@powder That is a quite preposterous comparison. To compare measures to prevent or halt the spread of a virus which if left unchecked would rampage through an unvaccinated community and decimate it’s population with Hitler’s Nazi regime is crass and grossly distorted. Any reasonably intelligent person, no matter how bloody minded about protecting their personal rights whether to mask up in public or to accept the vaccine, would understand that the reasons behind the temporary inconvenience of compliance with these measures, in no way can be equated with the genocidal totalitarian Nazi German regime of the 1930s.

@powder “There is talk”….yes the fear is circulating….please try to get this into perspective!

.There are certainly some regimes around the world who would wish to implement greater control over the lives of their citizens, some may use this pandemic to put in place mandatory measures and keep them in place longer than necessary or even permanently. However I don’t believe you or I, or most people here, or in any western democratic societies are at the least risk of this eventuality. This, in my opinion, is merely yet another dangerous idea sown by people who are intent on fomenting fear and endless unrest by peddling alarmist theories on the internet. If we want to contain and combat this pandemic to a level where we can live with it under normal risk level, like the annual ‘flu’, we need firstly to get its transmission down to the levels where it is manageable, and no longer considered to be a pandemic. To do that we need to get a high percentage of the world’s population vaccinated, and until then we need to contain transmission by curtailing travel to and from high risk countries and by stopping unvaccinated and unmasked people inside our own populations from spreading the virus when in close contact with the general population at close quarters, especially at indoor crowded events and on public transport.

I think most of us regard this as reasonable, and understand that having to show some sort of pass or evidence to gain entry at present is necessary, and that it will not be permanent, although it may remain in place for some time until it’s deemed safe for society to dispense with such measures,

@powder What law changes? I never said it could be eliminated. I know it can’t be. When people are vaccinated they do not take the illness in as severe a form if they do get it, and they also are at reduced risk of passing it on. Nobody has claimed that any of the vaccines will 100% prevent transmission or risk. That is why I compared it to the annual influenza outbreaks. I don’t believe the Olympic Games should be going ahead with spectators, neither do most Japanese people. The recent Euro Football championships will probably have spikes in transmission following in its wake I’m sure.

@powder If you had said it was the Police, Crime & Sentencing Bill I’d have known what you were referring to. I thought it was a new Covid law that I hadn’t heard about. I already signed the petition against the new Tory Bill, but with 80 of a majority the likelihood of it being passed was always high. I think in the context of what we are discussing you have just conflated two different issues.

@powder Yes…it would, it really had nothing to do with the pandemic. The Tories under this Home Secretary would still have brought this Bill forward…Priti Patel is a right wing authoritarian of the worst sort, she was accused by several civil servants in more than one of the Departments where she’s been Minister, of bullying and swearing, the Parliamentary ombudsman for standards decided she’d broken the Ministerial code and should’ve been sacked. A top civil servant resigned over this incident in April, when Boris refused to sack her, and in fact backed her. She has an agenda to make her mark as the first female Asian Home Secretary that she’s been hatching from long before COVID was ever unleashed on the world.