Does Closing Beaches Make Any Sense? | Page 13 | Australian Frequent Flyer
Australian Frequent Flyer

Welcome to Australia's leading independent Frequent Flyer and Travel Resource since 1998!
Our site contains tons of information that will improve your travel experience.

Joining AFF is fast, simple & absolutely free - register now and take immediate advantage of these great BENEFITS.

Once registered, this box will disappear. And you will see fewer advertisements :)

Login Now to remove this and all advertisements (GOLD and SILVER members)
Not a member? Register Now for free

Does Closing Beaches Make Any Sense?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Clefys

Newbie
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
3
Play it safe nobody has the right to risk themselves or anybody else they may come in contact with. Beach goers still make up a substantial part of the population. If they can spread the infection then so beaches should be closed the same way as any public space where there is a risk. Shopping for food puts you and other people at risk if you mingle . If you do not get food you die. If you do not swim you will not die. Essential things only is the message. Even if you feel the beach is your " religion" religious groups have stopped meeting.
 

straitman

Enthusiast
Moderator
Joined
Apr 27, 2003
Messages
17,113
Qantas
LT Gold
Virgin
Red
Flights
My Map
So just how much threat did those doctors pose.They boarded a cruise ship in Chile on 29/2.They disembarked in Stanley,Falkland Islands on March 27 having been in Antarctica or the high seas ever since.No Covid in Antarctica or the Falklands.First case in Chile confirmed 3/3.But even if it was picked up in Chile or before then if any of the pax or crew was positive on boarding why were there no reports of respiratory symptoms on board after 26 days?

I'm sorry those doctors are more likely to pick up Corona virus in their time in Sydney rather than on the cruise.Remember an ABF officer has tested positive in SYD.
So was there a communications mix up or did they think they knew better than the regulations? When we came off Carnival Splendor it was a total stuff up by NSW Health, so was it the same in this case?
Risk = Consequence x Likelihood. You have only covered off Likelihood which you have not stated is zero.
Agreed.
 

Pushka

Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
18,068
Flights
My Map
How can people still today not understand that it was 100% the right call to close Bondi Beach?




Does anyone yet not appreciate how things can quickly escalate due to how contagious CV19 is?

1 person can infect 3
3 people can infect 9
9 = 27
27 = 81
81= 243
243= 729
729 = 2187

etc

So no it was not ok that most people were well spaced apart. The numerous ones who were not were capable of creating a huge number of infections well above what is shown above.

After Bondi Beach was closed it has been identified as a CV19 hotspot. So much so that special additional pop-up testing is being done. So it is known that there were numerous CV19 people at Bondi and from the accounts of people it is also known that they were also frequenting Bondi Beach.


CV19 positive people ..
Thousands of people mixing...
The virus thrives of random contacts, and the more random contacts, the more it thrives.

Add to that that one of our main weapons is contact tracing and large public events with randomised mixing make that almost impossible.

Do people not yet not understand how much of a hotspot Bondi could have become if it had not have been closed when it was?
Do people not yet not understand how that hotspot could then have rapidly spread through Sydney if Bondi Beach had not been closed?
Closing it when they did was the right call. Logically it was the thing to do and we should all be enormously grateful that that call was made.
🤷‍♀️
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
6,884
So just how much threat did those doctors pose.They boarded a cruise ship in Chile on 29/2.They disembarked in Stanley,Falkland Islands on March 27 having been in Antarctica or the high seas ever since.No Covid in Antarctica or the Falklands.First case in Chile confirmed 3/3.But even if it was picked up in Chile or before then if any of the pax or crew was positive on boarding why were there no reports of respiratory symptoms on board after 26 days?

