One guy did get a ticket....a guy wearing a mask was ticketed for arguing with some of the protesters. I wish I was joking.
|
|
|
Covid-19
- Thread starter Mountain Man
- Start date
Chinook Arch
Active Member
Another new record of cases in Alberta, and it's probably going to get worse before it gets better, especially with the crowds at the mall on the weekend.
Also as a side note, I'm not making light of the anti-mask protesters, but it's important for people to remember that it's only two or three hundred people out in a city of 1.5 Million, and some of those protesters probably aren't even from Calgary. If the police were smart they would show up at the next protest and hand out fines early before the crowd gets large. It's an easy way to get those fines going all in one spot, and you'll have media coverage of it.
It will make some of those people think twice about doing it. There will be some hardcore folks that will protest again, fines or no fines, but the key is to get those guys on that next protest, and eventually most will back off - If they don't they can help fund our tax base. It's also a good way to send the message to other anti-maskers around the city.
Also as a side note, I'm not making light of the anti-mask protesters, but it's important for people to remember that it's only two or three hundred people out in a city of 1.5 Million, and some of those protesters probably aren't even from Calgary. If the police were smart they would show up at the next protest and hand out fines early before the crowd gets large. It's an easy way to get those fines going all in one spot, and you'll have media coverage of it.
It will make some of those people think twice about doing it. There will be some hardcore folks that will protest again, fines or no fines, but the key is to get those guys on that next protest, and eventually most will back off - If they don't they can help fund our tax base. It's also a good way to send the message to other anti-maskers around the city.
heightjunkie
Active Member
I know of 3 businesses in the Edmonton area that are voluntarily closing in the next week. They are doing it for two reasons: 1) even though they are allowed to stay open business has been extremely slow as many people are still afraid of coming out. They are losing money staying open at this point. 2) if they close, they will qualify for federal government assistance, and that seems like the best route to staying above water at this point.
JonnyCanuck
Senior Member
The heading says it all.
I also read somewhere that authorities were reluctant to ticket protestors as they had gathered for fear of provoking hostilities. Something about ticketing them after the protest ....sure ... after they left the area?
Frustration, finger pointing over lack of ticketing at Alberta anti-mask rallies
Questions are being raised as to why fines were not handed out to hundreds of Albertans who participated in anti-mask demonstrations.
calgary.ctvnews.ca
I also read somewhere that authorities were reluctant to ticket protestors as they had gathered for fear of provoking hostilities. Something about ticketing them after the protest ....sure ... after they left the area?
darwink
Senior Member
Tell them that they will use facial recognition to issue tickets -- maybe that will get them wearing masks!!
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Let's start a counter-conspiracy, "Big Government is after your personal information and face so they can track you. Wear a mask and stop the them from stealing your identity!"*
* unrelated, but you might accidentally save lives by wearing a mask from reducing the spread of deadly pathogens.
Last edited:
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Tickets have been issued to organizers of that event, so the word is out. Now we see how many are willing to risk a fine to be a super spreader lol.
Nimbus
Active Member
Fines need to be higher, especially for the three charged that appear to be the main organizers. $1200 isn't enough, $10,000+ and hit them hard.
Agreed.$1,200 may be a good sized hit to one person, but when multiple supporters chip in, it’s nothing.
darwink
Senior Member
It is sad to see the realization in our politicians eyes, that they didn't really understand what was happening until too late, with people switching to indoor gatherings after having it relatively under control. Having the kids back in school increased the rate but by a controllable amount (we would have got through the winter). But indoor social gatherings really increased the rate - almost to 2 it seems. Hopefully that will show changes in a few weeks.
It is crazy though - I don't think they internalized that changes take 6 weeks, and that the math in the mean time is just awful.
It is crazy though - I don't think they internalized that changes take 6 weeks, and that the math in the mean time is just awful.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
This pretty much sums Kenney up.
He needs to resign immediately. Completely incompetent little dipshit. I can't believe we had this wiener as Minister of National Defence for years. Lucky we weren't f*ckin nuked with this lil b*tch sucking his thumb looking around asking what's going on. What a little c*nt.
(obviously all insults in the above post are meant in gender neutral, non-mysoginystic ways.... I'm extra-eeeemely queer
)
He needs to resign immediately. Completely incompetent little dipshit. I can't believe we had this wiener as Minister of National Defence for years. Lucky we weren't f*ckin nuked with this lil b*tch sucking his thumb looking around asking what's going on. What a little c*nt.
