Off Topic Chat. (MOD NOTE post# 3949 and post#5279)

otmmyboy2

Mellor wrote: »

I'm not sure how legal is was at the time either tbh.
But how is that related to this law that was being discussed.
Trying to switch it to hypothetical future laws is moving the goalposts.

I did read something of an overview of the change in laws which facilitated the holocaust(my Ukranian/Russian isn't great and there are very few accounts of the legality used there compared to the study of Nazi lawmaking), but if you are curious as to the legal measures I suspect this wouldn't lead you astray:
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/law-justice-and-the-holocaust

There is a decent bit of reading there mind you.

What is you opinion of the guy? Was just a enthusiastic history buff.
Would you be ok with a jihadist possessing similar bomb making equipment?

Of that guy in particular, I honestly don't know. A lot of the stuff I've read about the case is rather sensationalist and thus does push you to thinking about him as an extremist, but taking that aside for a moment as a history buff myself and a firearms enthusiast to boot I could well fall into the same category of "guilty of possessing materials likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism", simply for some of the books I have on political ideologies and the aforementioned firearms.
Include historical weapons like swords and the like and I'm positively in the gaol already...

My major concern with his case is how a law abiding person could be imprisoned for simple possession of articles, which when taken with a particular view, could be construed as extremist.

It is just way too broad a law, in my opinion, to exist.

I mean when I was in school the anarchist's cookbook and similar literature was banned from the school internet.
Once that ban list was discovered all of the more technically inclined among the classes spent our free time trying to get around the filter to find those banned articles. Successfully I might add.

Thus from schoolkids possessing the anarchist cookbook(to take one example) would that be construed as "guilty of possessing materials likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism". By that judge's logic, potentially yes.
And I think that is abhorrent.
Unless it is acted upon with intent then I cannot consider that law as anything but an affront to what few freedoms remain in the UK.

Would you be ok with a jihadist possessing similar bomb making equipment?

Considering that, from what I read, his sole equipment for bomb making was the anarchist cookbook then sure, I see zero problem with an individual possessing that regardless of their political leaning or extremism.
The AC is such a cockamamie collection of lunacy that you are more likely to injure or kill yourself than anyone else following their "recipes".
Shortly after it's original publication it was called out as bait, simply to catch out would be "terrorists", and not taken particularly seriously thereafter.

So short answer, no, I don't think possessing a widely available(2 minute search on google will get you a nice pdf of it) and on it's own entirely legal piece of literature should result in someone getting jailed.

Very interesting. Thanks for posting

No prob, I do try and encourage people to move away from the traditional x axis of political leaning, but it is seriously entrenched in most people and political media outlets so it hasn't made too much headway so far.

Witcher

Uinseann_16 wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/new-garda-powers-bill-must-go-back-to-the-drawing-board-1.4595274
Although I picked up the warrantless part incorrectly it seems it was not just me who thought the forcing of passwords was a invasion of privacy

The person providing the password ensures things are brought before the courts faster and resolved.

The existing way is to seize the device and have it opened by IT which can take months/years which delays the resolution of cases which causes the taxpayer money.

otmmyboy2

Richard308 wrote: »

They don’t demand private and sensitive medical information. If you get a cert from your Gp it will not state what prohibits you from wearing a mask (unless your gp is an idiot). They’ll ask you have you one. If you volunteer this letter stating you are exempt from wearing a mask check mate. No issue.
It’s not hard to wear a mask/faceshield. It alleviates stress for people around you. They might be useless but if it reduces stress on someone else I’m only too happy to be considerate of those around me.

There is nothing in legislation which states you must carry anything to certify your exemption though, so the AGS demanding same has no basis in law, and so is not lawful for them to threaten people with arrest/fines if they don't provide something they are not obliged to, right?

And on the side of them being useless, if they are then wearing them or advocating for them is just theatre, like the security theatre at airports post 9/11.
Pointless, and should not be done.
Even worse, if they are indeed useless and you are not wearing one and get fined then you are essesntially, as you state, getting fined for not being "considerate".

That is appalling in a supposedly free democratic country, right up there with fines for not going to your nearest food shop, takeaway, etc.

Bog Trotter99

What you have is a flu like virus which if not understood and treated correctly, kills. Now we understand it, and can vaccinate against it. Now it only kills and harms the very old and infirm...............just as any other flu virus.

So do we have the same controls for all flu virus's or just this one?

If it was just normal flu they wouldn't have bought in so many restrictions as they have. But now it is just basically a normal flu like disease. So why all the draconian measure.

