Can we have some fcuking control on the airports from high risk countries please?

theological

Tenzor07 wrote: »

The Problem is we don't know where exactly this person came back from and it doesn't matter....For all we know he went away for the weekend and was already infected here in Ireland, was asymptomatic when he travelled, only displaying symptoms when he returned..

The actual issue here is that this individual failed to follow the guidelines as did his contacts... had he been responsible and isolated himself and got tested then we wouldn't all be talking about this case right now... This is a failure of personal responsibility and obligations to others by the character in question!

Legally restricting travel would ensure that we didn't have to rely on people following the guidance. Why isn't quarantine punishable with fines in Ireland still?

3xh

lawrencesummers wrote: »

It says in the piece he returned from holidays.
The majority of Irish people go to Spain on their holidays.

What the problem?

Please God you never serve on a jury.

3xh

Tenzor07 wrote: »

The Problem is we don't know where exactly this person came back from and it doesn't matter....For all we know he went away for the weekend and was already infected here in Ireland, was asymptomatic when he travelled, only displaying symptoms when he returned..

The actual issue here is that this individual failed to follow the guidelines as did his contacts... had he been responsible and isolated himself and got tested then we wouldn't all be talking about this case right now... This is a failure of personal responsibility and obligations to others by the character in question!

I agree with all this except to say, it’s important the government exemption, to their advised quarantine, for green country returnees is acknowledged here.

The guy could’ve been following the rules that people are saying he didn’t. They have no evidence or thought towards this point. Just full belief and trust in the Independent. It’s laughable.
And posters here fully disregard the actions of this mystery woman, too.

A responsible media group would correctly explain the HSE definitions of travel, close contact and community related transmissions in their articles.

Tenzor07

theological wrote: »

Legally restricting travel would ensure that we didn't have to rely on people following the guidance. Why isn't quarantine punishable with fines in Ireland still?

Don't you mean Legally enforce quarantine?

ShineOn7

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Man who failed to restrict movements after trip abroad led to 56 Covid-19 infections

https://www.thejournal.ie/man-failed-restrict-movements-56-cases-5237110-Oct2020/

Where was he from?

lawrencesummers

3xh wrote: »

Please God you never serve on a jury.

What country do you live in that asking a question should disqualify one from being a juror?

lawrencesummers

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Where was he from?

Ireland

Acosta

To be that much of a irresponsible moronic gob****e, the chances are he would have picked it up and spread it around even without travelling abroad.

lawrencesummers

lawrencesummers wrote: »

What country do you live in that asking a question should disqualify one from being a juror?

Ha. The problem with your post was not the question.

I travelled three times this year, to three different countries (excluding my essential visits to the UK). None of them was Spain. They were all places that had, at the time, had the virus more under control than Ireland. Therefore, had I caught COVID, I was more likely to have done so in my local pub (which I also frequented regularly)

In any case, this whole conversation is moot. Nothing is going to happen with travel & quarantine rules at this stage, other than the introduction of a fast testing regime at the airport

3xh

lawrencesummers wrote: »

What country do you live in that asking a question should disqualify one from being a juror?

Lawrence, you said this; ‘It says in the piece he returned from holidays.
The majority of Irish people go to Spain on their holidays.

What the problem?’

If one of my jurors, judging me, used a thought process like this, I’d be calling for a retrial!

You’ve read a highly agenda-ised (I know it’s not a word) article and simply assumed he broke quarantine advice because ‘the majority’ of Irish people holiday in Spain.

You don’t comprehend the three forms of transmission as per the HSE and how he simply cannot be responsible for the 56 cases. You also don’t acknowledge how the female in this article is also responsible for a number of the 56 cases.

And you ask what’s the problem and where do I live.

ShineOn7

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Ireland

Outstanding contribution

Thanks

washman3

lawrencesummers wrote: »

So travel isn’t a problem?


Travel clearly is a problem, but this piece would have you believe the “index case” is the problem with their behaviour when restrictions should have applied, testing should have been in place and follow up to check compliance happening.

Man who failed to restrict movements after trip abroad led to 56 Covid-19 infections

https://www.thejournal.ie/man-failed-restrict-movements-56-cases-5237110-Oct2020/

i'm now convinced this is a totally bull**** story, thrown out at the weekend to instill fear and prepare people for the 'big announcement'.
It supposedly happened in the MID-WEST concerning a GAA club that contested a County Final.
The original headline was the post match celebrations sparked the spread of cases.
What they did'nt know (or maybe hid) the fact that the team involved got an almighty trouncing in the final and went home with their tails between their legs. THERE WAS NO CELEBRATION.

MOH

3xh wrote: »

Lawrence, you said this; ‘It says in the piece he returned from holidays.
The majority of Irish people go to Spain on their holidays.

What the problem?’

If one of my jurors, judging me, used a thought process like this, I’d be calling for a retrial!

You do realise this is a discussion of a newspaper article on a public forum, and not the OJ Simpson trial?

