Post Pandemic Lockdown Scenarios

[James Deuce]

A lot of us are missing out on shit, why are hunters so entitled?

Because they have to cull deer numbers before it becomes obvious that they are shepherding deer numbers so they can have fun hunting rather than attempting to exterminate an introduced pest.

[Katman]

...why are hunters so entitled?

Makes a change from it being motorcyclists.

[pritch]

You got a Sauce for that?

Mint sauce? Cranberry? Or a cheeky little apple number?

[Katman]

Mint sauce? Cranberry? Or a cheeky little apple number?

Clearly you got the joke.

[TheDemonLord]

1:Figures on all the activities combined not just the tramping. Refer to my post #109

All activities? That's a rather broad term. Here's the thing - let's say I post up figures for the top 10 outdoors activities that people are upset about, apply the same Formula.

We both know that the end result, factoring a significant reduction (70%, 80% or 95% - whatever you are happy with), the length of time, the absence of any tourists etc. etc. is going to leave a net figure that is small.

Exceptionally small.

As an example - Ocean swimming - 2018/2019 figures were ~1,700 rescues. If we remove 35% due to no Tourists, that's ~1,200 (using Lazy maths), then divide by 12 - that's 100 - now let's divide that by 95% - that's 5.

Now let's account for the fact that the most likely demographic that would be going out to Swim in the sea during a lockdown are experienced Swimmers/Athletes (not saying they never get into trouble - but y'know, stats n stuff) - that leads to 0.

Also add in it's no longer Summer.

Rinse and repeat for any other activity you care to name.

2:Once again,the powers applicable to the emergency end when the emergency ends. That's how it works under the appropriate Acts.

Sometimes they do and sometimes Governments have a habit of using situations to legislate powers that otherwise would never have been granted. And to be frank, I don't trust this Government nor do I trust the senior Police Management.

Feel free to rip my argument to shreds on that point, but never-the-less, I can think of multiple instances both in NZ and overseas were Emergency Powers were granted and weren't wholesale revoked, with some 'systems, procedures and structures' being left intact.

3:I've never referenced any activity in Level 3, so your reference to Level 3 mountain biking is irrelevant. It's all about level 4 which is the applicable one now.

I should have perhaps clarified, I was using it to highlight that the claim 'it's being evaluated on risk of injury requiring 3rd party intervention' is demonstrably not true.

[TheDemonLord]

Mint sauce? Cranberry? Or a cheeky little apple number?

A Nice homemade BBQ Sauce.

I'm interested to see where the claim of permanent Lung Damage comes from - Certainly a possibility (some respiratory diseases that can be fatal leave scarring on the Alveoli), but to make a claim of life-long effects when it's such a new disease, on the face of it, seems a little - presumptive?

[TheDemonLord]

A lot of us are missing out on shit, why are hunters so entitled?

For a start they've been shat on, quite epicly by this Government and when they see that yet again, despite being able to meet all the requirements of Social Isolation, they are still being told No, then yes - they are justifiably upset.

It's not Entitlement. I've tooted the horn for swimming in the Sea, hiking in the Bush and a myriad of other activities that are done in isolation.

For some as well, Hunting is a regular part of their Food supply, rather than spend hundreds at the supermarket for Meat, they go out, bag an Animal etc. etc. If they have their budget worked out on that premise or if being out of work is tightening the purse strings - is being concerned for that really 'entitled'?

TL;DR - I think most hunters just want to be Left Alone, to do their thing.

[Gearup]

All activities? That's a rather broad term. Here's the thing - let's say I post up figures for the top 10 outdoors activities that people are upset about, apply the same Formula.

We both know that the end result, factoring a significant reduction (70%, 80% or 95% - whatever you are happy with), the length of time, the absence of any tourists etc. etc. is going to leave a net figure that is small.

Exceptionally small.

As an example - Ocean swimming - 2018/2019 figures were ~1,700 rescues. If we remove 35% due to no Tourists, that's ~1,200 (using Lazy maths), then divide by 12 - that's 100 - now let's divide that by 95% - that's 5.

Now let's account for the fact that the most likely demographic that would be going out to Swim in the sea during a lockdown are experienced Swimmers/Athletes (not saying they never get into trouble - but y'know, stats n stuff) - that leads to 0.

Also add in it's no longer Summer.

Rinse and repeat for any other activity you care to name.



Sometimes they do and sometimes Governments have a habit of using situations to legislate powers that otherwise would never have been granted. And to be frank, I don't trust this Government nor do I trust the senior Police Management.

Feel free to rip my argument to shreds on that point, but never-the-less, I can think of multiple instances both in NZ and overseas were Emergency Powers were granted and weren't wholesale revoked, with some 'systems, procedures and structures' being left intact.



I should have perhaps clarified, I was using it to highlight that the claim 'it's being evaluated on risk of injury requiring 3rd party intervention' is demonstrably not true.

Yep all activities and this is the second time I've had to draw your attention to it. This time refer to the second line of post #113. Why are the Government not permittting it all? I'd say it's to keep people safe.
And don't waste my time with your Top Ten red herring.

