Vaccine = Stadium Entry

[mephitis]

The letter should be accepted - as I understand it it’s the equivalent of the digital version for those without smart phones (or who don’t want to use the app). However I could well imagine instances where venues might wrongly refuse it.

Should be fine, it'll have the same QR Code thingy on it.

Just received this survey.

Done the survey and got the pass just need a pint of Neck Oil now and I'm set

 

[Raziel]

Yep, as @Rustyspurs said, club is doing a survey, check your emails.

 

[scaramanga]

Not really. In the time it takes between when you gave your sample and the result came back you might be infectious. Especially with this new variant. Vaccine coupled with mandatory masking is the safest way to do it. Vaccine alone might have been sufficient, if everyone had been jabbed with mRNA vaccines. But I think in the UK many have received the Astra one, which doesn't protect as well against Delta.

I don't think the intent is to have zero attendees with COVID, that would be as ridiculous as the Australian approach to the economy.

The intent is to reduce the number of people with it by as many as reasonably possible.

 

[Lilbaz]

I don't think the intent is to have zero attendees with COVID, that would be as ridiculous as the Australian approach to the economy.

The intent is to reduce the number of people with it by as many as reasonably possible.

No. The intent is to get the unvaccinated to get a jab.

 

[monkeybarry]

But neither is it a govt service, so the govt shouldn't be able to take it away.

Individual businesses should be able to make that choice, and I'd side with those that insisted on vaccines.

But public protection is - and that means uncomfortable mandation at times.
It's why we have laws and standards.
You have the choice not to use the water from your tap, but to do so you have to collect it and treat it yourself - or not treat it if your choice is being disease. By doing so, you give up convenience.
By having a water infrastructure you ensure everyone can have access to clean water and be the victim of someone else's unsafe actions.

So I agree vaccination shouldn't be mandated; but the restrictions you experience by not choosing it are yours to own and should not put the public at risk. Ergo, you choose to put the public at risk = you get restrictions to stop that happening. That is literally a core responsibilty of government and key reason we have government rather than a free for all.

 

[scaramanga]

But public protection is - and that means uncomfortable mandation at times.
It's why we have laws and standards.
You have the choice not to use the water from your tap, but to do so you have to collect it and treat it yourself - or not treat it if your choice is being disease. By doing so, you give up convenience.
By having a water infrastructure you ensure everyone can have access to clean water and be the victim of someone else's unsafe actions.

So I agree vaccination shouldn't be mandated; but the restrictions you experience by not choosing it are yours to own and should not put the public at risk. Ergo, you choose to put the public at risk = you get restrictions to stop that happening. That is literally a core responsibilty of government and key reason we have government rather than a free for all.

I agree that the govt has some responsibility here, but restricting services that are not theirs to provide are well outside the scope of what they should be able to control.

Stop access to the NHS, stop handouts, stop access to public buildings, etc. Anything the govt provides can and should be refused to those who do not take the vaccine. But stay the fudge out of other people's businesses.

 

[monkeybarry]

I agree that the govt has some responsibility here, but restricting services that are not theirs to provide are well outside the scope of what they should be able to control.

Stop access to the NHS, stop handouts, stop access to public buildings, etc. Anything the govt provides can and should be refused to those who do not take the vaccine. But stay the fudge out of other people's businesses.

They are governing services they provide - public health is just that. And it isn't confined to a building; it's conceptual and preventative as well as physical.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

But public protection is - and that means uncomfortable mandation at times.
It's why we have laws and standards.
You have the choice not to use the water from your tap, but to do so you have to collect it and treat it yourself - or not treat it if your choice is being disease. By doing so, you give up convenience.
By having a water infrastructure you ensure everyone can have access to clean water and be the victim of someone else's unsafe actions.

So I agree vaccination shouldn't be mandated; but the restrictions you experience by not choosing it are yours to own and should not put the public at risk. Ergo, you choose to put the public at risk = you get restrictions to stop that happening. That is literally a core responsibilty of government and key reason we have government rather than a free for all.

So if a fan provides a negative test that would be ok as well? ie I've done my best to prove I'm not a risk to others.

 

[monkeybarry]

So if a fan provides a negative test that would be ok as well? ie I've done my best to prove I'm not a risk to others.

I have a nagging doubt that that isn't enough, but I'm not sure what it is.
In theory it certainly seems fine, so as long as that sufficiently protects public health and doesn't disadvantage anyone that cannot be vaccinated, then yes.

 

[scaramanga]

They are governing services they provide - public health is just that. And it isn't confined to a building; it's conceptual and preventative as well as physical.