Unless they like the power?

Munsterlad102

Witcher wrote: »

It's airborne as an aerosol. Airborne doesn't mean it's a gas, it means that the droplets are being borne by air.

A mask prevents the expulsion of droplets and them becoming aerosolised during speech or a cough/sneeze.

https://www.livescience.com/face-mask-visualization-droplets-covid-19.html

I do know what airborne means, the existence of clouds proves that. I looked at the video you linked in the article, and it doesn't support your statement. It shows a homemade cloth mask being more effective than a professional grade mask and a thicker folded cloth handkerchief of the same material, seems a little bit suspicious. If cloth masks are so good, then why aren't they used in industry or medical scenarios? And why is a thinner layer better than a thicker layer, but we're told to wear more than one mask? It makes no sense. Ignoring all that, the article is nearly a year old, so is no doubt put out of date by recent studies.

Munsterlad102

badaj0z wrote: »

What is your source for this statement?

A friend told me about it about 2 months ago so I'd have to look for it. I know, it sounds sketchy, but his father is a practicing GP so he's not some random guy with no medical knowledge.

Richard308

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

A friend told me about it about 2 months ago so I'd have to look for it. I know, it sounds sketchy, but his father is a practicing GP so he's not some random guy with no medical knowledge.

Sounds like a random guy. A guy who knows a doctor? I know a few doctors would you believe me if I told you drinking bleach kills the virus? ;-)
I’m sure it would kill you and the virus. So don’t do it

BattleCorp

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

Let's be honest, it's not life a piece of cotton is going to stop you getting or spreading a microscopic airborne virus. Look at the masks people wear spray painting or ones used for biological or chemical warfare and compare that to what is supposed to stop a global pandemic. The masks are no more than a psychological technique to give the impression of change and help.

hiddenmongoose wrote: »

100%, set of boxers and jeans cant hold in a good fart that can clear a room but a homemade 1mm of leopard print fabric will save us all from the most deadly virus, its all just a pretense, to be seen doing something proactive

Masks do help. They help prevent the spread of droplets. Agreed, they don't totally prevent the spread of droplets, but they do reduce it.

Here's a non-technical explanation.



And here's the technical explanation.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) may spread through respiratory droplets released by infected individuals during coughing, sneezing, or speaking. Given the limited supply of professional respirators and face masks, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recommended home-made cloth face coverings for use by the general public. While there have been several studies on aerosol filtration performance of household fabrics, their effectiveness at blocking larger droplets has not been investigated. Here, we ascertained the performance of 11 common household fabrics at blocking large, high-velocity droplets, using a commercial medical mask as a benchmark. We also assessed the breathability (air permeability), texture, fiber composition, and water absorption properties of the fabrics. We found that most fabrics have substantial blocking efficiency (median values >70%). In particular, two layers of highly permeable fabric, such as T-shirt cloth, blocks droplets with an efficiency (>94%) similar to that of medical masks, while being approximately twice as breathable. The first layer allows about 17% of the droplet volume to transmit, but it significantly reduces their velocity. This allows the second layer to trap the transmitted droplets resulting in high blocking efficacy. Overall, our study suggests that cloth face coverings, especially with multiple layers, may help reduce droplet transmission of respiratory infections. Furthermore, face coverings made from materials such as cotton fabrics allow washing and reusing, and can help reduce the adverse environmental effects of widespread use of commercial disposable and non-biodegradable facemasks.

Source:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352431620301802

Uinseann_16

Witcher wrote: »

The person providing the password ensures things are brought before the courts faster and resolved.

The existing way is to seize the device and have it opened by IT which can take months/years which delays the resolution of cases which causes the taxpayer money.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/arrests/right_to_silence_in_criminal_cases.html#

This is the sticking points many states in the US and a few countries have deemed the forcing of passwords violates a right to not incriminate yourself ie right to silence
Phones are not just hard drives for illegal things
They hold people's entire lives and need to be viewed in a different light than just a storage device due to the sheer amount of information stored in them that you would find nowhere else

badaj0z

The mask debate offers fruitful ground in future years for some research on the topic of natural selection.

Grizzly 45

Richard308 wrote: »

They don’t demand private and sensitive medical information. If you get a cert from your Gp it will not state what prohibits you from wearing a mask (unless your gp is an idiot). They’ll ask you have you one. If you volunteer this letter stating you are exempt from wearing a mask check mate. No issue.
It’s not hard to wear a mask/faceshield. It alleviates stress for people around you. They might be useless but if it reduces stress on someone else I’m only too happy to be considerate of those around me.