I'm sorry those doctors are more likely to pick up Corona virus in their time in Sydney rather than on the cruise.Remember an ABF officer has tested positive in SYD.
The CV19 unknown part is also the series of flights they took to get back.
 

drron

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Messages
21,702
So people haven't read this post then.
And lovetravelling oz the people who arrived by plane that day from higher risk origins like the USA and UK were allowed to proceed home or interstate to isolate at home.
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
6,884
So people haven't read this post then.
And lovetravelling oz the people who arrived by plane that day from higher risk origins like the USA and UK were allowed to proceed home or interstate to isolate at home.
Perhaps, but it also fact remains that they were on a ship and after the Ruby Princess disaster I would much rather our officials make a mistake of quarantining people when they should not have, as opposed to not quarantining them when they should have.

Also the "trust me I am a returning traveller" has not worked well on many occasions. Indeed police checks on those self-isolating today has again had returning travellers not where they were meant to be.

In addition as this group would have had to self-isolate anyway there is not a lot of difference anyway. But one way the level of safety for the community is more certain.

After the Ruby Princess debacle was known Australia should have switched to quarantining all returning travellers earlier than we did.


PS: Agree on the USA. Given it was obvious early on that they were a significant source of our infections, it is quite amazing that we did not tighten up on travellers from the USA earlier.
 

Renato1

Established Member
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
1,679
So what you really are saying is yes you were knowingly driving your car unnecessarily.

Driving to exercise was specifically stated as being an unnecessary trip.

Driving to exercise at a "nice" location was specifically given as an example of what not to do.

Going out to exercise means WALKING or CYCLING from your house/apartment/caravan etc.

Going out to exercise DOES NOT MEAN driving to other locations and then exercising there.
Pretty pointless trying to have a logical discussion with you - as you do not read the rules that I posted from the Government.

You say, "Driving to exercise was specifically stated as being an unnecessary trip."

Please, feel free to find where that was stated as the official rule on a Government website last week.
Lots of luck.

I saw Premier Andrews on Channel 7 news saying that people could go out of the house for daily exercise. And only that.
You have dug out some other comment he made somewhere else.

If I interpret his first comment as being the new rule, then I can't go out for a walk to exercise, as it is something I have never done daily.

Regards,
Renato

Wow a true DYKWIA. Just you and your bud saving the world. No wonder you are of the belief that community actions that are best for everyone don't actually need apply .

The POTUS has shown a distinct ability to bungle the CV19 situation .


Which beach are you going to drive to today?
So, I can take it you regularly watch either our ABC or CNN?
Cheers,
Renato
Post automatically merged:

You are selfish and clearly put your own needs before everyone else's. This is clear in thread after thread on this forum.

One of the many reasons why unnecessary trips should not be undertaken is in that in doing them things will sometimes go wrong. Cars break down, accidents happen etc etc. This then requires unnecessary contact with other people that then have to intervene. Using you car more often means that it also has to be refuelled etc. The more this is done the more opportunities there are for the virus to be spread.

I contrast your constant bleating of having to do your bit with the attitude of my own daughter. While you were driving around making an unnecessary trips and complaining about things like not being able to make more unnecessary trips she was saying good bye to my wife and I. She is treating CV 19 patients in the most dangerous of environments. Due to this she knows it is only matter of time before she catches CV 19 and as such has now isolated herself from all family and friends. I will not see her again till this is over. She has fears yes, but she is not hesitating to do what she knows is right. That makes me proud, but also sad. But your attitude is a disgrace. By today you should know better, but you continue to post what you do.

You are meant to be an adult. So please start to act like one and stop your constant complaining about what are very minor personal inconveniences like you are hard done by because you cannot stargaze for a while, or drive to beaches.
Your car may break down.
I get mine serviced.
Regards,
Renato
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
203
Flights
My Map
I think the title of the article in one of our major papers sums it up nicely - Australia is a nanny state, because we behave like children
Turkmenistan can't be classified as a nanny state, but could provide some comparative (& potentially tragic) data on the opposite approach.

They have banned the use of the word and people can be arrested for wearing a mask.
 

