Covid restrictions extended to 19/7/2021. Your views on how this will pan out.

[Eyersey468]

While I have never disputed some form of measures were necessary, I have always been of the opinion that completely shutting things down caused far more harm than good.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Personally I’d like to see how many collectively died of other ailments aside from Covid.

 

[Eyersey468]

Personally I’d like to see how many collectively died of other ailments aside from Covid.

So would I. I have thought for a long time the number of collateral deaths will outweigh Covid deaths

 

[NorthKent1989]

While I have never disputed some form of measures were necessary, I have always been of the opinion that completely shutting things down caused far more harm than good.

As I’ve said, lockdown#1 was necessary, we had no idea what we were dealing with, the only thing I would say is that they should have kept vital appointments face to face and this is where we see that lockdowns can cause more issues than solve them.

Lockdown #2, I’ll concede and say it might’ve been necessary, especially if the stupid tier systems hadn’t been out in place, however lockdown#3 is a no no, it should have been loose restrictions but as the vaccine was being rolled out another lockdown isn’t necessary, all we’ve done is given our children and grandchildren a debt they’ll resent us for for generations to come, in the long run we will find that the restrictions from Xmas onwards haven’t made a difference and have only contributed to mental health issues, I’ll maintain that at this point the government only wants to be seen to be doing something by those who to be Frank, have come from a background in which they’re either financially secure with a big house or can work from home or just enjoy telling others what to do.

So would I. I have thought for a long time the number of collateral deaths will outweigh Covid deaths

In time I hope we will find this out, an inquiry must take place

 

[Eyersey468]

In time I hope we will find this out, an inquiry must take place

I agree but fear an inquiry will just be a whitewash

 

[quantinghome]

I’ll maintain that at this point the government only wants to be seen to be doing something by those who to be Frank, have come from a background in which they’re either financially secure with a big house or can work from home or just enjoy telling others what to do.

You're not being 'frank' though - you're just casting aspersions.

In time I hope we will find this out, an inquiry must take place

On this at least we agree.

 

[NorthKent1989]

You're not being 'frank' though - you're just casting aspersions.

No I’m being Frank, it’s just you don’t like my view and that’s fine, but I’m not lying in saying that those financially better off haven’t exactly fought back against lockdowns either.

I agree but fear an inquiry will just be a whitewash

Indeed, it’ll be all high fives and self congratulatory smugness all the while the high street is dead, economy in the toilet, the NHS being broken up by various billionaires, and depression and suicide rates will be at an all time high.

 

[quantinghome]

No I’m being Frank, it’s just you don’t like my view and that’s fine, but I’m not lying in saying that those financially better off haven’t exactly fought back against lockdowns either.

OK, fair to say you are giving a frank account of your personal views.

The fact is that very few people are actually 'fighting back against lockdowns'. But there's no data available to say how financially well off they are so we are left with our personal impressions, nothing more.

 

[MikeWM]

I agree but fear an inquiry will just be a whitewash

Yes - I'll save everyone the effort and money: 'we should have locked down sooner and probably harder (and please don't look too closely at the places that didn't but somehow didn't end up any worse)'.

 

[NorthKent1989]

OK, fair to say you are giving a frank account of your personal views.

The fact is that very few people are actually 'fighting back against lockdowns'. But there's no data available to say how financially well off they are so we are left with our personal impressions, nothing more.

And you have proof of that there’s only so few people fighting back against lockdowns have you?

There have been numerous protests that have grown in number in recent months in most cities, there’s going to be two this weekend in London alone.

OK, fair to say you are giving a frank account of your personal views.

And you haven’t done that have you?

 

[quantinghome]

And you have proof of that there’s only so few people fighting back against lockdowns have you?

There have been numerous protests that have grown in number in recent months in most cities, there’s going to be two this weekend in London alone.

They're at a pretty low level - hardly at Poll Tax or Iraq War numbers. And it's got to be said they haven't exactly been a PR success, what with anti-vaxxers like Piers Corbyn involved and journalists being threatened.

And you haven’t done that have you?

Of course I've given my personal view - nothing wrong in that. But I hope to avoid turning my personal views into sweeping statements without evidencing them.

 

[NorthKent1989]

They're at a pretty low level - hardly at Poll Tax or Iraq War numbers. And it's got to be said they haven't exactly been a PR success, what with anti-vaxxers like Piers Corbyn involved and journalists being threatened.


Of course I've given my personal view - nothing wrong in that. But I hope to avoid turning my personal views into sweeping statements without evidencing them.

Well based on how the media have ignored those protests by and large with the BBC saying that only 350 people are attended it’s not surprising you wouldn’t know the true facts, my friends went to the last one and the West End was in gridlock with marchers, so you’re wrong in saying that they’re no where near the levels of the Poll Tax or The Iraq war marches.

Your last paragraph you’ve done exactly what you said you don’t do, made sweeping statements without evidence with your claim that lockdown marches aren’t at the same levels as the Poll Tax or Iraq war.

I don’t agree with Journalists being threatened but the media is complicit in what’s gone on.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Well based on how the media have ignored those protests by and large with the BBC saying that only 350 people are attended it’s not surprising you wouldn’t know the true facts, my friends went to the last one and the West End was in gridlock with marchers, so you’re wrong in saying that they’re no where near the levels of the Poll Tax or The Iraq war marches.

I mean, saying it was "gridlock with marchers" says literally nothing about the actual number though does it.
Even pretty small protests (of say a few hundred or thousand) can seem pretty big when you are in the crowd and can cause gridlock too.
The Iraq war protests got around a million people at their peaks. Are you really trying to claim the anti lockdown protests have been that big?

 

[35B]

Well based on how the media have ignored those protests by and large with the BBC saying that only 350 people are attended it’s not surprising you wouldn’t know the true facts, my friends went to the last one and the West End was in gridlock with marchers, so you’re wrong in saying that they’re no where near the levels of the Poll Tax or The Iraq war marches.

Your last paragraph you’ve done exactly what you said you don’t do, made sweeping statements without evidence with your claim that lockdown marches aren’t at the same levels as the Poll Tax or Iraq war.

I don’t agree with Journalists being threatened but the media is complicit in what’s gone on.

Except that the BBC didn’t say that that demo only had 350 people, and the lie in which it was asserted has been effectively debunked - as shown previously on here.

The one piece of footage I’ve seen of what I believe to be the march you’re talking about suggests a decent size crowd, but nothing like the million alleged. Gridlock is possible with a small march - I’ve seen it due to a couple of hundred marching in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

[quantinghome]

Except that the BBC didn’t say that that demo only had 350 people, and the lie in which it was asserted has been effectively debunked - as shown previously on here.

The one piece of footage I’ve seen of what I believe to be the march you’re talking about suggests a decent size crowd, but nothing like the million alleged. Gridlock is possible with a small march - I’ve seen it due to a couple of hundred marching in the wrong place at the wrong time.

A reminder of the fabricated BBC story: The BBC did not claim 350 people attended anti-lockdown protests - Full Fact

And a salutary reminder of the difficulties in predicting crowd sizes: March for Freedom: London, 29 May, 2021 – Architects for Social Housing (ASH). Here the claim is 'up to a million' marched, based on the fact that 'the march took 2 hours to pass a given point'. For those numbers to work you'd need 140 people passing the given point every second for 7200 seconds.

From the look of the photos it wasn't merely anti-lockdown protesters - looks like a whole brew of anti-vaxxers, BBC bashers, 'free Assange' campaigners, Bill Gates haters, covid-deniers, 'Nuremberg II' (huh?).

 

[NorthKent1989]

I mean, saying it was "gridlock with marchers" says literally nothing about the actual number though does it.
Even pretty small protests (of say a few hundred or thousand) can seem pretty big when you are in the crowd and can cause gridlock too.
The Iraq war protests got around a million people at their peaks. Are you really trying to claim the anti lockdown protests have been that big?

Not claiming at all, it did achieve that, it’s no way a few hundred people could bring the entire length of Oxford Street from Hyde Park down to Westminster and Tottenham Court Road to a standstill I haven’t been to one yet, but several of my family and friends have gone and the last one was near a million.

Bear in mind there’s going to be two days of protests this weekend….

Except that the BBC didn’t say that that demo only had 350 people, and the lie in which it was asserted has been effectively debunked - as shown previously on here.

The one piece of footage I’ve seen of what I believe to be the march you’re talking about suggests a decent size crowd, but nothing like the million alleged. Gridlock is possible with a small march - I’ve seen it due to a couple of hundred marching in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I know you don’t like the fact that lockdowns are unpopular but I trust the people I know a bit more than the BBC who give a slanted view on everything at best.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Not claiming at all, it did achieve that, it’s no way a few hundred people could bring the entire length of Oxford Street from Hyde Park down to Westminster and Tottenham Court Road to a standstill I haven’t been to one yet, but several of my family and friends have gone and the last one was near a million.

Bear in mind there’s going to be two days of protests this weekend….

So once again - you are trying to say these protests have been bigger than the anti Iraq war ones? Right.
And you are providing literally no sources apart from "family and friends" who were there (so couldn't have had a clue how big the crowd actually was because in a large crowed you have no idea how many are there or not).

I know you don’t like the fact that lockdowns are unpopular but I trust the people I know a bit more than the BBC who give a slanted view on everything at best.

How do they "know" there were a million there then?
Did your family and friends count everyone? Did they have access to drones / helicopter views so they could actually see the real size of the crowd? No?
An amount of skepticism in the media is healthy. But literally making up numbers is lets say going too far the other way!

 

[NorthKent1989]

So once again - you are trying to say these protests have been bigger than the anti Iraq war ones? Right.
And you are providing literally no sources apart from "family and friends" who were there (so couldn't have had a clue how big the crowd actually was because in a large crowed you have no idea how many are there or not).

I never said bigger but I said as Big but on par, and again why is my source any less reliable than the media? The fact is lockdowns have become increasingly unpopular these Past months.

 

[WelshBluebird]

why is my source any less reliable than the media

I literally spelled it out. Your friends and family have literally zero way of accurately counting or seeing the size of the crowd when they are in that crowd.
I've been to busy football matches and concerts. When you are in the middle of those crowds you literally can't tell how large those crowds are.
Especially when you move that onto crowded streets. A few thousand could easily seem bigger.

The fact is lockdowns have become increasingly unpopular these Past months.

Lockdowns being unpopular literally has nothing to do with the size of a protest though.
Lots of things are unpopular - that doesn't automatically mean they get large million plus marches. In reality very very few things do.
So lockdown being unpopular in no way is proof that the marches were as big as you / your family and friends are claiming.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I literally spelled it out. Your friends and family have literally zero way of accurately counting or seeing the size of the crowd when they are in that crowd.
I've been to busy football matches and concerts. When you are in the middle of those crowds you literally can't tell how large those crowds are.
Especially when you move that onto crowded streets. A few thousand could easily seem bigger.

Lockdowns being unpopular literally has nothing to do with the size of a protest though.
Lots of things are unpopular - that doesn't automatically mean they get large million plus marches. In reality very very few things do.
So lockdown being unpopular in no way is proof that the marches were as big as you / your family and friends are claiming.

Okay so you spelled it out, just like I spelled it out that large parts of the West End was gridlocked, much like the 2003 Iraq War protests! So that equates to a fair amount of people above tens of thousands

 

[WelshBluebird]

Okay so you spelled it out, just like I spelled it out that large parts of the West End was gridlocked, much like the 2003 Iraq War protests! So that equates to a fair amount of people above tens of thousands

The point I am trying to make though is saying that "large parts of the west end were gridlocked" means literally nothing. It just means "a large number of people" which could be anywhere from hundreds to thousands to tens of thousands to more. It literally tells us nothing about the actual size of the protest.

Accurately judging the size of large crowds is actually fairly difficult (which is why estimates for large protests and gatherings tends to be a fairly large range). Especially things like marches where the very fact you are marching from A - B means you will cause disruption over a large area. I live in Bristol so am fairly used to protests causing chaos in the city centre and yet these are usually fairly small of just tens to hundreds of people normally (my understanding is the more recent ones here have still been just a few thousand at most - looking at the pictures you'd think it was more!). Because of the way these marches move, if you are in the crowd (or just seeing images of part of it) it is easy to think they are larger than what they actually are.

 

[35B]

Okay so you spelled it out, just like I spelled it out that large parts of the West End was gridlocked, much like the 2003 Iraq War protests! So that equates to a fair amount of people above tens of thousands

The police close roads when there's a march on, so a route down Oxford Street and Charing Cross Road towards Westminster is likely to be disruptive. If it takes the march an hour to pass a given point (and I think I remember the Countryside March taking 6 hours), then that's at least an hour that those roads are closed, probably nearer 90 minutes to allow police to put the road closures in place before the march gets there. I live in a smallish town where there's an annual St George's Day parade. It causes traffic problems here despite only taking about 15 minutes to pass, and involving a maximum of a couple of hundred people.

No one's arguing that there weren't a lot of people on that march, or that it didn't cause disruption, or that the people you know who were on it were lying; just that the impression from within the march was a distorted picture. What just isn't credible is the claim that it was a million person march - the crowds flocking to a march that big would have been noticeable and commented on in the news because of the mass travel.

 

[NorthKent1989]

The police close roads when there's a march on, so a route down Oxford Street and Charing Cross Road towards Westminster is likely to be disruptive. If it takes the march an hour to pass a given point (and I think I remember the Countryside March taking 6 hours), then that's at least an hour that those roads are closed, probably nearer 90 minutes to allow police to put the road closures in place before the march gets there. I live in a smallish town where there's an annual St George's Day parade. It causes traffic problems here despite only taking about 15 minutes to pass, and involving a maximum of a couple of hundred people.

No one's arguing that there weren't a lot of people on that march, or that it didn't cause disruption, or that the people you know who were on it were lying; just that the impression from within the march was a distorted picture. What just isn't credible is the claim that it was a million person march - the crowds flocking to a march that big would have been noticeable and commented on in the news because of the mass travel.

Because the news have been so reliable this year haven’t they? The news has been pro lockdown from the beginning of course they’re not going to report on it, that proves my point!

It was closer to a million than a few hundred or tens of thousands, quite Frankly I’m more inclined to believe the people who went than you since you’ve most likely not gone to the protest, so therefore you can say what you like about there not being as many people as the very people who marched claimed, but they’d have a better idea than you

 

[Cowley]

I think everything that needs to be said has been said in this thread has been said now. We’ve somewhat drifted off topic anyway and the best thing to do now is to wait until the date in the title and see what happens unless there’s some major news announcement that changes things.
Thanks folks.