Coronavirus Impact

Amarillo, you’re right.
We are in danger of losing our common freedom.
Some of this stuff of late is going to far and I’m worried about the direction we’re all heading...
I also agree but when locals in rural areas start talking about taking vigilante action such as arson and vandalism of campervans, to protect their own, then the police are probably keen to avoid this.
 
I also agree but when locals in rural areas start talking about taking vigilante action such as arson and vandalism of campervans, to protect their own, then the police are probably keen to avoid this.

Yes, it does appear that mob mentality is now acceptable...
How very disappointing.
 
I also agree but when locals in rural areas start talking about taking vigilante action such as arson and vandalism of campervans, to protect their own, then the police are probably keen to avoid this.
If people didn’t drive there vehicles to those areas then the elements of the local population would not be talking about vandalism of vehicles because there would be no vehicles to vandalise
 
If people didn’t drive there vehicles to those areas then the elements of the local population would not be talking about vandalism of vehicles because there would be no vehicles to vandalise
I live in my van, so have no other home to go to, campsites are shut, hotels are shut. I’m in a national park in Finland, and two people have knocked on my van door to check if I’m ok and ask me if I need any help. Its a really supportive place to be stuck.
In the same circumstances in the U.K. I’d risk my home being set in fire.
There are no good options for full time vandwellers at the moment.
In Sweden they are actively encouraging people to get out in the countryside, they are an outlier in all this though.
 
Because some people think the government guidance doesn't apply to them, and it's really not that difficult to interpret, surely tougher measures will have be introduced. I'm surprised the major hotspot London hasn't gone further with lockdown measures as opposed to say the Shetland Isles.
 
I live in my van, so have no other home to go to, campsites are shut, hotels are shut. I’m in a national park in Finland, and two people have knocked on my van door to check if I’m ok and ask me if I need any help. Its a really supportive place to be stuck.
In the same circumstances in the U.K. I’d risk my home being set in fire.
There are no good options for full time vandwellers at the moment.
In Sweden they are actively encouraging people to get out in the countryside, they are an outlier in all this though.
We have the space here
 
Personally, I thought the instructions for the UK were simple. Stay at home except for travel to work if you cant work from home or are a key worker, travel for essential shopping and exercise locally. How hard can it be.
 
Because some people think the government guidance doesn't apply to them, and it's really not that difficult to interpret, surely tougher measures will have be introduced. I'm surprised the major hotspot London hasn't gone further with lockdown measures as opposed to say the Shetland Isles.
I think that the only confusion is between “should not” and “must not”. You should not leave your home is a request. You must not congregate in groups of more than two unless all of the same household is an instruction. It doesn’t help when ministers present a request as an instruction.
 
It they said it was OK to go to the park or the beach , the problem is everyone would do it so the best way is a complete lockdown in my opinion.

Give people an inch, they take a mile.

I am hoping for a full lockdown as it will help us reach the peak faster
 
It they said it was OK to go to the park or the beach , the problem is everyone would do it so the best way is a complete lockdown in my opinion.

Give people an inch, they take a mile.

I am hoping for a full lockdown as it will help us reach the peak faster

Wouldn‘t that actually make it take longer to reach the peak?
 
Surely if we all stay indoors peak will come sooner ?
 
I think that the only confusion is between “should not” and “must not”. You should not leave your home is a request. You must not congregate in groups of more than two unless all of the same household is an instruction. It doesn’t help when ministers present a request as an instruction.
Put it another way,
1, You should not have unprotected sex with someone carrying an STD.
2, You must not have unprotected sex with someone carrying an STD.
There's no confusion there for me. I know what to do.
 
I think the peak would be lower, but it would take longer to reach it?
Yes, possibly, but this would be a good thing wouldn't it? For resources etc.
 
Put it another way,
1, You should not have unprotected sex with someone carrying an STD.
2, You must not have unprotected sex with someone carrying an STD.
There's no confusion there for me. I know what to do.
But you don’t need the government to tell you when not to have unprotected sex...
 
Put it another way,
1, You should not have unprotected sex with someone carrying an STD.
2, You must not have unprotected sex with someone carrying an STD.
There's no confusion there for me. I know what to do.
1. You should pay me for the work I do.
2. You must pay me for the work I do.
If you don’t want people to have a choice, don’t give them one.
 
1. You should pay me for the work I do.
2. You must pay me for the work I do.


If you don’t want people to have a choice, don’t give them one.

It was quite obvious that the vast majority got it from the start.

Of the minority that didn’t the vast majority of them got it a week or so ago.

The few that didn’t are now having it enforced.

The argument on here seems to be concentrating on the perceived rights of the minority of the minority.

Bigger things are at play than a walk in the countryside.



Mike
 
It was quite obvious that the vast majority got it from the start.

Of the minority that didn’t the vast majority of them got it a week or so ago.

The few that didn’t are now having it enforced.

The argument on here seems to be concentrating on the perceived rights of the minority of the minority.

Bigger things are at play than a walk in the countryside.



Mike

The government issued guidelines, which are optional, yet they are being enforced as if they are rules, by the police and by vigilantes.
Its not really about rights in my view, it’s more about people taking the law into their own hands, because they don’t agree with the law or that the guidelines are optional, as it stands.
 
Exit strategies

As far as I can understand
  1. Develop vaccine
  2. Develop cure/treatment
  3. Develop herd Immunity at a rate health services can cope with
All of which seem far enough away that we could be exiting to a very different world.

4. Develop extensive testing and contact tracing, along with very strict restrictions of movement for those affected, we could then isolate only the ones affected and ease restrictions on others

Viable?
 
Exit strategies



4. Develop extensive testing and contact tracing, along with very strict restrictions of movement for those affected, we could then isolate only the ones affected and ease restrictions on others

Viable?
Antibody testing will enable All those who have had it and have immunity to go back to work and a normal life.
The Antibody -tve would then be the problem. The Severely at risk should continue isolation until a vaccine is available. But what to do with the others? Do they continue isolation or take the risk?
 

VW California Club

Back
Top