In order for you to have a valid argument to make on covid19 countermeasures, you first have to accept that covid19 is real and deadly; that it’s a dangerous pandemic that must be met with all available measures to mitigate loss of life as best we know how. Because for you do deny the science or medical information that validates the existence of covid19 puts you on the opposite side of every medical community member on earth.
Imagine if you will, that there is a bridge off in the distance. Its old and some say it should be replaced or repaired – at high cost. In doing so, there will be disruptive traffic pattern changes and detours; nobody would enjoy those measures at all. But it needs to be done if the old bridge is to be dealt with.
So you hire some 10 structural engineers to evaluate the true state of the bridge and determine the best plan forward.
Nine of them conclude that the bridge has between 6-9 years of safe usage left before its unsafe to use if nothing changes, that it might collapse and kill anyone on the bridge deck at the time. Those nine recommend a mix of replacement and (major) repairs to upgrade the safety levels to an acceptable level.
One says that everything is fine. You’ve got many decades of safe usage ahead.
Who do you listen to?
In the case of covid19, there is virtually no disagreement in the scientific and medical community that the ailment is deadly and needs to be dealt with quickly. But its not unanimous. There hold outs who argue a variety conspiracy theories that covid19 is fake. This segment is less than 1% of the medical/scientific community. Or, less than one of a one hundred structural engineers in our above scenario.
Now, its fair to argue that one jurisdiction’s pandemic countermeasures are insufficient to whatever degree your expertise level can speak with any authority on. Or blow out some opinion on how you think your government has failed you. Cool, that’s your opinion. But you must first agree that covid19 is real and a lot of people are going to die (…already have died) if we don’t act – or slacken our efforts prematurely.
But if you’re going to argue that covid19 is fake and that everyone should just flout the emergency rules because of a bonkers conspiracy theory, then I have zero problems with the state answering your misinformation with fines or worse. Because what you offer isn’t an opinion, its foisting a dangerous advocacy to break laws no different than yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre. Your calls to break rules could get people killed.
The view from Pete 