Coronavirus

[Dynamo]

19 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

Curfew on pubs in England coming in today. 10pm. Still reckon we'll get 9pm so she's seen as being a bit stricter. This added to the furlough stuff will see thousands out of a job and a fair percentage of pubs/restaurants and hotels closing permanently. Complete fucking madness. Not a single life will be saved. 

Closing at 10 won't do much if you can still go out at midday.

[manboobs109]

2 minutes ago, For Fecks Sake said:

Reckon that was probably the attitude of the bloke who went on the pub crawl in Bolton after coming back from his holiday and not self isolating.

Imagine he will cause a few deaths as a result of spreading it around like he has.

And closing pubs early would've stopped him doing that would it? 

[Poodler]

1 minute ago, BrianFaePerth said:

Spit roasting two burds?

is her from freo yesterday’s news?

I wish

It'll be Aberdeen's best roast tatties for them but no sexual penetration. 
 

Nah she's still putting up with me, I think she's mentally unwell.

Do you have a source for thinking it was more Mini?

 

[manboobs109]

1 minute ago, Dynamo said:

Closing at 10 won't do much if you can still go out at midday.

It'll affect takings. It'll also mean big groups of people on Fridays and Saturdays heading off to house parties which is what they want to stop apparently 

[For Fecks Sake]

2 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

And closing pubs early would've stopped him doing that would it? 

Indeed not, but adhering to the rules as opposed to being a selfish cunt would have stopped it.

[manboobs109]

1 minute ago, For Fecks Sake said:

Indeed not, but adhering to the rules as opposed to being a selfish cunt would have stopped it.

So to prevent people breaking rules we'll make new, stricter rules? Great idea. 

[Foster14]

Just now, manboobs109 said:

So to prevent people breaking rules we'll make new, stricter rules? Great idea. 

Exactly my issue with this.  You punish the rule abiders even more to offset the folk who don't follow the rules anyway.  If someone breaks rules now, stricter rules aren't going to stop them.  

 

[manboobs109]

2 minutes ago, Foster14 said:

Exactly my issue with this.  You punish the rule abiders even more to offset the folk who don't follow the rules anyway.  If someone breaks rules now, stricter rules aren't going to stop them.  

 

Yip, it's bizarre logic. Making my local close at 10pm would've stopped a guy in Bolton spreading it? Not convinced. 

[For Fecks Sake]

2 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

So to prevent people breaking rules we'll make new, stricter rules? Great idea. 

But is that not how law and society works?  Has to be consequences has there not?

Rules or no rules, if you are the sort of person who does not give a fuck about anyone other than yourself (and let's be honest we see that type of selfish behaviour day in day out throughout society, COVID-19 related or not) then it does not matter what the rules are.

[manboobs109]

5 minutes ago, For Fecks Sake said:

But is that not how law and society works?  Has to be consequences has there not?

Rules or no rules, if you are the sort of person who does not give a fuck about anyone other than yourself (and let's be honest we see that type of selfish behaviour day in day out throughout society, COVID-19 related or not) then it does not matter what the rules are.

Exactly my point,and Fosters above. The people who are ignoring them will ignore the new ones and the ones following the rules will be punished more. 

[Studebaker-90]

Just fuck what they say and do what you want, RATM style. 

[Poodler]

11 minutes ago, For Fecks Sake said:

But is that not how law and society works?  Has to be consequences has there not?

Rules or no rules, if you are the sort of person who does not give a fuck about anyone other than yourself (and let's be honest we see that type of selfish behaviour day in day out throughout society, COVID-19 related or not) then it does not matter what the rules are.

That's the myth that's being peddled. You're protecting others by adhering to our baseless rules and restrictions. Helps to maintain a divide between adherers and those capable of thinking for themselves.
 

There was an article on the guardian yesterday about the vaccine and countries all signing a deal. 'For the benefit of all' said the statement.

 

Has the establishment suddenly developed extreme empathy in the last few months? Benefit of all. Fuck clean off, it's for profit and you damn well know it.

Theyve never looked out for your interests, why suddenly believe that they are now. 

[Guest the shepherd]

20 minutes ago, For Fecks Sake said:

Reckon that was probably the attitude of the bloke who went on the pub crawl in Bolton after coming back from his holiday and not self isolating.

Imagine he will cause a few deaths as a result of spreading it around like he has.

I think there would be far more chance of catching HIV, or any other STD, from the boy in Bolton you are referring to rather than contracting Coronavirus. 

Does anyone know anyone that's tested positive for this "incurable" disease and, if so, what symptoms they have and how they genuinely caught it? 

Sturgeon, Johnson, Hancock, Freeman Harries, Vallance and Whitty have been so quick to deliver perennial negative, unhelpful, and, frankly, contradictory rhetoric daily since 23/03/20 but have conveniently omitted any bona fide proof of how it is actually transmitted, how it is spread and how symptoms develop via biological evidence.

Surely in this day and age, they could produce a video of a town/city centre showing how the virus is spread via the use of genuine infrared technology?

[For Fecks Sake]

Don't get me wrong I am not exactly happy with that's going on at the moment but some people need to give themselves a shake at their selfish attitudes.

And aye the establishment don't give a fuck about anything else other than Money and a vaccine will be a licence to print just that.

[Henry]

42 minutes ago, Poodler said:

 

Do you have a source for thinking it was more Mini?

 

[Poodler]

No but I'm saying is it really selfish to just not do as you're told by a government who continually lies and abuses you? It can't be proven that the 'spread' is not caused by people with poor mask and hand hygiene efficacy even if they're trying their best. So you can't just blame people who want to get on with their lives.
 