(obviously all insults in the above post are meant in gender neutral, non-mysoginystic ways.... I'm extra-eeeemely queer
)
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Lockdown #2, stay safe and stay sane everyone!
JonnyCanuck
Senior Member
Unfortunately strict measures became necessary because of a lack of personal responsibility. That percentage of the population that does not adhere to guidance (masks/ physical distancing/ handwashing) whether it be in private or in public (ie 'freedom' mob), pretty much caused this to happen. Government and the medical community just did not trust citizens at large enough to get us through this second wave. What lessons we learned from the first wave, were forgotten by many.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_action_problem
Broken record alert: it was always entirely predictable that relying on personal responsibility would fail. Government and public systems exist in a large part to address collective action problems and public health in the face of a easy-to-spread disease is about as perfect of example that exists.
While many/most follow every rule, some can't (1), some won't (2), some make mistakes (3). Adding up all the people that can't + won't + make mistakes in the face of a problem that grows exponentially is the problem. The virus doesn't care if you are an anti-masker yelling in someone's face, or a front-line service worker with a large family at home that you have no choice to interact with in close quarters - the virus treats any chance the same: if you are close to an infected person with poor ventilation you risk infection. You can spread it on just as easily as well, often before you are symptomatic. So you can do everything right and still spread it.
Even if we didn't have people who won't follow the rules and no one makes mistakes (despite shifting guidance and mixed messages on how to be safe over many months), you don't solve the people that can't. Here's where government supports are needed to keep as many people that can't help it be as safe as possible. Each program comes with more challenges and more opportunities to lose some people in the process: program has to be generous enough to change behaviour, people have to know about them, people have to be able to apply. All the regular education, language and cultural challenges also apply here that need to be addressed to get as many people as possible begin acting safer.
So when we look for who to blame, yes we should blame individuals that have all the opportunity but choose not to follow the rules. But there's a lot of blame that should be directed to the only party that had the tools, resources and coordination capability to solve collective action problems: the government.
ByeByeBaby
Active Member
Absolutely, a complete lack of personal responsibility led to this crisis, and this set of restrictions*. But enough about Jason Kenney.
Obviously not everybody followed all of the rules. Look at a road for two minutes, and tell me again how it's reasonable to expect every single person to strictly follow all the rules in a serious life-or-death situation. (And everybody on that road has learned all the rules, and passed a test.) It's completely obvious that some people will bend the rules, and the rules have been complicated and confusing and ever-changing.
Also, even if everybody followed the rules, the rules have been obviously too lax. Want to sweat and breathe heavily in a spin class -- something that has been linked to multiple outbreaks in both Calgary and Edmonton? Completely within the rules until November 13, when cases had quadrupled from September levels. Still completely within the rules today if you drive 15 minutes to Cochrane. Want a 50 person wedding? Or a 15 person keg party in your studio apartment? 100% within the rules until November 24, when the province had gone from 1 death a day in October to 10 a day, and after Jason Kenney had spent more than a month saying people shouldn't, even though he was the only person in the province in the power to actually make that happen. Want to get hammered at a bar, with no mask (since you're drinking)? Still allowed until 10 PM this Saturday night.
Government trusted the public entirely too much; if they had trusted us a little less, we probably could have had a less stringent and/or shorter lockdown in November, rather than over the important social/retail season of Christmas, and with hundreds of fewer deaths, and thousands of fewer cases. You can look back at old posts and see people saying this in real time, without the benefit of hindsight.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned much is that the higher the cases go up, the longer it takes for them to go down under the same circumstances. Say we can half the number of new cases every X days. We'll be over 2000 new cases a day by the time there's any effect from the new rules. If we want to get back down to 125 or so a day - the September number - then that's 4 halvings needed. If we'd done an equally effective restriction on November 1, when we had 500 cases a day and the exponential growth was clear, then we'd only need two halvings. If we can halve the number of cases every 10 days, that's the difference between 20 and 40 days. (I did a quick calculation, which may not be right, but I think we were closer to halving the number of cases every 20 days back in April.)
* Which is not a lockdown, it's less (but not by much) than the "lockdown" in effect in Toronto, which is less than we had in March and April, which was less than, for example, France, Italy, Spain or Australia had at their strictest. The malls are still open for leisure shopping; maybe this is acceptable exposure, maybe it's a reasonable economic tradeoff, whether it's good or bad, it's not a lockdown.