Im sorry .Im not in the habit of giving people information they are not entitled to or making people "comfortable" around me either.
If you want to hand out your info and wear a bit of t-shirt as "protection" even with this farcical "droplet catcher" explanation.W and has been proven to be now an utter joke if you have people like Dr Faucci advocating wearing two or more masks.[Why wasn't one enough from the word go?] Well go ahead...Seeing that you are also buying into the "it's only..." story as well. "its only a mask...Its only a doctors letter,digital cert to enter any shops or public utility,building.Its only a jab,that you must renew every 6months to participate in society..etc etc."

Grizzly 45

BattleCorp wrote: »

Masks do help. They help prevent the spread of droplets. Agreed, they don't totally prevent the spread of droplets, but they do reduce it.

.

So maybe stand far away out of range from the others piss stream?...Problem sorted too.:)
Ok can any of you tell us as to what parts per million of Covid bacteria is needed to infect a healthy individual?

Jeeze how did we get so OT from a possible ban on semi-auto rifles here,to using watersports examples to avoid Covid???:D
Gotta love boards shooting threads:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

tudderone

The Chinese making up "Franken-animals", sewing rats together, swapping organs etc. No wonder the dreaded lurgy sprang from their labs. It reminds me of the Churchill quote of the "Lights of perverted science" :mad:.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-9696597/Chinese-scientists-force-male-rats-BIRTH.html

JP22

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

...................Jeeze how did we get so OT from a possible ban on semi-auto rifles here,to using watersports examples to avoid Covid???:D Gotta love boards shooting reads:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

All part of the fun & crac Grizz, take a breather, relax………….:D:D

Ask an Irish man/woman directions or a question and before you get an answer you get asked several questions back. Before you know it your sitting at their kitchen table having coffee/sambos/cake and life is great, you don’t care anymore if your lost…………:)

It’s what makes us who and what we are; we can use the F*** word in a hundred different ways without ever cursing/insulting or belittling anyone.

The English may claim to have invented the language, but Irish people speak and use it better than anyone else.

Grizzly 45

Is it true the Irish will answer a question with another question?
Who told you that? :P:D:D:D
Yeah,we re the only race who make themselves the butt of our own jokes,and where "cultural appropriation" dies a very quick death.
After all everyone's "Irish" on March 17th

yubabill

BattleCorp wrote: »

Masks do help. They help prevent the spread of droplets. Agreed, they don't totally prevent the spread of droplets, but they do reduce it.

Here's a non-technical explanation.



And here's the technical explanation.

The hole in that argument is that, yes, CV-19 may spread in droplets, it also may spread by aerosol.

CV is a virus - little more than a few molecules in a sheath - and it does not require to be in droplets. It can pass through fabric like water through a sieve. Bacteria are much, much larger than viruses and cannot easily disperse through the aerosol method. they really get dispersed by droplets.

So masks are only useful for droplets.

What I mean is that they are far from 100% effective and are IMHO a sop to confidence.

BattleCorp

yubabill wrote: »

The hole in that argument is that, yes, CV-19 may spread in droplets, it also may spread by aerosol.

CV is a virus - little more than a few molecules in a sheath - and it does not require to be in droplets. It can pass through fabric like water through a sieve. Bacteria are much, much larger than viruses and cannot easily disperse through the aerosol method. they really get dispersed by droplets.

So masks are only useful for droplets.

What I mean is that they are far from 100% effective and are IMHO a sop to confidence.

You are the scientist so you know what you are talking about but if masks only help contain some of the droplets (and the study I linked to says they contain a lot more than some), they are at least lowering the risk posed by droplets. Any sensible measure that gets rid of some of the risk has to be worthwhile. I honestly don't know why so many people are anti-mask. It's not that difficult to wear a mask when you can't keep 2m away from people (shops/public transport etc.)

Uinseann_16

Main thing is washing your hands , alcohol destroys the lipid in a virus , and it should be done in general too
I haven't had a head cold in 15 months because dirty basterds are finally washing their hands

Richard308

Uinseann_16 wrote: »

Main thing is washing your hands , alcohol destroys the lipid in a virus , and it should be done in general too
I haven't had a head cold in 15 months because dirty basterds are finally washing their hands

True that. Amazing how hygiene helps. Some lad picking his nose (or worse place) then 20 minutes later shaking your hand.

BattleCorp

Uinseann_16 wrote: »

Main thing is washing your hands , alcohol destroys the lipid in a virus , and it should be done in general too
I haven't had a head cold in 15 months because dirty basterds are finally washing their hands

You also stayed the fcuk away from other people too for 15 months. That also helps avoiding colds etc.

