onewheeldave Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 1 hour ago, Arnold_Lane said: Your worry that wearing coverings will increase instances of rape is frankly absurd. Masks aren't useful in rapes and muggings?! I'm keen to see your reasning on that one. 1 hour ago, Pettytom said: So far, the only reason that you’ve given for not wearing a mask is that you don’t want to. That’s pretty poor in my opinion. That is patently not true. The negatives I'm given for compulsory mask use [I've no problem with voluntary maks use] include health issues, civil liberty issues, facilitation of masked crime [assualts/rapes] and disproportioate negative effects on minority groups, including many autistic people, deaf people and disabled people in general. 57 minutes ago, PRESLEY said: Attack and rule breaking ? No, Just stating facts, anyhow Im sure the Mods are more than compedent and don't need any help in the pointing out of Forum rules from you, thats why they do this job. Also talking about Facts, get yours right, I didn't say mask were useless, I said if face coverings either do or don't limit the spread just conform. Your the attacker here and the rule breaker by causing people to bicker. They don't need help with knowledge of what type of posts break forum rules, but they do welcome having the posts pointed out to them as they have limited time and there are a lot of posts on this forum. What you said exactly was- 2 hours ago, PRESLEY said: The point Im making is, just conform, if it limits the spread or not, its not asking a lot, 15mins or 1 hr in duration in a shop, not much time out of the day, there are some real big babies knocking about these days, no wonder some people use the term nanny state, some of the big babies that moan about trivial matters like wearing a face covering for a short period time really need a nanny. i.e. if it limits the spread or not, do it, conform. Conforming is, in your own words "The point". "if it limits the spread or not" includes the scenario where it does not limit the threat i.e. it doesn't work- nevertheless, your advice even in that scenario is "just conform". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold_Lane Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 49 minutes ago, onewheeldave said: Masks aren't useful in rapes and muggings?! I'm keen to see your reasning on that one. The kind of rapes I assume you must be talking about, where the victim is dragged off into the woods and assaulted, are very rare. Perpetrators don't merely decide to commit them because they think they will get away with it. If that were the case, the advent of DNA evidence would have practically wiped it out. Has it? It's completely woolly thinking - it sounds like it might be true but does not pass real scrutiny. 53 minutes ago, onewheeldave said: That is patently not true. The negatives I'm given for compulsory mask use [I've no problem with voluntary maks use] include health issues, civil liberty issues, facilitation of masked crime [assualts/rapes] and disproportioate negative effects on minority groups, including many autistic people, deaf people and disabled people in general. There are exemptions to the rules to help such people you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold_Lane Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 56 minutes ago, onewheeldave said: What you said exactly was- i.e. if it limits the spread or not, do it, conform. Conforming is, in your own words "The point". "if it limits the spread or not" includes the scenario where it does not limit the threat i.e. it doesn't work- nevertheless, your advice even in that scenario is "just conform". And your reply is that it is the beginning of totalitarianism. Sounds like paranoia mixed with a dislike of change to one's personal routine to me. I.e. you not wanting to wear one is, simply, because you are autistic. I understand that. It doesn't make you right though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 21 minutes ago, Arnold_Lane said: The kind of rapes I assume you must be talking about, where the victim is dragged off into the woods and assaulted, are very rare. Perpetrators don't merely decide to commit them because they think they will get away with it. If that were the case, the advent of DNA evidence would have practically wiped it out. Has it? It's completely woolly thinking - it sounds like it might be true but does not pass real scrutiny. I'm talking about any rape, or mugging, or any other crime where wearing a mask is an advantage. Up till very recently, a person in a mask would stand out a mile, and generally be assumed to be very likely up to no good. Now it is becoming the norm- that is a great asset for criminals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold_Lane Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 3 minutes ago, onewheeldave said: I'm talking about any rape, or mugging, or any other crime where wearing a mask is an advantage. Up till very recently, a person in a mask would stand out a mile, and generally be assumed to be very likely up to no good. Now it is becoming the norm- that is a great asset for criminals. I'm talking about rape. Your suggestion it will increase because of mask wearing is absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 26 minutes ago, Arnold_Lane said: There are exemptions to the rules to help such people you know. I don't think so. I'm keeping my eyes open for an official mention of exemption from compulsory mask wearing in shops for disabled people- I've seen nothing yet, please do let me know if you see anything. I know that disabled people are exhempt from mandetory masking on public transport, but this latest escalation of compulsory masking is a new thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 3 minutes ago, onewheeldave said: I'm talking about any rape, or mugging, or any other crime where wearing a mask is an advantage. Up till very recently, a person in a mask would stand out a mile, and generally be assumed to be very likely up to no good. Now it is becoming the norm- that is a great asset for criminals. What percentage of muggings and rapes pre-covid involed masks or face coverings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 22 minutes ago, Arnold_Lane said: And your reply is that it is the beginning of totalitarianism. Sounds like paranoia mixed with a dislike of change to one's personal routine to me. I.e. you not wanting to wear one is, simply, because you are autistic. I understand that. It doesn't make you right though. No, I am well able to distinguish between behaviour and opinions of mine that are based on the rigidity of thought and habit associated with autism, and that based on actual reasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arnold_Lane Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, onewheeldave said: I don't think so. I'm keeping my eyes open for an official mention of exemption from compulsory mask wearing in shops for disabled people- I've seen nothing yet, please do let me know if you see anything. I know that disabled people are exhempt from mandetory masking on public transport, but this latest escalation of compulsory masking is a new thing. Really? First result in Google: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/face-coverings-mask-england-exempt-compulsory-shops-public-transport-a9617656.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 7 hours ago, Lex Luthor said: That's just semantics. People have lost their lives because they haven't received treatment. For many others that "putting on hold" has made it too late. They've been told they can't have treatment - that's being denied treatment. Cancer can't be "put on hold" while the government plays at dealing with CV-19, not issuing clear instructions, constant back-pedalling, u-turns, setting poor examples, and double speak. No its not semantics especially when it comes to cancer treatment. The most common way to treat cancer is to be treated by chemotherapy to help stop its spread and enlargement and then possibly have it removed through surgery. Unfortunately by doing that you are automatically giving the person a very compromised immune system which means even a small common recurring viral infection such as herpes simplex can kill. It then gets down to a matter of weighing up how life threatening it is and which is the best outcome for the patient, and if that means putting it on hold then I'm sure the clinicians involved know better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts