Northern Europe during Pandemic -- Summers 2020 & 2021 & onwards

[Montanan]

Germany’s Incoming Vice-Chancellor Calls for ‘Lockdown of the Unvaccinated’

Ahead of talks between German federal and regional officials on Tuesday, Robert Habeck, a co-leader of the Greens, said only people who are inoculated or recovered should be allowed into non-essential stores and “public settings” across the country, rather than just in virus hotspots.

“We will need to face the winter with further coordinated measures,” Habeck said in an interview with ZDF television. He also raised the prospect of bringing forward or extending the Christmas school vacation.

. . .

In a sign of the growing pressure on European leaders, the talks between German federal officials and the country’s 16 state premiers were brought forward to Tuesday from Dec. 9.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/g...071909388.html

[Anders]

Not in northern Europe but Greece has decided that everyone 60 and over must be vaccinated with a fine of €100 every month for the unvaxxed.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Then I don't understand your original argument at all.

At first it sounded like you were in favor of denying ICU treatment to the unvaxxed, on the basis that they made a poor choice and got themselves into their own mess. You've clarified that this is not what you meant -- great.

So then it seemed that you meant that people who choose not to vax should be responsible enough to decline ICU treatment in case of need. Now you say that if you were in that position, you would accept ICU treatment.

OK, so what did you mean in the first place, then? That if you choose not to vax, and end up in the ICU, you should feel guilty about it?
.............

Let's see if I can explain it better but please remember I have never been a wordsmith and it is complex subject.

1. No one should be denied ICU treatment and if triage is required, vaccination status should not be an deciding factor although it could possibly be a medical contributing factor.

2. Before choosing to decline vaccination on the grounds of "my rights", one should ask oneself what is ones personal ethical response should one then need the services on an ICU.

3. My (hypothetical) ethical response would be to decline the ICU service (if a vaxxed person also needs it).

In truth, I believe I would likely fall short of my self imposed ideal ethical response and would consider myself to be hypocritical and selfish in accepting ICU. This would lead to feeling shameful and possibly guilty (for not thinking it through and not having the courage to standby my convictions).

However I vaccinated so the questions no longer arise for me.

I would not demand others to do in the same but I do think they should consider the consequences of their choices and ask themselves hard questions, consider their convictions and not simply stop at excising 'their rights'.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

You have clearly expressed several times -- do I need to go back and quote your posts? That you think all these folks are scrotes and deserve what they get. You seemed even happy about it. If your actual opinion is more nuanced than this, you're welcome to post a correction.

"Hard" jail time is an actual term of art. It means -- you actually sit in jail. Have you ever been in jail, or visited anyone in jail?


I admit (and apologize for) that I bring some baggage to this conversation. I am a lawyer, studied criminal law, visited prisons as part of my training. I come from a country with harsh laws and harsh punishments and prisons overflowing with miserable souls, some of them imprisoned for decades on trivial violations of drug laws due to our idiotic "war on drugs". The casual "they got what they deserve!" attitude towards someone deprived of liberty and thrown into that horror, sets me off a bit.

But you have never been to Australia and yet are an expert on our prison system?
OK, whatever.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

But you have never been to Australia and yet are an expert on our prison system?
OK, whatever.

So a friend was seeking a visa to visit Australia and the consulate that was processing his application said everything was looking in order, but asked if he had a criminal record.

He responded: "Oh, I didn't know that you still needed one."

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Anders

Not in northern Europe but Greece has decided that everyone 60 and over must be vaccinated with a fine of €100 every month for the unvaxxed.

In Australia 98% of over 60s are now vaccinated - with - virtually - no compulsion. A very small percentage would have been been affected by any mandates.

Had to stick in the 'virtually' cos I know someone would pick me up on the fact that a very small percentage may be in mandated employment

https://www.theage.com.au/national/c...28-p56xht.html

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by laird

People who do not have addictive personalities seem unable to comprehend just how difficult is is to give up stuff that you are addicted to ,be it cigarettes ,alcohol ,drugs ,sugar to name some .

I not sure if some even consider the possibility that other's can be different to themselves.

I've been off the booze for 28 years ,I've quit smoking cigarettes I avoided class A drugs , I've spent a lot of time in UK prisons trying to help convicts quit their drug of choice
Addiction is an illness , unfortunately too many people make too much money from Alcohol, cigarettes ,Drugs and sugar and as long as there is huge profits in these substances they will be available

Possibly why some believe (short sightedly) Big Pharma is the bad boy behind all things Coronavirus.

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

….And Australia -- that's a different universe altogether. Someone said, one of the state premiers I think -- we don't care about human rights, the matter is human LIVES. That is -- for theoretically saving lives, no individual rights are even in question.

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

Stop making things up.... show where that was said…

It was Dan Andrews in September of last year who said his decision to impose a curfew was “not about human rights. It is about human life.”

This was after he “again refused to reveal where the idea for the state’s strict nighttime curfew originated, saying he would not reverse the decision despite senior health and law enforcement officials stating they had not asked for the policy.” https://www.theguardian.com/australi...e-covid-curfew

The decision to impose a curfew was made single handedly by the Victorian premier with nothing to back up that it was necessary, so it was a memorable decision, along with his accompanying comment.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

It was Dan Andrews in September of last year who said his decision to impose a curfew was “not about human rights. It is about human life.”