Cass

Don't wanna get into this debate, but the above begs the question, how does covid still spread if contact is reduced/eliminated and personal hygiene is so high that the cold/flu has almost disappeared?

Feisar

Cass wrote: »

Don't wanna get into this debate, but the above begs the question, how does covid still spread if contact is reduced/eliminated and personal hygiene is so high that the cold/flu has almost disappeared?

Richard308

Cass wrote: »

Don't wanna get into this debate, but the above begs the question, how does covid still spread if contact is reduced/eliminated and personal hygiene is so high that the cold/flu has almost disappeared?

Because people don’t follow the guidelines. Alcohol helps blur them completely

tudderone

Just spent the last week in bed with the filthiest cold i've ever had. So colds and flu's are still to be had for the asking.

BattleCorp

Cass wrote: »

Don't wanna get into this debate, but the above begs the question, how does covid still spread if contact is reduced/eliminated and personal hygiene is so high that the cold/flu has almost disappeared?

It spreads through close contact.

It's impossible to eliminate contact completely.

We shop, we interact with other people, we socialise etc. You can't 100% eliminate close contact unless you are on your own and self-sufficient on a little island somewhere.

And besides, a good chunk of the country aren't socially distancing or obeying the rules. We've had funerals near me that have had hundreds at it and then back to a pub/house etc. for a skin full. We've teenagers partying and all swigging out of the same bottle of vodka or passing around a joint. We've people calling in to check on relatives and actually giving them covid because they were asymptomatic.

Hey, I'm not without sin either to be honest. I've tried my best to obey the rules but I've had the odd slip-up. Had a socially distanced BBQ with a few drinks with the next door neighbour late last year and guess what, the social distancing goes out the window when one is three sheets to the wind.

It's not practical to maintain social distancing for 15 months but I'm trying.

Cass

Richard308 wrote: »

Because people don’t follow the guidelines.

BattleCorp wrote: »

It spreads through close contact.

It's impossible to eliminate contact completely.

Again if the close contact is the method of spreading then why does the flu/cold not spread with the same contact?

Just to be clear I'm not arguing for or against this, in any capacity. Its just something that "bothers" me when I hear it as it doesn't seem to make sense. Both require close contact yet one spreads easily with such close contact while the other seems to have disappeared with a reported (IIRC) 97% drop in cases reported.

Even though, according to WHO, CDC, HSE, etc, the flu/cold is more easily transmitted and has a shorter incubation time.

Let me ask this. Is there any chance that severe flu cases wee mis-identified as covid given the claimed inaccuracy of the PCR testing? I know one is a virus, the other an infection, but something has to be going on with the figures given the rise in covid, subsequent drop in flu/cold, yet the method of spread is the same.

Again, not arguing some conspiracy, just curious.

Cass

tudderone wrote: »

Just spent the last week in bed with the filthiest cold i've ever had. So colds and flu's are still to be had for the asking.

Bummer. Survive a pandemic to be taken out with a poxxy flu.


I rarely suffered from such. Got a cold once or twice (runny nose, loss of smell, slight cough) but never bed ridden or anything close to it.

tudderone

Cass wrote: »

Bummer. Survive a pandemic to be taken out with a poxxy flu.


I rarely suffered from such. Got a cold once or twice (runny nose, loss of smell, slight cough) but never bed ridden or anything close to it.

I had two tee-shirts, two jumpers, two bodywarmers, two blankets, a woolly hat and then an old army sleeping bag on me and my teeth were still chattering with the cold, meanwhile it was 30+ degrees outside

I did think i had the dreaded lurgy, information is difficult to find, as in how to get tested or what to do

Cass

Yeahhhhhhhhh.............. you're as good as dead. Sorry for your own loss.

Grizzly 45

BattleCorp wrote: »

. I honestly don't know why so many people are anti-mask. It's not that difficult to wear a mask when you can't keep 2m away from people (shops/public transport etc.)

As Yuba said, they are more a sop to be seen to be doing something,[and a bit of a social control experiment too IMO].As well as the fact its a pointless operation with people not wearing them properly,taking them off properly,cleaning them properly.How many people have you seen dragging some ol gammy much used cloth out of their pocket and put that on before going into a shop? Not to mind those men who decide to hide their features behind a big gamey mass of hair called a beard.One of the best dirt and disease collectors going about .Kind of prevents a good seal with your facial hair leaking it all over the place.