IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Ringy Rose]

Just now, doc.fixit said:

RB Is that correct? A UK person who is un-jabbed can't come here? Even if they are family? My son and family are supposed to come over in the new year and he seems to think that he has permission if they get a PCR test within 48 hours.

He needs to apply in advance and comply with the testing and quarantine rules when he gets here. But otherwise, he's fine. Visiting immediate family is a valid reason for travel. He'll need to apply for a Manx Entry Permit using the online service.

[Ramseyboi]

2 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said:

Except we're not part of the UK. It's only recently the Irish have started letting non-vaccinated people in, and even then only with stringent testing.

Most European countries have fewer entry restrictions on non-vaccinated residents. So what? 

Non-vaccinated people can still come here from England if they have reason to come here (visiting family, etc).

So why not stop unvaccinated manxies going and coming back.  It is exactly the same thing.  Both carry zero risk since we are riddled with it anyway (and suffering no real consequences)

It is these pointless inconsistencies that make us look stupid.

[doc.fixit]

thanks folks , he's done all that, that's why I was querying RB

[Ramseyboi]

4 minutes ago, Ringy Rose said:

Except we're not part of the UK. It's only recently the Irish have started letting non-vaccinated people in, and even then only with stringent testing.

Most European countries have fewer entry restrictions on non-vaccinated residents. So what? 

Non-vaccinated people can still come here from England if they have reason to come here (visiting family, etc).

Immediate family only. Cousins still can’t come to see other cousins for example or even to their weddings.  It insane

[pongo]

1 minute ago, Ramseyboi said:

So why not stop unvaccinated manxies going and coming back.  

You just said that you were not suggesting that.

It should not apply to those who have a genuine medical reason not to be vaccinated.

[pongo]

1 minute ago, Ramseyboi said:

Immediate family only. Cousins still can’t come to see other cousins for example or even to their weddings.  It insane

Yes they can. Provided they get vaccinated.

[quilp]

36 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

Most made by you and your mates on Twitter at least 20 times a day before they started relaxing all the rules and the doom-sphere mutated.

It worked. Those who were incarcerated were used, in a way, as patsie's. Symbolically, the hard line, no-nonsense-attitude portrayed the seriousness of the issue, the threat was made clear, according to what was understood about covid back then (not much). Emergency Powers, an'that. It helped politically too. Ashford got a gong for it. Simplest way to get the message across. And I'd pose that more of the population were behind this policy than not, in the beginning.

I'm not condoning or condemning here, see it for what it was, the tactics of the so-called "fear-factory" was discussed earlier in this thread. Swift compliance was the order of the day. That time when we knew less. 

Edited November 23, 2021 by quilp

[AcousticallyChallenged]

1 minute ago, quilp said:

It worked. Those who were incarcerated were used, in a way, as patsie's. Symbolically, the hard line, no-nonsense-attitude portrayed the serious of the issue as was perceived back then. Emergency Powers, an'that. It helped politically too. Ashford got a gong for it. Simplest way to get the message across. And I'd pose that more of the population were behind this policy than not, in the beginning.

I'm not condoning or condemning here, see it for what it was, the tactics of the so-called "fear-factory" was discussed earlier in this thread. Swift compliance was the order of the day. That time when we knew less. 

We also lacked a vaccine. Which, as we know, is the real game changer in terms of risk. 

[littlebushy]

16 minutes ago, Ramseyboi said:

Immediate family only. Cousins still can’t come to see other cousins for example or even to their weddings.  It insane

Yeah, but that's more to do with Foxdul than Covid.

[P.K.]

45 minutes ago, Ramseyboi said:

Only last week was I on a teams chat with people in the UK laughing at us for what went on last year and the fact that they STILL can’t send their staff here to do work.

One of them had been planning to relocate  here before COVID kicked off with his family.  Now due to the way we treated him and his staff he isn’t and won’t even take any more clients on if they are here.  Once our contract expires he won’t allow me to renew it.

That could be because you are not telling it like it is.

[Banker]

1 hour ago, Ramseyboi said:

Immediate family only. Cousins still can’t come to see other cousins for example or even to their weddings.  It insane

Tell the stupid idiots to get vaccinated then like all the medical experts suggest 

[Ringy Rose]

1 hour ago, Ramseyboi said:

Cousins still can’t come to see other cousins for example or even to their weddings.