[TheDemonLord]

Yep all activities and this is the second time I've had to draw your attention to it.

All is an infinite and regressive measure. Let's do the Hypothetical, I'll list a bunch of activities, pull the numbers, run the maths, show that the number is in the single or low double digits and so as to be so negligable as to be irrelevant, You'll engage in a series of what-about-isms etc.

Using an example you provided and one I provided, both sets of numbers show the expected numbers to be tiny, even an aggregate across all activities that are enjoyed in isolation but could require rescuing, will still be miniscule.

This time refer to the second line of post #113. Why are the Government not permittting it all? I'd say it's to keep people safe.

I agree that's why they say they are doing it, but when the justification is interrogated, it simply doesn't add up, on multiple levels. And I happen to have an issue when a civil liberty is taken away on flimsy justification, even in a scenario such as this.

And don't waste my time with your Top Ten red herring.

I didn't - in fact you've proved my reluctance rather nicely - that by requesting 'all' - you'll just continually move the Goal Posts.

[FJRider]

You are aware that within the spectrum of people with Mental Health issues, there is an extremely tight overlap with people who either attempt or complete Suicide?

I never implied, infered or suggested that all people who had Mental health problems are suicidal.

I mentioned Mental Health and your post in reply was to tell me about the high NZ suicide rate. I would regard that as being "Inferred" ..,.

No, I didn't.

I'm not sure what you are reading, but by the rebuttals you make it bears little resemblance to what I post.

Like I said - Are you high?

Sounds like you ...

... could be purely for Mental health to take an hour away from young children who are crawling up the walls bored out of their minds and aren't able to comprehend why they can't do any of their usual activities ...

But it wasn't all about you ... right .. ??

and no, I don't buy the 'but you might need rescuing argument' - The numbers, assuming the worst case scenario are nowhere near sufficient to have any large scale impact.

Such are things at the moment ... for now ... them's the rules ...

[Gearup]

All is an infinite and regressive measure. Let's do the Hypothetical, I'll list a bunch of activities, pull the numbers, run the maths, show that the number is in the single or low double digits and so as to be so negligable as to be irrelevant, You'll engage in a series of what-about-isms etc.

Using an example you provided and one I provided, both sets of numbers show the expected numbers to be tiny, even an aggregate across all activities that are enjoyed in isolation but could require rescuing, will still be miniscule.



I agree that's why they say they are doing it, but when the justification is interrogated, it simply doesn't add up, on multiple levels. And I happen to have an issue when a civil liberty is taken away on flimsy justification, even in a scenario such as this.



I didn't - in fact you've proved my reluctance rather nicely - that by requesting 'all' - you'll just continually move the Goal Posts.

Once again, because you obviously don't get it, the Government made the ruling about all the activities. I suggest you talk to them about how it's infinite and regressive.

I've already given you the reason why I think they did it. See ya!

[FJRider]

Let's do the Hypothetical, I'll list a bunch of activities, pull the numbers, run the maths, show that the number is in the single or low double digits and so as to be so negligable as to be irrelevant, You'll engage in a series of what-about-isms etc.

Take a look at the annual road toll's ... go back as far as you like. ALL those thought they had a "negligible" risk of an accident ... injury ... or death.

But they died anyway.

The gamble of risk is your's ... but if your "risk" involves the possibility putting others (or yourself) at risk ... expect some (the ones that might be your rescue force) might have taken a different view of your risk.

And take a look at the road toll during lockdown. See who died and why.

I didn't - in fact you've proved my reluctance rather nicely - that by requesting 'all' - you'll just continually move the Goal Posts.

Kick in the other direction ... you're scoring own goals ...



(get spell check ... makes you look like a stupid prick without it )

[MaxPenguin]

For a start they've been shat on, quite epicly by this Government and when they see that yet again, despite being able to meet all the requirements of Social Isolation, they are still being told No, then yes - they are justifiably upset.

It's not Entitlement. I've tooted the horn for swimming in the Sea, hiking in the Bush and a myriad of other activities that are done in isolation.

For some as well, Hunting is a regular part of their Food supply, rather than spend hundreds at the supermarket for Meat, they go out, bag an Animal etc. etc. If they have their budget worked out on that premise or if being out of work is tightening the purse strings - is being concerned for that really 'entitled'?

TL;DR - I think most hunters just want to be Left Alone, to do their thing.

How have hunters been shat on?

And don't make me laugh about food gathering, they can change their ways for a bit, just like everyone else. And the argument about hunting to gather food to feed the family is a cop out. I don't think hunting for meat is all that cost effective once you add up all the costs e.g. rifles, ammo, dog upkeep, Hilux., fuel etc. Yes its a recreation as well, but, again. Its not for long.

[Berries]

TL;DR - I think most hunters just want to be Left Alone, to do their thing.

Don't we all.

[jasonu]

And stupid old Dover Samuels giving the nation a proper good telling off on the news.
Apparently the whanau will be breaking the rules to go fishing.

Why do the maoris think they are so entitled?