Hold your horses there, Matlock

323

lawrencesummers wrote: »

So travel isn’t a problem?


Travel clearly is a problem, but this piece would have you believe the “index case” is the problem with their behaviour when restrictions should have applied, testing should have been in place and follow up to check compliance happening.

Man who failed to restrict movements after trip abroad led to 56 Covid-19 infections

https://www.thejournal.ie/man-failed-restrict-movements-56-cases-5237110-Oct2020/

The Journal!!!!!!... FFS. Must be true then

is_that_so

323 wrote: »

The Journal!!!!!!... FFS. Must be true then

"A report by the Department of Public Health in the midwest has outlined how one person who did not restrict his movements after returning from abroad led to 56 individuals in ten households and a sports team contracting Covid-19."

theological

Acosta wrote: »

To be that much of a irresponsible moronic gob****e, the chances are he would have picked it up and spread it around even without travelling abroad.

Sure, but this proves the point that international travel isn't consequence free and it also proves that a system that relies on people's goodwill to quarantine isn't good enough when this virus is still around.

Some people on this thread seem to think this is the only such case. I highly doubt it given precedent from elsewhere. This is why governments should have asked us to make the sacrifice to stay in our home country for one year. If that happened we'd be in a different place now in Europe.

3xh

MOH wrote: »

You do realise this is a discussion of a newspaper article on a public forum, and not the OJ Simpson trial?

Hold your horses there, Matlock

Haha!

Sometimes it’s more Judge Judy here than The Firm, the way some people go on with their thoughts.

lawrencesummers

3xh wrote: »

Lawrence, you said this; ‘It says in the piece he returned from holidays.
The majority of Irish people go to Spain on their holidays.

What the problem?’

If one of my jurors, judging me, used a thought process like this, I’d be calling for a retrial!

You’ve read a highly agenda-ised (I know it’s not a word) article and simply assumed he broke quarantine advice because ‘the majority’ of Irish people holiday in Spain.

You don’t comprehend the three forms of transmission as per the HSE and how he simply cannot be responsible for the 56 cases. You also don’t acknowledge how the female in this article is also responsible for a number of the 56 cases.

And you ask what’s the problem and where do I live.

Spain has for a number of years been the most popular destination for Irish people holidays.

You seem to miss the part where I said “presumably“ because presuming an Irish person went to Spain for their holidays isnt a stretch.

If you want to apply the musings of people on boards to the statements under oath in the midst of a criminal trial You will find yourself infinitely disappointed.

So presumably he went to Spain or some such place that Irish people tend to go for their holidays.

Is that ok your honor?

3xh

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Spain has for a number of years been the most popular destination for Irish people holidays.

You seem to miss the part where I said “presumably“ because presuming an Irish person went to Spain for their holidays isnt a stretch.

If you want to apply the musings of people on boards to the statements under oath in the midst of a criminal trial You will find yourself infinitely disappointed.

So presumably he went to Spain or some such place that Irish people tend to go for their holidays.

Is that ok your honor?

No, it’s not. I can tell you’re not aware that the request to quarantine is applicable to non-green list countries only.

This case obviously started months ago, if 56 are alleged to have been involved. Transmission, incubation, testing, awaiting, etc. Not last week. The Green list was a lot bigger when it came out.

That’s one thing.

The second thing is you swallowed whole the bit about this man infecting the woman who then infected others while she waited for her positive result to come back and so therefore he was responsible for all.

Not even the HSE/NPHET/Government who bring you this quarantine talk, accept that the guy would be responsible here. All 56 cases are not travel related. You accepted they are because the article said so. You’re wrong. And left unchecked, you’d go on to spout this nonsense to whoever will listen to you.

It’s important you understand how cases are notified, the part this alleged woman played in the 56 and how green countries’ returnees aren’t requested to quarantine.

The people queuing for Smyth’s again today are more likely to spread it. Do you know what those cases would be called then, Lawrence?

saabsaab

3xh wrote: »

No, it’s not. I can tell you’re not aware that the request to quarantine is applicable to non-green list countries only.

This case obviously started months ago, if 56 are alleged to have been involved. Transmission, incubation, testing, awaiting, etc. Not last week. The Green list was a lot bigger when it came out.

That’s one thing.

The second thing is you swallowed whole the bit about this man infecting the woman who then infected others while she waited for her positive result to come back and so therefore he was responsible for all.

Not even the HSE/NPHET/Government who bring you this quarantine talk, accept that the guy would be responsible here. All 56 cases are not travel related. You accepted they are because the article said so. You’re wrong. And left unchecked, you’d go on to spout this nonsense to whoever will listen to you.

It’s important you understand how cases are notified, the part this alleged woman played in the 56 and how green countries’ returnees aren’t requested to quarantine.

The people queuing for Smyth’s again today are more likely to spread it. Do you know what those cases would be called then, Lawrence?

Ultimately he certainly was as all those cases might not have happened otherwise!