They can if they're vaccinated. There's a simple enough solution right there.

 

1 hour ago, quilp said:

And I'd pose that more of the population were behind this policy than not, in the beginning.

We all stayed at home and did our bit, like we were told to, even though it was awful. I really wanted to sit in my mate's garden with a beer, but I didn't, I stayed at home. Therefore I have zero issue with the Courts throwing the book at those who chose to take the piss out of the rest of us. 

The only people I feel sorry for were the existing prisoners in Jurby, stuck on a 23-hour lockdown because some numbnuts thought they were far too important to follow the rules.

[quilp]

1 hour ago, offshoremanxman said:

... I don’t believe that the success of public compliance is down to how many people we threw in jail or otherwise treated appallingly...

Neither do I, but the threat of incarceration was all part of the show, that this government meant business, a firm hand was on the tiller and woe-betide those who transgressed. The prospect of jail was, imo, also directed at a certain section of society; the chancers, deniers and misfits, maybe; those who 'won't be told' and as we've seen by the numbers put away, there were many who wilfully broke the law as it stood back then. Some of the people who eventually ended up in Jurby had been warned a couple of times prior to them having to be arrested, giving little heed to what was required. One can probably assume that many more people were 'let off' with just a warning, given a chance with the emphasis being the gravity of what we potentially faced. 

The actions taken may seem to some as severe in hindsight but what did we know at the beginning? Fuck all, that's what, and as AcousticallyChallenged pointed out, a time when no vaccine was in sight. Every media broadcast carried a sense of immediacy and quiet desperation, and the plea to comply, constant. The population were put on trust. So effective was the fear instilled that we now have many people suffering the collateral effects of the campaign. The "doom-coven" as they're described. That's to be expected and they should be given the benefit of their doubt rather than harangued. It's attention-seeking hot-heads driving the paranoia who need to be taken to task, those who, without social media know they and their opinions would be insignificant. Given time, and the way things seem to be progressing, their existential fears of the overly-cautious will likely diminish. By next summer? 

What else can be done? 

[Ramseyboi]

10 hours ago, quilp said:

Neither do I, but the threat of incarceration was all part of the show, that this government meant business, a firm hand was on the tiller and woe-betide those who transgressed. The prospect of jail was, imo, also directed at a certain section of society; the chancers, deniers and misfits, maybe; those who 'won't be told' and as we've seen by the numbers put away, there were many who wilfully broke the law as it stood back then. Some of the people who eventually ended up in Jurby had been warned a couple of times prior to them having to be arrested, giving little heed to what was required. One can probably assume that many more people were 'let off' with just a warning, given a chance with the emphasis being the gravity of what we potentially faced. 

The actions taken may seem to some as severe in hindsight but what did we know at the beginning? Fuck all, that's what, and as AcousticallyChallenged pointed out, a time when no vaccine was in sight. Every media broadcast carried a sense of immediacy and quiet desperation, and the plea to comply, constant. The population were put on trust. So effective was the fear instilled that we now have many people suffering the collateral effects of the campaign. The "doom-coven" as they're described. That's to be expected and they should be given the benefit of their doubt rather than harangued. It's attention-seeking hot-heads driving the paranoia who need to be taken to task, those who, without social media know they and their opinions would be insignificant. Given time, and the way things seem to be progressing, their existential fears of the overly-cautious will likely diminish. By next summer? 

What else can be done? 

What happened to the most wilful law breaker of them all, the one who advertised his event online and still cracked on with it despite being warned not to?

I have no issue with laws being enforced as long as their is consistency and clear benefit to those rules being in place.

There is no obvious reason for stopping un unjabbed people coming over, and their is no consistency in sending people to prison for stopping for petrol but letting the swimming look just get forgotten about.

These are the things that make us look stupid.  Implement sensible laws and enforce them, or don’t bother.  It really is that simple.

Edited November 24, 2021 by Ramseyboi

[Ringy Rose]

9 hours ago, Ramseyboi said:

What happened to the most wilful law breaker of them all, the one who advertised his event online and still cracked on with it despite being warned not to?

That's a very good question. There was supposed to be a trial in August, that was the last mention in the media. Presumably he'd be crowing everywhere if the prosecution had been withdrawn?