Wtf is going on??!!

[NearlyDown]

I actually think it’s quite scary and a bit strange the amount of people who are happy to have their human rights taken away.

For the record I’m fully vaccinated and I think that the vaccine is brilliant, but it is a medical procedure and I don’t think people that have made the decision not to have said medical procedure should then not be able to participate in society.

This is not at all normal, I can see the hospital beds are getting overwhelmed but this is likely because of viruses that haven’t been able to run through the population normally are making people very poorly.

Which means that this will happen every winter forevermore if we don’t let humans, vaccinated or not just get on with life.

From not to, obviously

I actually think it’s quite scary and a bit strange the amount of people who are happy to have their human rights taken away.

I think it is scarier that based on absolutely no information, people are happy to make a decision that impacts on others, in exactly the same way as they claim they would be impacted, on the basis we should all be concerned about losing our “human rights”

What about the rights of disabled and vulnerable people to be able to live their lives free of the fear of catching something that will kill them. To be able to go about their daily business free from impediment. And no, before everyone starts “they can be vaccinated” is not the answer there. The issues around Covid still being as prevalent in our country as it is, are all down to people being up in arms about their lives being impacted by restrictions and the government reacting to that and wholesale removing anything that might mean we could get a handle on this thing.

Right from the start “lock up the vulnerable” was the cry. Where were you with your “human rights!!!” cry then?

When things began to open up and pavements were full of outdoor dining, when disabled spaces were removed, when toilets were closed or restricted, when hospitals were stopping therapies that allow people to carry on their daily lives, when they closed the only exercise venues which allowed disabled to retain some kind of movement with their bodies, restricting the ability of people with disabilities to travel. Where were you then? The answer was invariably, “you can get vaccinated” or “if you’re that worried, just stay at home”

Oh but now the “human rights” of people who have never faced having to be part of a group who’s lives are restricted are allegedly at risk (even though what they are being asked to do is really fucking simple) we are all supposed to feel really sorry for them?

Yeah, not happening.

im sorry, where in the uk are people being forcibly restrained and vaccinated?

Get vaccinated and wear a mask. It is SO FUCKING SIMPLE.
When I see posts like this they make me realise I am on the right side of the argument.

[quote EmotionalSupportBear]its not contravening ANY 'human rights' here in the UK.

We abide by the Human Rights act 1988. The only one you might argue is the one about the Right to Liberty.. however, that does have a bit in it that legally allows the government to detain/restrict public movement in certain circumstances.

"When can a public authority interfere with a qualified right?
A public authority can only interfere with a qualified right if it’s allowed under the law. It must also show that it has a specific reason set out in the Human Rights Act for interfering with your rights. The Act calls these reasons a legitimate aim.

Examples of legitimate aims include:

the protection of other people’s rights
national security
public safety
the prevention of crime
the protection of health.
The interference must be no more than what's absolutely necessary to achieve one of the aims in the Act. The Human Rights Act says the interference must be necessary in a democratic society."

www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/civil-rights/human-rights/when-can-a-public-authority-interfere-with-your-human-rights/[/quote]
By that logic you anide by then, mandatory blood donations would fit the criteria of " protecting public health" as many people need blood from accidents daily- perhaps we should just give our bodies up completely for the greater good with a kidney donated as well?

@Anythingbutsnow

Regarding the quarantine camps. Would people who support them be happy to be dragged away from their home and family for 14 days? Or have a family member forced into one. I wonder how long it is before people are hiding in the loft to avoid being arrested and taken to a camp. Sorry, but I don't think it would be a huge leap if we started hearing the police in Australia have shot someone for trying to escape to one of the camps.

What are you talking about?

People who have returned from overseas or come from interstate in some instances are quarantined. In NSW, it was in hotels, but that has been/is being phased out. In the Territory they have Howard Springs.

Nobody is 'dragged away from their home and family'...

Nobody is arrested and taken to a camp.

People who leave quarantine prematurely are returned, for the protection of the greater community, which in the NT as I said before has a very vulnerable population of First Nations people.

Shame on you for spreading mistruths and beating up inaccurate and offensive WW2 analogies.

Dishhh are you saying that the girl giving her firsthand account of being sent to Howard Springs as a punishment and the experiences she had there is lying?

How many people suffer adverse side effects from wearing a seat belt contrary to the many thousands in the Uk alone who have had the vaccine?

Not flawed at all. There is a whole lot of evidence that seatbelts cause injuries, some of which are life limiting. But it is also true the injuries they prevent are much worse in most scenarios.

And, your “many thousands in the U.K. alone” comment is not backed by any research.

@BlueskiesAbove i doubt very much that anyone could argue that would ever be proportionate/legitimate aim.

What is it with people coming up with absolutely ridiculous imaginary scenarios to argue their point?

For all the people stating the vaccine significantly reduces transmission, the stats suggest otherwise. Wales for eg has been one of the more draconian countries for rules with enforced mask wearing and social distancing with decent vaccine takeup yet..

www.itv.com/news/wales/2021-09-24/7-of-hospital-patients-in-wales-test-positive-for-coronavirus

The percentage of people who have tested positive for coronavirus while in Welsh hospitals is now at 7%, latest figures reveal.

637 out of 9,735 hospital patients had tested positive for the virus up til the week ending September 19.

More than 80% of patients in hospitals in Wales, who have tested positive for Covid-19, have been double jabbed.

