Does Closing Beaches Make Any Sense?

[juddles]

I will wade into this prolific thread unprepared - as i simply do not have the time to read up on everything.

I understand the closing of those beaches that allow irresponsible mayhem. But I love that my local beach is not closed.

I go almost every day to my local beach at Mooloolabah in Queensland. Each day it is the same - much restricted patronage, noone just lying on the beach. People go there to walk or for a quick dip. In this microcosm I think we, locally, have a good balance - respectable isolation but still allowing some small freedoms. I know it does my own family and endless good to be able to get out of the house.....

But I also really agree with the enforcement at other places where people show so much less dedication to the common good...

 

[Pushka]

I will wade into this prolific thread unprepared - as i simply do not have the time to read up on everything.

I understand the closing of those beaches that allow irresponsible mayhem. But I love that my local beach is not closed.

I go almost every day to my local beach at Mooloolabah in Queensland. Each day it is the same - much restricted patronage, noone just lying on the beach. People go there to walk or for a quick dip. In this microcosm I think we, locally, have a good balance - respectable isolation but still allowing some small freedoms. I know it does my own family and endless good to be able to get out of the house.....

But I also really agree with the enforcement at other places where people show so much less dedication to the common good...

SA is the same. People walk. People run. They don't linger. They practise safe distance. No backpackers.

 

[straitman]

 

[Bundy Bear]

Good attempt at trying to defend the indefensible, while not adressing my point - that banning something just for the sake of banning it - is nonsense and government overreach.
Regards,

Regards,
Renato

The government has introduced these harsh measures to keep you and everyone else alive and so that our medical resources can keep as many people alive as possible.

<redacted>
Take a note from this cough.

 

[Princess Fiona]

The government has introduced these harsh measures to keep you and everyone else alive and so that our medical resources can keep as many people alive as possible.

<redacted>
Take a note from this cough.
View attachment 212985

Stealing this

 

[juddles]

My entrenched view is that banning something for the sake of banning something - where there is no possiblity of that action harming anyone else - is nonsense, and government over reach.
...

Hmmmm. I do not think that anyone is banning anything without thinking it is for a good reason. They may get some things wrong, but overall it is for a good purpose.

I understand your view that heading off to shoot a rabbit is an activity that is largely singular- no crowds involved. But have you contemplated the difficulty that the authorities face in this? That they need the entire population to stop unnecessary activities? Sure, you shooting a rabbit does not increase corona risk, but you travelling to do this is just part of general unnecessary movement that does increase the risk. And wasting the authorities time in trying to distinguish your activities from the dickheads that just want to carry on as if normal just makes their ability to identify dangerous behaviour that more difficult...

 

[Renato1]

I will wade into this prolific thread unprepared - as i simply do not have the time to read up on everything.

I understand the closing of those beaches that allow irresponsible mayhem. But I love that my local beach is not closed.

I go almost every day to my local beach at Mooloolabah in Queensland. Each day it is the same - much restricted patronage, noone just lying on the beach. People go there to walk or for a quick dip. In this microcosm I think we, locally, have a good balance - respectable isolation but still allowing some small freedoms. I know it does my own family and endless good to be able to get out of the house.....

But I also really agree with the enforcement at other places where people show so much less dedication to the common good...

Just curious - are you allowed to drive to the beach in Queensland?

I am four minutes drive from my local beach - which is under a Shire that singularly now allows swimming, excercise. walking - but I am not allowed to drive there by my State government (though I can spend two hours or more walking there).

On the other hand, thousands of people somehow make their way to the Tan track in Melbourne and run around it in far closer proximity than beach users. No problem there, no Police checking that the runners didn't actually drive their cars there to do the running.

Nonsense rules, and inequitably applied.
Regards,
Renato

Hmmmm. I do not think that anyone is banning anything without thinking it is for a good reason. They may get some things wrong, but overall it is for a good purpose.

I understand your view that heading off to shoot a rabbit is an activity that is largely singular- no crowds involved. But have you contemplated the difficulty that the authorities face in this? That they need the entire population to stop unnecessary activities? Sure, you shooting a rabbit does not increase corona risk, but you travelling to do this is just part of general unnecessary movement that does increase the risk. And wasting the authorities time in trying to distinguish your activities from the dickheads that just want to carry on as if normal just makes their ability to identify dangerous behaviour that more difficult...

I have to travel to my other property to shoot - and I have the right to do that - but I know plenty of people who now cannot shoot on their own properties where they actually live.

That's a nonsense rule - made for what good purpose?

As for the travel increasing risk of transmitting the virus, a single person driving to where ever he or she shoots, where there is nobody there - well, that also is an impossibility for transmission of the virus.

I wager that in rural Victoria people living in towns who regularly shoot and fish, will flout the ban as being stupid - especially as for NSW people on their side of the Murray river can fish to their hearts' content, but those on the Victorian side get a $1600 fine for fishing the same river. There just aren't enough Police to go around and enforce it - and it will bring about the notion that rules can generally be flouted.
Regards,
Renato

The government has introduced these harsh measures to keep you and everyone else alive and so that our medical resources can keep as many people alive as possible.

<redacted>
Take a note from this cough.
View attachment 212985

You are happy to be nannied like you were back in primary school - where the whole class is punished for the transgressions of the few - rather than punishing the transgressors (as was the case with the few people ignoring social distancing rules on the beach). That's fine.

