility? Or are you saying that anyone who raises constitutional questions lacks credibility just because?

Are you asking that question with a straight face? :pac:

And nope not because "anyone who raises constitutional questions lacks credibility"

Its the fact that a similar stunt not only has been already tried by Gemma et al and spectacularly failed but the general idea that challenging legislation brought in to help control rates of infection during a pandemic (which tbf is little different to similar to legislation in the UK and elsewhere) will somehow help to manage the pandemic here or even aid the current vaccination programme.

Its simply pure lunacy and little more in this instance.

Kermit.de.frog · 08-03-2021 04:31PM

Most restrictions will be lifted when a large proportion of the population has been vaccinated and the effect is seen in hospitalisations and ICU's.

People just have to be patient.

TonyMaloney · 08-03-2021 04:32PM

growleaves wrote: »

I don't know. Does she lack credibility? Or are you saying that anyone who raises constitutional questions lacks credibility just because?

Yes, she lacks all credibility. She has a wide range of horrible opinions on everything from immigration to abortion.

Her twitter feed is an open sewer.

https://twitter.com/TraceyOMahony81/status/1184560786586394626?s=20

She's a far-right grifter. I wouldn't be sending her money, even if I agreed with her on things like restrictions, masks and vaccines.

timmyntc · 08-03-2021 04:33PM

gozunda wrote: »

Are you asking that question with a straight face? :pac:

And nope not because "anyone who raises constitutional questions lacks credibility"

Its the fact that a similar stunt not only has been already tried by Gemma et al and spectacularly failed but the general idea that challenging legislation brought in to help control rates of infection during a pandemic (which tbf is little different to similar to legislation in the UK and elsewhere) will somehow help to manage the pandemic here or even aid the current vaccination programme.

Its simply pure lunacy and little more in this instance.

You're right - in fact I think the legislation doesnt go far enough. The govt should take away ALL our rights until the pandemic is over. After all, govt knows best, and they have never acted improperly or made mistakes.

Boggles · 08-03-2021 04:34PM

gozunda wrote: »

Are you asking that question with a straight face? :pac:

And nope not because "anyone who raises constitutional questions lacks credibility"

Its the fact that a similar stunt not only has been already tried by Gemma et al and spectacularly failed but the general idea that challenging legislation brought in to help control rates of infection during a pandemic (which tbf is little different to similar to legislation in the UK and elsewhere) will somehow help to manage the pandemic here or even aid the current vaccination programme.

Its simply pure lunacy and little more in this instance.

Looking through their website, they are the usual anti vax / anti mask,, God bothering, far right loons.

It would appear they are also anti temperature checks.

You can download a non consent form for a temperature check from their site for schools.

Is it too late for any craythur that detonated to yank back their money?

growleaves · 08-03-2021 04:35PM

TonyMaloney wrote: »

Yes, she lacks all credibility. She has a wide range of horrible opinions on everything from immigration to abortion.

Her twitter feed is an open sewer.

https://twitter.com/TraceyOMahony81/status/1184560786586394626?s=20

She's a far-right grifter. I wouldn't be sending her money, even if I agreed with her on things like restrictions, masks and vaccines.

What do political opinions have to do with constitutional law?

I'm asking about her credibility as a solicitor.

growleaves · 08-03-2021 04:36PM

Btw we need an amnesty for posters banned from the main thread who've ended up here.

d161 · 08-03-2021 04:40PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Most restrictions will be lifted when a large proportion of the population has been vaccinated and the effect is seen in hospitalisations and ICU's.

People just have to be patient.

And when the virus mutates, or the next one comes along?

Lock down because there is precedence!

gozunda · 08-03-2021 04:41PM

timmyntc wrote: »

You're right - in fact I think the legislation doesnt go far enough. The govt should take away ALL our rights until the pandemic is over. After all, govt knows best, and they have never acted improperly or made mistakes.

Ya can drop the hyperbole my friend - its as daft as any of the "let it rip" stuff tbf.

TomTomTim · 08-03-2021 04:41PM

growleaves wrote: »

What do political opinions have to do with constitutional law?

I'm asking about her credibility as a solicitor.

This isn't how the modern world works. You can dismiss the credentials of someone completely based on them having just one opinion that doesn't align with orthodoxy.

ArmaniJeanss · 08-03-2021 04:46PM

growleaves wrote: »

What do political opinions have to do with constitutional law?

I'm asking about her credibility as a solicitor.

Barrister, not solicitor.

Though I've looked and haven't seen any case where she appeared as an active barrister. Which is a bit of a flag.