Public Health Wales statistics show 80.3% of all Covid-positive hospital patients have had both doses of the vaccine. For patients aged 60 and over, the percentage of those double jabbed rises to 90%.

What about the rights of disabled and vulnerable people to be able to live their lives free of the fear of catching something that will kill them. To be able to go about their daily business free from impediment. And no, before everyone starts “they can be vaccinated” is not the answer there
Well that's what we were told was the answer. Vaccines were the saviour, we were told how amazing the scientists were and so on. But now it seems that people being vaccinated to protect themselves is not enough. They also need other people to be vaccinated to protect them. The whole thing is just absurd.

[quote EmotionalSupportBear]@BlueskiesAbove i doubt very much that anyone could argue that would ever be proportionate/legitimate aim.

What is it with people coming up with absolutely ridiculous imaginary scenarios to argue their point?[/quote]
Maybe, but I don't think a proportionate aim is toi exclude people from society for a virus which is extremely mild for the vast majority of people bullying them into taking a vaccine which has the risk of death as a side effect. I'd call that equally ridiculous and far fetched 2 years ago yet here we are

@BoredZelda

How many people suffer adverse side effects from wearing a seat belt contrary to the many thousands in the Uk alone who have had the vaccine?

Not flawed at all. There is a whole lot of evidence that seatbelts cause injuries, some of which are life limiting. But it is also true the injuries they prevent are much worse in most scenarios.

And, your “many thousands in the U.K. alone” comment is not backed by any research.

I think you will find it was the driving of the car and impact of any accident causing the injury - comparing a seatbelt to an injected drug which many don't want to exist as a human being with body autonomy is absurd.

By that logic you anide by then, mandatory blood donations would fit the criteria of " protecting public health" as many people need blood from accidents daily- perhaps we should just give our bodies up completely for the greater good with a kidney donated as well?

As we aren’t in an exceptionally difficult situation with blood or organ donations, there would be no reason to make either of these mandatory.

Scotland has an opt out organ donation system now. So, yeah, it’s perfectly possible to change the rules so a larger number of organs might be available but still protect people’s human rights.

@churchofthepoisonmind

Get vaccinated and wear a mask. It is SO FUCKING SIMPLE. When I see posts like this they make me realise I am on the right side of the argument.

haha yep

@BoredZelda

By that logic you anide by then, mandatory blood donations would fit the criteria of " protecting public health" as many people need blood from accidents daily- perhaps we should just give our bodies up completely for the greater good with a kidney donated as well?

As we aren’t in an exceptionally difficult situation with blood or organ donations, there would be no reason to make either of these mandatory.

Scotland has an opt out organ donation system now. So, yeah, it’s perfectly possible to change the rules so a larger number of organs might be available but still protect people’s human rights.

If we were in an exceptionally difficult position with blood donations, would you support blood donation being mandatory? Where is the line drawn exactly for the " greater good" often referred to?

What human rights are being taken away?

Speaking of scary - It must be extremely scary for the clinically vulnerable to live in a society where people just do not give a shit and are happily putting their lives at risk. I'm not just talking about anti vaxxers, but those who just won't wear masks etc (even though that wasn't your point, that's an aside). Perhaps too thick to even realise that they are putting peoples lives at risk - or worse, just don't care.

Bagamoyo1 Well said.

The UK government has definitely been a shining example of the correlation between a government shifting more authoritarian and gaining more powers over people and governments removing meaningful accountability, limiting access, and placing themselves above the laws they put on others for "the greater good" rather than living by example.

I mean, yes, wearing a mask and getting vaccinated is simple for most, but when looking at how the Coronavirus act was renewed and the many issues in the NHS before COVID, I'm not sure the long-term solution to 'get on with life' is simple.

For the official stats check the below link rather than a random article and numbers shared by an antivaxxer.

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19byvaccinationstatusengland/deathsoccurringbetween2januaryand24september2021

I agree OP the mandatory vaccination part is seriously the most chilling because what do they do if people refuse. A fine a prison sentence they have their right to free medical services removed (NHS UK). What is the answer then everyone on this thread is focusing on going to non essential shops entertainment ect which is divisive enough but the mandatory vaccination is concerning. It will be written about in the history books by psychologists and I am not sure if we are all around then we will like what we read.

Let them die if they get it, don't waste ee sources on them. And allow the normal people to have safe zones away from them.

@Draggondragon

Let them die if they get it, don't waste ee sources on them. And allow the normal people to have safe zones away from them.

That's what I like about these threads. They are very revealing about some of the folk on here.

Genuine question @Draggondragon for you and others who find these posts boring - what would like to see happen from a policy standpoint to people who refuse at all costs to be vaccinated? ie even under threat of jail and fines? What would be your next step?

Reply above

But now it seems that people being vaccinated to protect themselves is not enough. They also need other people to be vaccinated to protect them. The whole thing is just absurd.

From the start we were told we would need upward of 80 - 90% of the adult population to be vaccinated to achieve proper herd immunity. To not grasp that this is not about you, the individual, and your so-called right to infect others and perpetuate this pandemic worldwide, when many countries have little access to vaccines, causing thousands and thousands of horrible deaths quite needlessly, simply because you want to go here and there without a mask and without a jab, because... you are you!... is more than absurd this late in the game.

Yeah it really does, people would rather not take a simple vaccine to protect themselves and others when they claim to have taken all childhood jabs or not even wear a mask which is a small inconvenience in fighting the pandemic when they aren’t exempt.