Its a catch 22 - At the start of the pandemic, the Govt issued 'guidance' and many give it a good ignoring. Now that the daily figures are rising sharply towards the second spike, the Govt has now issued 'legislation' and the same crowd are still pleading ignorance.
Rule of 6, we're all in this together.
- Thread starter JohnD
- Start date
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 17 May 2012
- Messages
- 10,786
- Reaction score
- 850
- Country
I think rule of 6 is just to give the police legal powers to do something when people break the rules.
People say they don't want to live in a Nanny State, but as soon as they need to make good decisions for themselves, they fail, and the state needs to tell them what they can't and can do. Silly really.
Biggest problem is all the idiots who still think that it is just a scam made up by governments to control people. They're out there spreading it and killing people. If the police had powers to lock them up in isolation for 6 months that would help a lot too!
People say they don't want to live in a Nanny State, but as soon as they need to make good decisions for themselves, they fail, and the state needs to tell them what they can't and can do. Silly really.
Biggest problem is all the idiots who still think that it is just a scam made up by governments to control people. They're out there spreading it and killing people. If the police had powers to lock them up in isolation for 6 months that would help a lot too!
The "rule of six" does not "eradicate risk".
Think for yourself, not do as you're told.
- Joined
- 17 May 2012
- Messages
- 10,786
- Reaction score
- 850
- Country
I know
Sponsored Links
you're thinking of "eyetest" Cummings, no doubt.
Despite his poor behaviour, Buffoon said it was fine, and got his underlings to support Cummings. Those who did not, such as Ruth May, were pushed aside.
I wonder if the government can do anything to convince people that, this time, they are serious.
The rule of 6 mitigates risk.
Those who think for themselves will just do their own thing and 'damn the risk'.
There is an interesting post going around social media (author unknown):
"If the roles were reversed and it was the young who were at serious risk of dying from CV19,
us parents and grandparents would do EVERYTHING in our power to protect them"
Does the rule of six help at all when that six can be different people at different times?
Why six? No reason; it's just a number.
Why six? No reason; it's just a number.
Please let Jonbey know that ; he introduced "eradication of risk", not I.
I disagree ; those who "do their own thing and damn the risk" are not thinkers. (apart from sociopaths that is, who are likely in the minority).
Elders would do that for any threat ; covid is no different in that regard.
It is just the nature of things.
It also makes the assumption that each group can't protect oneself, to a lesser or greater degree.
Basically, the unaccredited post is emotive false equivalence.
Raves, parties, covid parties etc are going strong.
The youths don't give a toss about the elders catching covid 19.
Except, obviously, threats of unemployment, reduction of opportunity, economic decline and reduced prosperity.
You are correct; I lazily neglected to be absolutely clear that I was referring to the "serious threat of dying"( in a matter of days or weeks, in the case of covid, in the main) , in the post to which I was responding.
Lot of "ins" in the above post, for which I apologise.
Nor do you
Norconroger928ryler thinks the virus is made up.
Sponsored Links