They're also supposed to be providing us with freedom - that shouldn't stop because some wish to cower.

 

[monkeybarry]

They're also supposed to be providing us with freedom - that shouldn't stop because some wish to cower.

No they're not - they are elected to govern. By definition that isn't freedom, it's creating societal balance and fairness for all.
That includes managing risk in public health - if people don't want to participate in the measures, they should be disadvantaged in favour of those that do wish to participate.

 

[Lilbaz]

No they're not - they are elected to govern. By definition that isn't freedom, it's creating societal balance and fairness for all.
That includes managing risk in public health - if people don't want to participate in the measures, they should be disadvantaged in favour of those that do wish to participate.

Not that i agree with scaramanga.

But you view puts us in very dangerous territory. The needs of the many out weigh the neeeds of the few.

Hopefully cases go down further and we don't come to that point.

 

[LutonSpurs]

Traffic lights must enrage some of you, the government imposing on your freedoms to reduce traffic and accidents. How dare they.

 

[Lilbaz]

Traffic lights must enrage some of you, the government imposing on your freedoms to reduce traffic and accidents. How dare they.

There needs to be a balance though. Banning all cars because some people die in road accidents is just as stupid as having no requirements at all to make them safer.

My personal view is that people should be free to do whatever they want. As long as that freedom does not impede anothers freedom. Including their freedom to have life or happiness. If it does then laws and government need to step in to ensure the best outcome for all.

 

[LutonSpurs]

There needs to be a balance though. Banning all cars because some people die in road accidents is just as stupid as having no requirements at all to make them safer.

My personal view is that people should be free to do whatever they want. As long as that freedom does not impede anothers freedom. Including their freedom to have life or happiness. If it does then laws and government need to step in to ensure the best outcome for all.

Having vaccine passports is a balanced approach. Most people do not believe it is an imposition on their freedoms and will give them comfort and solace when attending big gatherings while we move towards herd immunity and the virus becoming endemic. This is likely the exit wave but it does depend on more people having protection via infection or vaccination. Vaccination is better than infection. This helps drive that. It is the sensible, safe and balanced approach to public health and for most consumers it is a welcome strategy to make them feel safe, which in turn is good business as in my view it will increase attendance.

 

[Lilbaz]

Having vaccine passports is a balanced approach. Most people do not believe it is an imposition on their freedoms and will give them comfort and solace when attending big gatherings while we move towards herd immunity and the virus becoming endemic. This is likely the exit wave but it does depend on more people having protection via infection or vaccination. Vaccination is better than infection. This helps drive that. It is the sensible, safe and balanced approach to public health and for most consumers it is a welcome strategy to make them feel safe, which in turn is good business as in my view it will increase attendance.

After all the brick from antivaxxers on social media over the last year, i'm a little sympathetic towards the idea. I also believe people should be vaccinated.

But. We are talking about excluding people from certain aspects of society unless they inject themselves with something that possibly kill them. For the greater good.

It's a slippery slope. Where does it stop? Should we force everyone to have the flu vaccine each year? Eugenics? Castrating people with aids?

 

[LutonSpurs]

But. We are talking about excluding people from certain aspects of society unless they inject themselves with something that possibly kill them. For the greater good.

Covid is more likely to kill them. That is an objective fact based on real data.

 

[Lilbaz]

Covid is more likely to kill them. That is an objective fact based on real data.

I agree. As i said people (at least adults) should be vaccinated. Forcing them against their will though is the issue. Although i do think health care workers and that, vaccinations should be mandatory. Also think that we shouldn't allow people into the country if they haven't been vaccinated.

For the rest of the population i'm not so sure.

 

[monkeybarry]

I agree. As i said people (at least adults) should be vaccinated. Forcing them against their will though is the issue. Although i do think health care workers and that, vaccinations should be mandatory. Also think that we shouldn't allow people into the country if they haven't been vaccinated.

For the rest of the population i'm not so sure.

Are you on a seesaw?
Or just oblivious to the number of times you've contradicted yourself in your last three/four posts?

 

[Lilbaz]

Are you on a seesaw?
Or just oblivious to the number of times you've contradicted yourself in your last three/four posts?

I think people should get vaccinated, i don't think the public should be forced to against their will. People in health care are looking after vulnerable people, in order to do that they should be vaccinated. It is their choice to do that job. If they don't want to be vaccinated they can leave.
People coming to this country choose to do so and would have to meet entry requirements of being vaccinated.

It's not all black and white but there's no contradiction.