JohnK

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
41,701
John with respect I think you are looking at this from the wrong perspective. Why is saving people lives punishing people? Why is preventing people from unnecessary car trips a bad thing?

CV 19 is a virus and has no intelligence. It relies on people to not act with reason and intelligence to spread and thus thrive. Some people have wilfully chosen to ignore what reason dictates.

What we should ALL be doing is by now abundantly clear. There may have been some confusion originally, but there are some very simple rules that we all now know that we should follow, and should have been following for a while now. Various state governments have now further restricted things, but most of these restrictions are practices that we should all have already been doing anyway.

Stay at home as much as you can and help save lives. Stay at home and help yourself to be around for your daughter's later years. She needs you.

We shouldn't really need the government to wave big sticks at us, but unfortunately it is necessarily as the minority can cause enormous damage. And another minority will think that the rules only apply to others, or that they have the right to re-interpret them.

We can all choose to be like the Aspen Couple, or we can just choose to do the right thing.
I'm not against saving lives but you can't keep people locked inside indefinitely because a few are spoiling it for others. We're looking at 3 months possibly more. Many are going to go crazy.

I feel these current measures are really strong. I've seen people in the past 2 days ignoring the measures. Ignorant? Don't watch news? Don't understand English? Possibly all of the above. I don't feel comfortable shopping at Coles as there are people passing very close without having the decency to wait.

NSW Sport has done a backflip on golf courses which is a good thing as people need to do something to distract themselves. Tennis is another. Easy to practice social distancing. But we need to drive to get there.

So driving is not really the problem. Thailand has taken extreme measures to close all golf courses but the restaurant that I go to for organised golf is allowed to serve food and people sitting next to each other and having group photos with staff. Very irresponsible.

Minority causing issues? I would have sent all backpackers home on chartered flights. Totally irresponsible and they don't belong here. If you're going to punish locals who are doing the right thing then punish all backpackers too. And include all tourists too.

And don't get me started on this pilfering of our medical products fiasco. Send all of them home. Clearly Australia means nothing to them.
 

drron

Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Messages
21,702
Perhaps, but it also fact remains that they were on a ship and after the Ruby Princess disaster I would much rather our officials make a mistake of quarantining people when they should not have, as opposed to not quarantining them when they should have.

Also the "trust me I am a returning traveller" has not worked well on many occasions. Indeed police checks on those self-isolating today has again had returning travellers not where they were meant to be.

In addition as this group would have had to self-isolate anyway there is not a lot of difference anyway. But one way the level of safety for the community is more certain.

After the Ruby Princess debacle was known Australia should have switched to quarantining all returning travellers earlier than we did.


PS: Agree on the USA. Given it was obvious early on that they were a significant source of our infections, it is quite amazing that we did not tighten up on travellers from the USA earlier.
I answered that point a little further down the thread.
 
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
20,539
You say, "Driving to exercise was specifically stated as being an unnecessary trip."

Please, feel free to find where that was stated as the official rule on a Government website last week.
Lots of luck.
The link to the Premier's comments can be found in this article: What stage 3 virus restrictions mean for Victorians

It includes direct quotes from the Premier that exercise means local only - not driving to get to your exercise.
 

Renato1

Established Member
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
1,679
As others have mentioned - BACKPACKERS.

My friend is a Limo driver who drives Doctors around and gets all the gossip.
6000 backpackers who would normally be in Queensland are stuck in Victoria, and had a great time congregating together on beaches last Friday and Saturday. Same as the story in Sydney.

Knee jerk reaction - close all the beaches - instead of arresting them and locking the corona-infested lot up in five star hotels.

Talking of knee-jerk reactions - some bright spark noticed a spike for applications in Category A/B firearms licences. Accordingly, the Government then went and banned the sale of guns and ammunition to all licenced shooters. Only problem is, there is always a spike of applications this time of the year......because it's near the start of hunting season. True, there may also have been a rush to buy guns and ammunition - but that was utterly expected as our dollar has fallen, and prices will be much higher in the future.