But in theory, it doesn't really matter as it's been said that the money is being raised in order to fund 'expert' barristers to put the case together.
The first test of whether the donators are 'being had' will be whether there is a team of proper and expensive barristers involved, or whether O'Mahony herself and Gemma/JW end up being the ones taking the case.

caveat emptor · 08-03-2021 04:47PM

AlekSmart wrote: »

The two major imponderables are the COVID Payments (UK's Furlough) and the Weather.

If the weather keeps improving,I would expect late April will see the Gardai experiencing difficulties policing the "New" normal.

Or,perhaps it depends on whether Ranger's have an Irish subsidiary ?

https://twitter.com/i/status/1368621493761024000

Interesting to see the Scot's Polis adopting a different control technique than our own force.

They do things differently up there alright. Might explain why they have the lowest life expectancy in the UK.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_effect#Excess_mortality_and_morbidity

The mortality rates are the highest in the UK and among the highest in Europe. As of 2016, life expectancy in Scotland was lower for both females and males than anywhere else in western Europe, and was not improving as quickly as in other western European countries.[15] With a population of 1.2 million in greater Glasgow, life expectancy at birth is 71.6 years for men, nearly seven years below the national average of 78.2 years, and 78 years for women, over four years below the national average of 82.3.

Kermit.de.frog · 08-03-2021 04:50PM

d161 wrote: »

And when the virus mutates, or the next one comes along?

Lock down because there is precedence!

A much more deadly virus is inevitable. It could happen any time, next week or in 30 years.

The important thing is that the world has learned through this experience, unfortunately the hard way, that new diseases/pathogens are a serious threat to humanity and will hopefully put in regimes that will stop these at source as best they can.

It can't be allowed happen like this again. We are so lucky that this disease is as benign as it is. We've been playing Russian Roulette for decades.

That's the positive out of this. We got away with it this time. Now we need to take what we have learned for the future when that nightmare 70 or 90% fatality event pops up somewhere.

We got away with it.

TonyMaloney · 08-03-2021 04:57PM

growleaves wrote: »

What do political opinions have to do with constitutional law?

I'm asking about her credibility as a solicitor.

I can't find any news articles about her actually winning any cases ever, and from looking at her Linkedin it appears she doesn't have much if any courtroom or constitutional experience. Her speciality seems to be construction law and draughting contracts.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/tracey-o-mahony-85987019/

She refers to herself as a barrister on her twitter profile, but she ain't registered
https://www.lawlibrary.ie/members/results.aspx?fname=tracey&sname=O%27Mahony&DPA=0&language=None&circuit=All+Circuits&areas=All+Areas&status=Either&specialisation=All+Areas

08-03-2021 05:00PM

acequion wrote: »

Of course they are as there is a massive democracy deficit in this country. So only pro lockdowners/draconian restriction enthusiasts are allowed the floor here.

You may need to revisit the names in the original post I was responding to

08-03-2021 05:02PM

suicide_circus wrote: »

Anyone with anything but a "zero risk is permissible" attitude to covid is being roundly ignored.

Yet a "zero covid" policy is not being followed, but in fact a less date specific version of what the UK is doing

OwenM · 08-03-2021 05:06PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

A much more deadly virus is inevitable. It could happen any time, next week or in 30 years.

The important thing is that the world has learned through this experience, unfortunately the hard way, that new diseases/pathogens are a serious threat to humanity and will hopefully put in regimes that will stop these at source as best they can.

It can't be allowed happen like this again. We are so lucky that this disease is as benign as it is. We've been playing Russian Roulette for decades.

That's the positive out of this. We got away with it this time. Now we need to take what we have learned for the future when that nightmare 70 or 90% fatality event pops up so somewhere.

We got away with it.

Disagree, take a virus with 70-90% CFR, it's never going to spread, lockdown or not, a virus that deadly hinders it's own spread. Unless your talking about something that has a long asymptomatic incubation period and a high R number (>10) but that's just science fiction.

IMO this is a bad as it gets, it was bad enough to be fatal to a small proportion but not bad enough to convince everyone to lock down and so human behaviour was variable over time and location. If it was much worse e.g. CFR >5% then the outcome might have been quicker with more consensus internationally on lockdown.

Also the novel coronavirus isn't novel anymore, anyone reinfected with a variant is very likely to have cross reactivity because of the original infection and the disease should be much milder.