It proves that travel is adding in a big way to the total.

3xh

saabsaab wrote: »

Ultimately he certainly was as all those cases might not have happened otherwise!


It proves that travel is adding in a big way to the total.

Well done. So you’re saying this man is responsible for this Garda being infectious today and attending an event when he should really have stayed at home to help save lives as it was not essential.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1019/1172546-garda-public-covid19/

saabsaab

saabsaab wrote: »

Ultimately he certainly was as all those cases might not have happened otherwise!


It proves that travel is adding in a big way to the total.

It proves nothing of the sort. It’s not whether travel is a risk. It’s whether travel is a BIGGER risk than whatever would have been done locally

I travelled to places with a lower prevalence per 100,000, which also actually had better COVID behaviour. If I had not travelled, I would have gone to the pub. Therefore I did not increase the risk.....in fact I lowered it.

The issue is in behaviour, not travel. Blaming travel in isolation is lazy, which is why those in charge who are thinking out the risk v impact have not stopped it

saabsaab

Deleted User wrote: »

It proves nothing of the sort. It’s not whether travel is a risk. It’s whether travel is a BIGGER risk than whatever would have been done locally

I travelled to places with a lower prevalence per 100,000, which also actually had better COVID behaviour. If I had not travelled, I would have gone to the pub. Therefore I did not increase the risk.....in fact I lowered it.

The issue is in behaviour, not travel. Blaming travel in isolation is lazy, which is why those in charge who are thinking out the risk v impact have not stopped it

That does not follow. Behaviours like traveling abroad ensure that you contact many others at airports, ferries trains etc etc.

saabsaab

saabsaab wrote: »

That does not follow. Behaviours like traveling abroad ensure that you contact many others at airports, ferries trains etc etc.

Not at all. If you’ve travelled you’d see how quiet everywhere is. I’ve never felt more socially distanced than in an airport the last few months. And as for ferries.... it’d be easy to not come within 20m of another human. If the travel itself were an issue don’t you think that there would be many many cabin crew having been infected?

Again, it’s not the travel, it’s the behaviour. And those that partied in Spain and brought it back would have partied equally in Ireland; a country of an equal COVID prevalence.

Tenzor07

saabsaab wrote: »

That does not follow. Behaviours like traveling abroad ensure that you contact many others at airports, ferries trains etc etc.

If you travel even once, you're basically guaranteed to get Covid and become Typhoid Mary in your little head...

lawrencesummers

3xh wrote: »

No, it’s not. I can tell you’re not aware that the request to quarantine is applicable to non-green list countries only.

This case obviously started months ago, if 56 are alleged to have been involved. Transmission, incubation, testing, awaiting, etc. Not last week. The Green list was a lot bigger when it came out.

That’s one thing.

The second thing is you swallowed whole the bit about this man infecting the woman who then infected others while she waited for her positive result to come back and so therefore he was responsible for all.

Not even the HSE/NPHET/Government who bring you this quarantine talk, accept that the guy would be responsible here. All 56 cases are not travel related. You accepted they are because the article said so. You’re wrong. And left unchecked, you’d go on to spout this nonsense to whoever will listen to you.

It’s important you understand how cases are notified, the part this alleged woman played in the 56 and how green countries’ returnees aren’t requested to quarantine.

The people queuing for Smyth’s again today are more likely to spread it. Do you know what those cases would be called then, Lawrence?

Naw, I just said he was probably in Spain.



Your the one who reckons this is special sitting of the special criminal court.

lawrencesummers

Deleted User wrote: »

Ha. The problem with your post was not the question.

I travelled three times this year, to three different countries (excluding my essential visits to the UK). None of them was Spain. They were all places that had, at the time, had the virus more under control than Ireland. Therefore, had I caught COVID, I was more likely to have done so in my local pub (which I also frequented regularly)

In any case, this whole conversation is moot. Nothing is going to happen with travel & quarantine rules at this stage, other than the introduction of a fast testing regime at the airport

Thanks for telling me about your wonderfully irrelevant travel.

The guy in the piece was probably in Spain. I can say it again if you want.

lawrencesummers

You can’t leave your county.
But you can leave the country.


Soon presumably you won’t be able to go 5km from your house or some such nonsense but you can fly to Spain.

saabsaab

When will they get basic common sense and stop non essential foreign travel. Its how it started and how it is still a major factor.

saabsaab

saabsaab wrote: »

When will they get basic common sense and stop non essential foreign travel. Its how it started and how it is still a major factor.

Micheal Martin in his speech made it pretty clear that was not going to happen, describing zero-COVID proponents as people who ‘mean well’. Other than schools perhaps closing if the unions kick off, this is the tightest that restrictions will ever go. I’m sure we’ll get quick testing in the airports at some stage though

So you can probably stop banging the drum now. Having been put firmly back in his box by MM, even McConkey didn’t mention foreign travel or zero-COVID on Claire Byrne