Regards,
Renato
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
6,884
I'm not against saving lives but you can't keep people locked inside indefinitely because a few are spoiling it for others.
John no one has stated that. This whole thread is not about that. No government official is advocating it. No one in this thread is advocating it.

At its essence the thread was about some beaches having being close as people were not practising social distancing. Some thought that decision was wrong. Other such as I thought the decision was the right call based on what was occurring.


As long as you social distance you and anyone else who is not being quarantined/self-isolated for 14 days are free to go outside from your hose/apartment/caravan for exercise as long as you follow the rules in your state or territory.

Those that have gardens or balconies can spend all day outside if they wish too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RB
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
20,539
If you're going to punish locals who are doing the right thing then punish all backpackers too. And include all tourists too.
The rule is non discriminatory. Everyone is banned from doing the same thing.

One the one hand proponents are complaining you can't lump everyone together and punish everyone for the actions of a few (thousand, as in the case of Bondi beach), but then advocate that every backpacker is deported, regardless of whether or not they ever visited Bondi?

If folk are happy to lump classes of people together (for example ALL backpackers), is it not fair to lump all beach goers together?
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
6,884
Pretty pointless trying to have a logical discussion with you - as you do not read the rules that I posted from the Government.

You say, "Driving to exercise was specifically stated as being an unnecessary trip."

Please, feel free to find where that was stated as the official rule on a Government website last week.
Lots of luck.
On the day you posted you were visiting a beach I posted what Andrews had on the government website on that day. So I have already done it with information that was current when you did it.


So which part of:

I assume you did not drive to the beach as you do understand that you are meant exercise where you can walk to/ from where you live?

As Daniel Andrews put it, "‘getting some exercise’ means going for a walk around the block or a bike ride to stretch your legs and get some fresh air. It means staying local – not driving for miles or being out all day." So no, you should not be going out and doing massive day hikes or driving down to your beach house for the day. You need to stay put.
was not clear?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
6,884
Your car may break down.
I get mine serviced.
Regards,
Renato
As if getting a car serviced can guarantee that it will not break down. Well serviced cars break down or have other issues. Parts may be faulty, random faults can occur.

ie
1/ Recently in the bush my less than 12 month old fully maintained vehicle came up with a service fault stating to not drive the vehicle (I am sure you are aware that all modern vehicles are run via black boxes these days).

Now as I do a lot of remote travel and so understand that all vehicles can break down anywhere anytime I carry an OBDII reader and have the Software App on my mobile plus a good set of tools. So I was able to determine the fault and reset the car to run again.

Most people do not carry an OBDII reader and so they would have been calling for a tow truck.

2/ In Bosnia on my last international trip a sharp object embedded in the road punctured both tyres on one side of the car. Car only had one spare and so had to call for assistance as two new tyres were required. Nearest town was again 30 minutes away.


Cars are also involved in accidents. Even if you are blameless the driver of another vehicle may not be.

Theft. While you are enjoying the beach, a thief may take a shine to you car, or something in it.
 
Last edited:

Renato1

Established Member
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
1,679
The link to the Premier's comments can be found in this article: What stage 3 virus restrictions mean for Victorians

It includes direct quotes from the Premier that exercise means local only - not driving to get to your exercise.
I went and exercised at the beach on the last day of Stage 2.
Regards,
Renato

On the day you posted you were visiting a beach I posted what Andrews had on the government website on that day. So I have already done it with information that was current when you did it.


So which part of:



was not clear?
On the day I posted visiting the beach - we were at Stage 2.

The Government instructions on their website for Stage 2 was that people were advised to stay at home.
There is a big difference between the advice of one day, and the instructions on the next.

So, lots of luck finding all those instructions you claim I violated.
Regards,
Renato
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Community Statistics

Threads
85,698
Messages
2,035,050
Members
52,953
Latest member
Todd07
Top