-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Coronovirus III
- Thread starter churchmouse
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Status
Link?
"you must spread some reputation..."
I want to thank JettaKnight for jumping in here
I went along with the claims because it basically fits my preconceived notion and memory. But he's right. The person who makes the claim should be the one who has to go back it up. If you can't, it's meaningless.
Nothing to refute in that statement, I'm sure your buddy said that, because you are an honest guy I believe he did...
No thanks! I couldn't spent all the money CM makes moderating here... LOL
Ever been called "selfish" for wanting the restrictions to ease up?
I don't know why this just occurred to me, but it appears that there are a pretty loud group of "vulnerable" people (certainly not all) who want to preserve their own ability to go to stores, carry-out, etc. to the extent allowed, and they see making everyone non-vulnerable stay locked down as the means to reduce their own risk.
I think I know who the real selfish ones are.
Truth of the matter, they would be safer if they stayed in their homes, had whatever they needed delivered, and did not venture out, even if the non-vulnerables were out and about. "But that's not fair".
Sheesh.
I don't know why this just occurred to me, but it appears that there are a pretty loud group of "vulnerable" people (certainly not all) who want to preserve their own ability to go to stores, carry-out, etc. to the extent allowed, and they see making everyone non-vulnerable stay locked down as the means to reduce their own risk.
I think I know who the real selfish ones are.
Truth of the matter, they would be safer if they stayed in their homes, had whatever they needed delivered, and did not venture out, even if the non-vulnerables were out and about. "But that's not fair".
Sheesh.
I don't think most people on either side are selfish. That's coming from a few people who aren't listening to the other's concerns.
For example, the vulnerable can't just stay home. They need, or may need, healthcare. As long as healthcare workers and nursing home workers lack extensive testing and PPE, innocent vulnerable people doing their very best are going to get exposed.
Edit: by way of example, one of my clients broke her knee about 3 weeks ago. She went from the ER to surgery and then to rehab. Somewhere in there she picked up the SARSCov2 virus. She died last week of Covid19. Hadn't left home until she broke her knee. That may or may not be a rare occurrence, but it's a real consideration of how we handle this pandemic.
And yes, some people think the "open up"crowd just wants to get their hair done. In truth most people care about things like the job of the hair stylist, as well as their own economic concerns.
Of course, listening to each other would solve a lot of political disagreement.
I agree with all that.
...but the tough truth is that it's time to start opening up, and some people will get the virus and a few of those people will die...but people will get the virus and die under the current conditions as well.
Exact thing happened to me. I saw the line and decided what I needed wasn't needed that bad. What's clear to me, people aren't staying home much anymore. I think a lot of people are trying to spend their stimulus checks.
citizenkane
Sharpshooter
- Apr 11, 2009
- 725
- 28
I’m getting pretty agitated with the carry out
businesses that have closed their restrooms but you still go inside to order.
I run service calls all day. It would be nice to be able to wash my hands before I eat since that’s the number one way to prevent the spread of disease. But it seems like more and more places have
decided that you cannot use their restroom.
I’m not sure what the difference is if I’m already in the store. I’ve left Multiple Subways and a Jersey mikes in the last week because they have the restroom closed.
businesses that have closed their restrooms but you still go inside to order.
I run service calls all day. It would be nice to be able to wash my hands before I eat since that’s the number one way to prevent the spread of disease. But it seems like more and more places have
decided that you cannot use their restroom.
I’m not sure what the difference is if I’m already in the store. I’ve left Multiple Subways and a Jersey mikes in the last week because they have the restroom closed.
I dunno. It's not just the old people and vulnerable balking about starting things up. On the news, social media, lots of younger healthier people think we should ride it out hunkered down. It's not just the old/vulnerable people who want to call the police when they see someone out jogging in the park.
That fact seems proven out often enough on social media and in the news. And, anecdotally as well. I have younger relatives, as well as most of my coworkers, who are quite health conscious. I doubt the virus would be vary dangerous for them as they don't fit the profile. They mostly think we should stay locked down. Of course a lot of people are just following their own interests, but morals often outweigh other self-interests. Or maybe it's better said that morals often are the way we prioritize our self interest. My SIL has spoken about it being a moral issue. It's immoral to go out and do things that are unnecessary. She's one of those, "if it saves just one life..." as well as "think of the....children".
Personally, I'm most likely vulnerable. I would not say poor health. But not great. Near 60. Out of shape but trying to improve. It's in my self interest not to get it. But I have other moral priorities I guess. I want things restarted because people are hurting. My coworkers think the "start it up" people are crazy. They trivialize the concerns into a nifty straw man of "I need a haircut." Oh, so you want to put us all at risk just because you want a haircut? They're using moral language to talk about the issue. It is an issue of competing morals.
I think the issue is conflicting moral ideals. Example: anti-gun zealots think gun owners are selfish because we won't give in on their "common sense gun safety" measures. Well no, selfishness doesn't explain the difference. That we don't agree on their solution explains the difference. We see that issue in a way they cannot. So it seems immoral to them. They see going out as dangerous. Risky. Too risky to care about jobs and earning a living and living life. Put all that on hold, or you're selfish. If they could see it the way the other side sees it they would not say it's putting others at risk just because you want a haircut. That's as facile as it is to say gun owners are selfish.
I think a lot of people think the "open up" crowd just wants a haircut. I hear it from a lot of people. It's a popular enough theme to be a meme. I think it's not that they're just not listening. It's that they're not empathizing. They're interpreting it within their own moral framework without regarding that other people have different moral priorities, formed fromtheir own moral foundations. The language I find most common in the dispute of whether to open up or shut down sounds a lot like a moral language.
Restrooms are also a way to spread the disease. I can't blame them I guess. But it sure would be helpful if they offered a way to clean your hands.
I was in a papa johns the other day picking up a pizza. They had a container of hand sanitizer out for people to use. That was very thoughtful and helpful, but I think they did it because they still make you sign the receipt, and they have a common pen out to use.
But kudos for providing the hand sanitizer.
Probably by any measure, we've "flattened the curve". I think it's also true that the virus will burn through the people it's going to burn through regardless of whether we stay hunkered down or start to open things up. It's just a matter of now or later for a lot of people. But, if the herd immunity theory is true, I think that the "later" people would be better served by opening things up, preferably to the most capable people of handing the virus without harm. Maybe the virus burns out before it gets to those people. But, it's a hard sale to the "if it saves just one life" people. They think you just want a haircut. A coworker just told me that a few hours ago. So it's still a thing.
Is your coworker...working?
Of course.
...not that I am implying that attitudes about opening up are defined by employment status.
My work has been uninterrupted, but I want to start opening up (however, my son is out of work and so far- no UE benefits).
Last edited:
- Status
