Have people's opinions changed?

[MassiveOverthinker]

Just wondering really, if the last few months have changed people's opinion on how we managed covid in this country.

Anyone wondering if maybe fewer restrictions would've been better and if more draconian ones (often called for) were unnecessary. Anyone wondering if we needed to close schools, swab and isolate our kids, test and trace etc etc.

Or do people generally feel we did what was necessary at the time and are only okayish now because of weaker variants and higher vaccination levels?

Anyone feel less angry at the rule breakers, those who don't want to be vaccinated etc?

If it all happened again, do you think your response to restrictions would be the same, or would you be a bit more inclined to think "sod that for a laugh".

(Asking for a friend).

The first lockdown was probably necessary but lockdown 2 and 3 and the whole mess of tiers had too much of a negative impact on mental health. On balance, I think the risk to mental health was bigger than the risk of covid so they were not in the nations best interests.

Yes, I have had a loved one in a similar position. I think it could go on a while.

@AppleandRhubarbTart I'm so sorry to hear that.

Thank you. The whole situation has been very hard for people admitted to hospitals over the past couple of years. Some of the stories you hear about are absolutely tragic. I'm glad for anyone who is able to have a loved one with them in that situation.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing here We are two years in with much milder ( generally) variants every body who wants to be vaccinated vaccinated
Surely people can't have such short memories that they have forgotten the awful scenes coming out if Italy, knowing that would be the UK?
I think the first lockdown was necessary ,some of rules made no sense but it was a brand new virus
The second lock down was a farce with everybody claiming to be a " key worker" either schools needed to be shut or they didn't.

@x2boys Why should children be judged on whether they are worthy of getting an education in a school environment based on their parents occupation.

You have no way of knowing how many people you killed

No one killed anyone. A virus killed people.

Exactly. The nonsense of moral culpability for a pandemic was the madness at the heart of the whole strategy.

This is why those of us who live in certain communities never bought into the "we are all in it together" or "this is all about the health" lines.

Because many organisations HAs councils ARE behaving like this and risking other illnesses, They dont seem to mind risking a cholera outbreak while telling us we should all stay away from each other. When its something they can actually do something about, they dont bother until they are shamed on social media.
twitter.com/KwajoHousing/status/1524317629535727617?s=20&t=rfC6NL7tUqTUHx95FTRrcw

Oops Heres another one.

twitter.com/KwajoHousing/status/1525831059740688385?s=20&t=rfC6NL7tUqTUHx95FTRrcw

I think this is really relevant. All the to and fro about things seems to be based on the psychological reaction to where we are now and not what it felt like two years ago.

I think there is extremism on both sides. Some people think the lockdowns were a mistake in general and everyone should merrily skip and jump forgetting that those who are vulnerable are still around and at risk, forgetting the mental health of those who were on the frontline at the worst of it. There is an impressive arrogance to that.

Some extremists on the other side think we should all still be locked down and bugger it to the need to put food on the table keep roofs over our head. Entitlement to the externe.

The reality is that whilst covid is now a ubiquitous part of life 2 years ago ot was terrifying.decisions made then cannot be judged by our current mindset and its silly and naive to do so.

There were bad decisions, there were good decisions. There was so much going on that noone cane really assert the success of the overall response just yet.

Anything speaking in absolutes when referring to this is simply pushing an agenda and fostered by a likely fear response. The whole thing is more complex.

I think this is really relevant. All the to and fro about things seems to be based on the psychological reaction to where we are now and not what it felt like two years ago.

I think there is extremism on both sides. Some people think the lockdowns were a mistake in general and everyone should merrily skip and jump forgetting that those who are vulnerable are still around and at risk, forgetting the mental health of those who were on the frontline at the worst of it. There is an impressive arrogance to that.

Some extremists on the other side think we should all still be locked down and bugger it to the need to put food on the table keep roofs over our head. Entitlement to the externe.

The reality is that whilst covid is now a ubiquitous part of life 2 years ago ot was terrifying.decisions made then cannot be judged by our current mindset and its silly and naive to do so.

There were bad decisions, there were good decisions. There was so much going on that noone cane really assert the success of the overall response just yet.

Anything speaking in absolutes when referring to this is simply pushing an agenda and fostered by a likely fear response. The whole thing is more complex.

Yes. And on the subject of culpability, we do know that restrictions were the cause of some deaths. Anyone who wants to start talking about killing people and who also thinks lockdown and restrictions were justified would do well to remember that.

These kind of posts remind me of the damage that has been caused to mental health.

The virus killed people. Much like other viruses do.

Life isn't black and white. It's many shades of grey

Of course theres culpability.

PP claimed she hadnt killed anyone, because it wasnt anyone she knows.

If you dont follow restrictions, go to the supermarket after not following restrictions and stand beside granny at the till, who dies from covid, you killed her. If you stand beside a 39 week pregnant woman who contracts covid from you and it killed her baby, you killed them.

People don't like it, but it's true.

I also think the result of restrictions on mental health, hospital scans and care homes killed people, if that helps.

@x2boys

What a wonderful, rainbow view. If you think anyone shoved their children into a hub during a pandemic for a laugh, you're very lucky.

If you think anyone shoved their children into a hub during a pandemic for a laugh, you're very lucky.

People were falling over themselves to get their children into school as key workers during the second lockdown, don't be ridiculous.

Not that it was for a 'laugh'. They'd seen the impact on them first time round.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/from-snowball-fights-to-delivering-birthday-cards-britains-136000-lockdown-penalty-charges

While Boris Johnson and Keir Starmer await the police’s judgment, there has been no end to the fines issued to others caught by their lockdown rules. At last count, some 136,000 fixed penalty notices had been issued in Britain. Durham police – a fairly easygoing force by Covid standards – have handed out just 1,090. Is it a bit mean to fine someone for having had a glass of wine or a beer at work? Perhaps. But no more so than the fines still being issued under the lockdown rules that Johnson and Starmer both voted through.
A student in Leeds was fined £10,000 for organising a snowball fight. A beggar was fined £434 for having his cap out at King’s Cross station. A homeless man was arrested at Liverpool Street station for being outside ‘without a reasonable excuse’. Staff at a London chip shop were told to attend a ‘business meeting’ during the second lockdown, when work meetings were allowed. They all received a fine because the police decided the meeting could have been held online. A Devon landlord held a Christmas gathering for staff on the same day as the Downing Street Christmas bash – and received a £4,000 fine.

Rules are rules: for some, at least. The police won’t investigate any more offences, but the backlog is such that the cases keep being heard in magistrates’ courts and fines keep coming. No one in 10 Downing Street, meanwhile, has been charged more than £50.
I’m not surprised she nicked our porridge
‘What with the cost of living, I’m not surprised she nicked our porridge.’
In each lockdown case, the defendant can enter a written plea. Many are heartbreaking. A 66-year-old man from Brockley said: ‘I am a sick person with heart failure and other problems. I went to the allotment to get some greens as I don’t eat meat. I’m a pensioner struggling to pay my way and in debt already – I didn’t mean to break the law.’ He was caught chatting with others at his allotment, found guilty and fined £100.
A childminder pleaded with the court that she had just ‘popped round to drop off a birthday card – I didn’t realise there would be other people present. I did not enter the property.’ Too bad: she was found chatting outside to others, convicted and fined £250. Another woman, who had reluctantly agreed to join her boyfriend for a car journey to mark his birthday, was fined twice for the same outing. She appealed against the second fine, saying she could not have walked 13 miles home after being stopped the first time. Her appeal was rejected.
Fair Trials, a legal watchdog, says many of these fines are unjust and unlawful. But the system is set up to discourage anyone from challenging them, and only 2 per cent have been contested. Challenging your fine is a daunting process – and a secretive one.
If you don’t pay your fine, you are dealt with under the ‘Single Justice Procedure’, which is designed to stop cases going to court. Cases aren’t dealt with openly but are adjudicated by a magistrate and a legal clerk. Insiders refer to this as ‘Courtroom 78’. Lists of cases weren’t made public for the first six months of the pandemic and only became so because of lobbying from reporters. Little effort is made to notify someone that they’re the subject of an SJP. If you don’t spot your letter in the post, the ‘court’ cracks on anyway. A man from Reading found out he’d been fined via his local paper.
The courts are still struggling to keep up with the lockdown laws which criminalised so much of everyday life. If the authorities do take weeks to decide Starmer’s fate, it will be understandable. Thanks to him, they have rather a lot on!!

Some schools had 75% of kids in during the second lockdown. People absolutely wanted their kids in school.

Bizarre take.

People didn't shove their kids into hubs for a laugh, no. Many parents were however desperate to get their kids into school in the 2021 lockdown in particular, because of the obvious disadvantages of being left out.

Speaking as someone whose children were not amongst those considered worthy of schooling, socialisation and education, whilst nearly half of both my children's classes were in and getting all those things with better ratios, I don't blame the parents at all. They did what was best for their DC. I do blame the system. Those of us whose DC were in the collateral damage category have every right to speak about it.

That is utter bullshit. Because unless anyone has never left their home during this ENTIRE pandemic, any one of us could have unknowingly had Covid at any time and passed it onto someone, regardless of whatever restrictions were in place at the time.

Not really. It doesn't make your wider view any more rational.

If you dont follow restrictions, go to the supermarket after not following restrictions and stand beside granny at the till

Well plenty of people passed on covid while following restrictions. Many of them essential workers who kept society going. Are they all murderers too? 🙄