And why should I care about some random in Inverbervie or Slough? You don't have to care about anyone, it's ok to be like that. It sounds unpleasant but it's ok.

[Studebaker-90]

2 minutes ago, Henry said:

Indeed 

[Henry]

16 minutes ago, the shepherd said:

Sturgeon, Johnson, Hancock, Freeman Harries, Vallance and Whitty

... Sessions.

[minijc]

2 minutes ago, Studebaker-90 said:

Indeed 

Lool!!!

[Parklife]

4 minutes ago, Poodler said:

No but I'm saying is it really selfish to just not do as you're told by a government who continually lies and abuses you?

No, it's not. However your post seems to imply that anyone who's adhering to any of the guidelines is doing so solely because they're told to. When that is not the case either. 

4 minutes ago, Poodler said:

It can't be proven that the 'spread' is not caused by people with poor mask and hand hygiene efficacy even if they're trying their best

There's a plenty things in life that can't be proven. Especially negatives. There's plenty evidence that good hand hygiene and wearing of coverings can reduce the spread/risk of spread. No one is claiming that they will eliminate the spread. 

4 minutes ago, Poodler said:

So you can't just blame people who want to get on with their lives.

We all want to get on with our lives. 

4 minutes ago, Poodler said:

And why should I care about some random in Inverbervie or Slough? You don't have to care about anyone, it's ok to be like that. It sounds unpleasant but it's ok.

We all have to be able to look ourselves in the mirror at the end of the day. You don't want to care about anyone else, that's fine. If you're happy with that, then there's little anyone can do to change that. Most people are not like that though. Most people do care about their fellow citizens. 

[DelMonte]

You can care about your fellow citizens in another way though. 

A lot of people think there is more danger from the consequences of lockdown rather than the virus itself. Its a perfectly reasonable argument. 

[Parklife]

Just now, DelMonte said:

You can care about your fellow citizens in another way though. 

A lot of people think there is more danger from the consequences of lockdown rather than the virus itself. Its a perfectly reasonable argument. 

Totally is. I agree with you and wasn't disagreeing. I was Merely responding to what Poodler had said. 

[Poodler]

10 minutes ago, Parklife said:

No, it's not. However your post seems to imply that anyone who's adhering to any of the guidelines is doing so solely because they're told to. When that is not the case either. 

There's a plenty things in life that can't be proven. Especially negatives. There's plenty evidence that good hand hygiene and wearing of coverings can reduce the spread/risk of spread. No one is claiming that they will eliminate the spread. 

We all want to get on with our lives. 

We all have to be able to look ourselves in the mirror at the end of the day. You don't want to care about anyone else, that's fine. If you're happy with that, then there's little anyone can do to change that. Most people are not like that though. Most people do care about their fellow citizens. 

I am being deliberately obtuse but the point stands 

[StandFree1982]

14 minutes ago, Parklife said:

No, it's not. However your post seems to imply that anyone who's adhering to any of the guidelines is doing so solely because they're told to. When that is not the case either. 

There's a plenty things in life that can't be proven. Especially negatives. There's plenty evidence that good hand hygiene and wearing of coverings can reduce the spread/risk of spread. No one is claiming that they will eliminate the spread. 

We all want to get on with our lives. 

We all have to be able to look ourselves in the mirror at the end of the day. You don't want to care about anyone else, that's fine. If you're happy with that, then there's little anyone can do to change that. Most people are not like that though. Most people do care about their fellow citizens. 

The tinhat weirdos with their "Masks do nothing" mentality do my head in.  Why then do we all put a hand to our mouth and nose when sneezing/coughing? It's to stop the germs from SPREADING. It's simple physics. The mask is simply a way to stop the virus from spraying out when people are talking / breathing.  Nobody has ever said that it's 100% effective, but it's about reducing the risk. 

[manboobs109]

4 minutes ago, StandFree1982 said:

The tinhat weirdos with their "Masks do nothing" mentality do my head in.  Why then do we all put a hand to our mouth and nose when sneezing/coughing? It's to stop the germs from SPREADING. It's simple physics. The mask is simply a way to stop the virus from spraying out when people are talking / breathing.  Nobody has ever said that it's 100% effective, but it's about reducing the risk. 

It's not physics surely? 

[manboobs109]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-54106272

Might be worth trying to get yourself on this gravy train now, they'll be throwing money, cars, meals on wheels etc at these cunts soon enough. 

[Parklife]

5 minutes ago, manboobs109 said:

It's not physics surely? 

The distance an object travels is directly proportionate to the resistance it meets. If you add resistance (a face covering) you'll reduce the distance travelled. 

Physics. 

[Parklife]

1 minute ago, manboobs109 said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-54106272

Might be worth trying to get yourself on this gravy train now, they'll be throwing money, cars, meals on wheels etc at these cunts soon enough. 

I know someone experiencing similar. A 32 year old woman with no underlying health issues. Pretty similar to the story there actually. 

[The Boofon]

4 minutes ago, Parklife said:

I know someone experiencing similar. A 32 year old woman with no underlying health issues. Pretty similar to the story there actually. 

I work with someone who has had it. His lungs are still a bit iffy at the moment.

 

The woman in the link that manboobs provided is at it though make no mistake about it.

 

Obvious from the photos of her.

[The Boofon]

1 minute ago, Sooper-hanz said:

Not having a pop Parky but the lady in that story does have an underlying respiratory condition. 

She's also genetically lazy.