This was after he “again refused to reveal where the idea for the state’s strict nighttime curfew originated, saying he would not reverse the decision despite senior health and law enforcement officials stating they had not asked for the policy.” https://www.theguardian.com/australi...e-covid-curfew

The decision to impose a curfew was made single handedly by the Victorian premier with nothing to back up that it was necessary, so it was a memorable decision, along with his accompanying comment.

At least someone can back statements up.
Got anything on the woman jailed for 3 months?

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

At least someone can back statements up.
Got anything on the woman jailed for 3 months?

No, but there was one jailed for 6 months for returning home to Western Australia from Victoria and not entering hotel quarantine:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-53903498

There was also one woman sentenced to 3 months and 18 days but “only” jailed for one month when she crossed the border from Vic to SA without an essential traveller permit. Two months 18 days were suspended upon her entering a good behaviour bond of 12 months.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-...ches/100542542

The driver of the car was jailed for 18 days.

None of them infected anyone.

[Zippee]

Originally Posted by laird

Dr John Campbell has just posted another video ,and he's optimistic about The new strain. Lol I don't know how to post the link

Yes, you are right and the link you saw is below. In addition to the latest changes and supersonic spread of Omicron, Campbell holds out some real hope - yes, it is true that it could just as well be the very worst oucome - but there is hope.

Until we know more:

1. We all can be expected to be exposed and catch it, and better be using every single protective means at our disposal, and that certainly includes governments.

2. It doesn't matter whether we are vaccinated or not. It is clear that Omicron is incredibly transmissible.

3. The hope is that this mega-mutation was so extreme that it will favor transmission ability over more serious outcomes. If the former, this mutation may by itself end the pandemic. If the latter, don't forget to re-register at the Neptune Society...

Gentlemen, place your bets....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ls7zy6_0Z2s

[Zippee]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

No, but there was one jailed for 6 months for returning home to Western Australia from Victoria and not entering hotel quarantine:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-53903498

There was also one woman sentenced to 3 months and 18 days but “only” jailed for one month when she crossed the border from Vic to SA without an essential traveller permit. Two months 18 days were suspended upon her entering a good behaviour bond of 12 months:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-...ches/100542542
.

Nope: the first (woman) did NOT serve the possible 12 months and $50K fine, was NOT jailed for six months. Indeed she only served 3 weeks (mostly for quarantine), and ultimately to only a community sentence including 50 hours of community service.

Nope again: I'd call serving one month instead of 12, and escaping $50K in fines rather a gift. Per the prosecutor, this woman was "no stranger to the court system" and possessed a long criminal record. She and 3 other rowdy scofflaws had a history of drug dealing, driving offenses and other indictable offenses - and get this - while on bail!

- Pauline Briggs will spend one month in jail for breaching SA's border rules
- She was part of a group arrested at the border earlier this week
- truck driver who allegedly spat at police

If there's a point or two to be made here, it would be to do more due diligence, and less crying for criminals who just happen to be women, eh?

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by Zippee

…If there's a point or two to be made here, it would be to do more due diligence, and less crying for criminals who just happen to be women, eh?

The point to be made is being jailed for any time whatsoever when no harm was done.

If it is men you are interested in then here are two that were jailed for a month for breaching quarantine directions:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-...ourt/100403348

And a WA gentleman who was sentenced to 7 months and jailed for 2 months “for booking tradespeople to work on his house while he was supposed to be quarantining after returning from interstate.”:
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...rantine-orders

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Zippee

Nope: the first (woman) did NOT serve the possible 12 months and $50K fine, was NOT jailed for six months. Indeed she only served 3 weeks (mostly for quarantine), and ultimately to only a community sentence including 50 hours of community service.

Nope again: I'd call serving one month instead of 12, and escaping $50K in fines rather a gift. Per the prosecutor, this woman was "no stranger to the court system" and possessed a long criminal record. She and 3 other rowdy scofflaws had a history of drug dealing, driving offenses and other indictable offenses - and get this - while on bail!


If there's a point or two to be made here, it would be to do more due diligence, and less crying for criminals who just happen to be women, eh?

You beat me to it re the WA case
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-...reach/12654822

As I understand it jailing people serves three purposes. 1 Removing dangerous people from society. 2 Punishing people for breaking the law. 3 Sending a message to the rest of us to behave ourselves.

A little bit of #2 has been applied in Australia and rather a lot of #3.
I would suggest that most of us are quite happy with that. Enforcing internal border security has meant that a very large part of Australia - five of the eight states and territories - have been able to lead a (near) normal life for the last two years.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

The point to be made is being jailed for any time whatsoever when no harm was done.

If it is men you are interested in then here are two that were jailed for a month for breaching quarantine directions:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-...ourt/100403348

And a WA gentleman who was sentenced to 7 months and jailed for 2 months “for booking tradespeople to work on his house while he was supposed to be quarantining after returning from interstate.”:
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...rantine-orders

Give it a break!
Did any of these people know 'no harm was/would be done' when they commited the offences?
No they did not.
Had any of them been tested before commiting the offences ?
No they had not.
Could their behaviour have led to serious outbreaks?
Yes it could have.
Do I have any sympathy for any of them?
No.
The current outbreak in Victoria is down to two removalists breaking the rules and entering from NSW.
They didn't know they were infectious at the time but no harm done eh?
This was the outbreak that had your young friend in Melbourne diving under the doona yet again.