08-03-2021 05:10PM

TonyMaloney wrote: »

I can't find any news articles about her actually winning any cases ever, and from looking at her Linkedin it appears she doesn't have much if any courtroom or constitutional experience. Her speciality seems to be construction law and draughting contracts.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/tracey-o-mahony-85987019/

She refers to herself as a barrister on her twitter profile, but she ain't registered
https://www.lawlibrary.ie/members/results.aspx?fname=tracey&sname=O%27Mahony&DPA=0&language=None&circuit=All+Circuits&areas=All+Areas&status=Either&specialisation=All+Areas

Everyone knows the law library is a front for the lizard people

TonyMaloney · 08-03-2021 05:12PM

OwenM wrote: »

Also the novel coronavirus isn't novel anymore, anyone reinfected with a variant is very likely to have cross reactivity because of the original infection and the disease should be much milder.

That doesn't appear to have been the case in Manaus, and it doesn't appear to e the case in the rest of Brasil right now.

Boggles · 08-03-2021 05:14PM

TonyMaloney wrote: »

She refers to herself as a barrister on her twitter profile, but she ain't registered

caveat emptor · 08-03-2021 05:14PM

TonyMaloney wrote: »

I can't find any news articles about her actually winning any cases ever, and from looking at her Linkedin it appears she doesn't have much if any courtroom or constitutional experience. Her speciality seems to be construction law and draughting contracts.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/tracey-o-mahony-85987019/

She refers to herself as a barrister on her twitter profile, but she ain't registered
https://www.lawlibrary.ie/members/results.aspx?fname=tracey&sname=O%27Mahony&DPA=0&language=None&circuit=All+Circuits&areas=All+Areas&status=Either&specialisation=All+Areas

They should really make this one a spectacle. Maybe get judge Judy if she is free. Oprah could do the cross examinations of the expert witnesses etc. Dr Phil could be brought in to discuss mental health.

Missed opportunity otherwise.

Russman · 08-03-2021 05:18PM

OwenM wrote: »

Disagree, take a virus with 70-90% CFR, it's never going to spread, lockdown or not, a virus that deadly hinders it's own spread. Unless your talking about something that has a long asymptomatic incubation period and a high R number (>10) but that's just science fiction.

IMO this is a bad as it gets, it was bad enough to be fatal to a small proportion but not bad enough to convince everyone to lock down and so human behaviour was variable over time and location. If it was much worse e.g. CFR >5% then the outcome might have been quicker with more consensus internationally on lockdown.

Also the novel coronavirus isn't novel anymore, anyone reinfected with a variant is very likely to have cross reactivity because of the original infection and the disease should be much milder.

Someone involved in disaster planning / epidemiological modelling said similar to me last year. Its not the most deadly virus, but its deadly enough, and its not the most transmissible virus but its transmissible enough. Its right in the sweetspot of causing mayhem, apparently.

timmyntc · 08-03-2021 05:22PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Yet a "zero covid" policy is not being followed, but in fact a less date specific version of what the UK is doing

It's an Irish version of solutions tried by everyone else.
A half-assed implementation of zero-covid last summer, a half-assed implementation of "living with covid" when no vaccines were on the horizon.
And now a half-assed version of the UKs roadmap out of lockdown.

gozunda · 08-03-2021 05:30PM

caveat emptor wrote: »

They should really make this one a spectacle. Maybe get judge Judy if she is free. Oprah could do the cross examinations of the expert witnesses etc. Dr Phil could be brought in to discuss mental health.

Missed opportunity otherwise.

Definitely. Id go for that. I was just about to suggest that for a bit of balance and democracy that we forget the next presidential election and appoint Gemma O'Doherty and Hazel Chu as joint regents. Their social media followings are surely representative of the very best of what social media produces ...

OwenM · 08-03-2021 05:43PM

TonyMaloney wrote: »

That doesn't appear to have been the case in Manaus, and it doesn't appear to e the case in the rest of Brasil right now.

Brazil's reporting is on a par with Iran and China in terms of plausibility and last glance I had their death rate had fallen by about a third in the last month.

One possibility WRT Manaus, the lower bound of the CI from the observed data is 47%:
"The 76% estimate of past infection2 might have been biased upwards due to adjustments to the observed 52·5% (95% CI 47·6–57·5) seroprevalence in June, 2020, to account for antibody waning."

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00183-5/fulltext

TonyMaloney · 08-03-2021 05:52PM

OwenM wrote: »

Brazil's reporting is on a par with Iran and China in terms of plausibility and last glance I had their death rate had fallen by about a third in the last month.

One possibility WRT Manaus, the lower bound of the CI from the observed data is 47%:
"The 76% estimate of past infection2 might have been biased upwards due to adjustments to the observed 52·5% (95% CI 47·6–57·5) seroprevalence in June, 2020, to account for antibody waning."

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00183-5/fulltext

Brazil's suffering record cases and deaths right now. And that report you linked to does not rule out a high level of reinfection in Manaus. Quite the opposite.

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IX Read OP For Mod Warnings