New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough

Re:New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown... by igetspam on Saturday March 28, 2020 @12:22PM (#22712114)

The possible end result of the disease is death. Which cure is worse? A 44 year old school teacher and father of six died in my county. He went from sick to dead in a week. He had no underlying conditions that made him "at risk." By all accounts, he was active and healthy. The population of people who are at risk of death or long term lung damage are those that can be classified as "human."

I don't particularly care if people don't want to protect themselves but this isn't about selfish individuals. This is about everyone else. If, like some politicians, you are willing to "sacrifice" yourself, please do it quickly and away from populations.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown... by SpicyLemonZest on Saturday March 28, 2020 @12:41PM (#22712270)

I guess I'm not sure I see why we're the ones who have to move. I'd be totally fine with a proposal to construct voluntary social distancing sites for people who'd like to spend the next 18 months isolated.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown... by igetspam on Sunday March 29, 2020 @04:57PM (#22722651)

Perhaps because the safety of the majority should outweigh the minority. If you'd like to risk yourself, why shouldn't you be the one to move to a high infection site? Why protect you and yours and not me and mine? Those who opt in to risky behavior (willfully accepting the possibility of being infected with a dangerous virus being the risky behavior), should be allowed to do so away from the rest of us.

[ Parent | on HN ]