But some of us have grown up since then.
Regards,
Renato

 

[oz_mark]

You are happy to be nannied like you were back in primary school - where the whole class is punished for the transgressions of the few - rather than punishing the transgressors (as was the case with the few people ignoring social distancing rules on the beach). That's fine.

But some of us have grown up since then.

Not enough people have. And that's the problem.

They really did try telling people to keep their distance. People ignored.

The nanny state treats people like children, because that's how they behave.

 

[scaredeycat]

Yep - it's a full moon. Explains some of the comments...

 

[Renato1]

Not enough people have. And that's the problem.

They really did try telling people to keep their distance. People ignored.

The nanny state treats people like children, because that's how they behave.

Your assetions don't match reality

You say people ignored, when plainly most people complied.

You say they really did try telling the people who transgressed at beaches to keep their distance - but they did not really do so, as they did not enforce the law and fine them as individuals.

But instead, the Government was happy to impose harsher conditions on everybody for the actions of the few, and to now actually fine people sitting on park benches, learning to drive in cars, sitting in cars, fishing by themselves, shooting by themselves - people who were never then huddled together at either Bondi or St. Kilda beaches transmitting the virus, but instead are fined now for doing activities which wouldn't transmit a single virus to anybody.

Interesting to see that you think the entire adult population including yourself behave like children that require a nanny.
Regards,
Renato


.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

There just aren't enough Police to go around and enforce it - and it will bring about the notion that rules can generally be flouted.

That's the thing. There are enough police to enforce it, because only a few people are flouting the law.

If everyone made up their own rules, you'd be right - there wouldn't be enough police.

This is exactly what we were talking about a few days ago... that police have to enforce the law against those who should be at home self isolating. They don't have time to go chasing after a random car going off star gazing. They can't read your mind, they don't know why you are going somewhere, or your reasons. So they have to stop you.

Multiple you by 10,000 and the whole enforcement could be in jeopardy.

 

[dajop]

but I know plenty of people who now cannot shoot on their own properties where they actually live.

Where does it say that this is not allowed?

The way the health order is written (as I mentioned above) is that you aren’t permitted outside the premises you ordinarily reside at, and the definition of premises includes land as well as buildings. Maybe it is being enforced differently to the way it is written?

 

[dajop]

Also another thought, all the overzealous policing seems to be on or near to the Mornington Peninsula. Every one of the much publicised fines that were being portrayed as unfair (mountain bike rider, L plate driver, tip person etc) have been in/around that area. Probably due to the well publicised actions of the Aspen returned couple in the same area. Renato, you live down that way don’t you?

 

[oz_mark]

Your assetions don't match reality

You say people ignored, when plainly most people complied.

You say they really did try telling the people who transgressed at beaches to keep their distance - but they did not really do so, as they did not enforce the law and fine them as individuals.

Most complied, but not enough.

Interesting that you are proposing a police state, where there are police at every corner enforcing the rules.

But instead, the Government was happy to impose harsher conditions on everybody for the actions of the few, and to now actually fine people sitting on park benches, learning to drive in cars, sitting in cars, fishing by themselves, shooting by themselves - people who were never then huddled together at either Bondi or St. Kilda beaches transmitting the virus, but instead are fined now for doing activities which wouldn't transmit a single virus to anybody.

Do you really beleibe the government are 'happy; to do this?

Interesting to see that you think the entire adult population including yourself behave like children that require a nanny.

In this case, I recognise that the requirements for society as a whole mean that some of our individual freedoms we take for granted are going to be impacted.

Just do the right thing.

 

[drron]

Yes and a few instances of backpackers behaving badly.

Backpackers told they can leave their hostel ‘to board a flight’

An outraged local has filmed what he has claimed is a group of backpackers who can be seen flouting social distancing measures.

www.news.com.au

Personally if caught these people should have their visas cancelled.

 

[Bundy Bear]

Renato maybe I wasn’t clear the first time

 

[Renato1]

To all the people who love the Nanny state and being looked after by the Police force, please tell me why you support this particular insane over reach? I'm trying to fathom the thinking going on around here.

Man is fined $1,000 for going for a morning walk despite exercise being allowed - because he gave police 'several different reasons' for leaving home

Cheers,
Renato

 

[MEL_Traveller]

To all the people who love the Nanny state and being looked after by the Police force, please tell me why you support this particular insane over reach? I'm trying to fathom the thinking going on around here.

Man is fined $1,000 for going for a morning walk despite exercise being allowed - because he gave police 'several different reasons' for leaving home

Cheers,
Renato

Sounds like he had no good reason to be out, until he eventually 'remembered' he was allowed to be out for exercise, and so used that?

 

[straitman]

To all the people who love the Nanny state and being looked after by the Police force, please tell me why you support this particular insane over reach? I'm trying to fathom the thinking going on around here.

Man is fined $1,000 for going for a morning walk despite exercise being allowed - because he gave police 'several different reasons' for leaving home

Cheers,
Renato

This has been explained to you numerous times in this thread. All you have to do is actually read what people have said.

 

[Himeno]

This has been explained to you numerous times in this thread. All you have to do is actually read what people have said.

I don't think anything on this forum will be read or understood by a certain person because it doesn't have a Fox News skin.