Covid-19

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Mar 11, 2006
3,744
2,172
1,743
She isn't rethinking her past, she is talking about the present day which is a distinct change from the past. Just because you personally didn't understand or care about the risks doesn't mean others shouldn't have. I know people that don't really care much about drunk driving. But, they don't brag about it and call the people that do "Karen." BTW, drunk driving killed 10,000 in the US in 2019. COVID killed 375,000 in the US in 2020. Putting a piece of fabric over your face while in public spaces to help prevent the third leading cause of death isn't too big of burden to ask. Ignoring it and making us one of the worst countries on the planet at COVID is poor citizenship that should be judged.
But, you go right ahead and act holier-than-thou about the fact that you didn't get it.
Wait a second, are you seriously comparing not wearing a mask to someone drunk driving???

“Act holier-tan-thou” You seriously did not understand my response. I stated it never bothered me when others didn’t wear a mask — I didn‘t judge them or like Maddox assume they were selfish. The opposite of holier-than-this.

I never said I didnt wear a mask. I stated several times an this board over the year that I did, but I sure as hell never worried about others that decided to wear or don’t wear a mask. It is not too hard going around people in stores. I never felt like I ever had problems with people encroaching me. Have you heard of walking around?
 
Last edited:
Mar 11, 2006
3,744
2,172
1,743
You would have felt differently if you were one of the ones I put on a ventilator.

It bothered me because I got to see the people gasping for their last breaths that this careless and selfish attitude helped worsen. There is clear science that face-coverings limit the spread in enclosed spaces. Not doing is potentially killing other people. I cannot comprehend how you can't see this.
People have been fully vaccinated for months. Maddow is just now finally saying what most everyone else already knew. Mask mandates have ceased in most places. But Maddox just NOW figures this out and has to re-think her thinking about being threatened by someone wearing a mask.

And before you respond we are talking about Rachel Maddow. Do you really want to continue defending something she said? :)
Her record of accuracy is not stellar.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
31,099
32,332
1,743
oklahoma city
Wait a second, are you seriously comparing not wearing a mask to someone drunk driving???

“Act holier-tan-thou” You seriously did not understand my response. I stated it never bothered me when others didn’t wear a mask — I didn‘t judge them or like Maddox assume they were selfish. The opposite of holier-than-this.

I never said I didnt wear a mask. I stated several times an this board over the year that I did, but I sure as hell never worried about others that decided to wear or don’t wear a mask. It is not too hard going around people in stores. I never felt like I ever had problems with people encroaching me. Have you heard of walking around?
Yes. Not only am I making the comparison, it is worse. 375,000 dead Americans because we did so poorly. NEVER did drunk driving come close to that even at its worst. The risk to others of an individual act of drunk driving is not high. Of course I'm not defending it, just looking at numbers as I do instead of depending on how I feel about it or "interpret" it like you do. Other countries showed how much better COVID could be done when a complaint population follows the rules. What happened is like drunk driving where if you hit someone they become a drunk driver also. You clearly do not understand the risks of drunk driving and the risks of severe infectious disease transmission during a pandemic.

The holier-than-thou was bragging about not looking down at people who were actively spreading a deadly disease. If you gave a crap about your fellow man it very much should have bothered you. And, calling people "Karen" because they didn't like to see their loved ones dead but you don't care is what I am talking about. You are right, holier-than-thou isn't the right term, but I don't want to say what I think about it.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
31,099
32,332
1,743
oklahoma city
People have been fully vaccinated for months. Maddow is just now finally saying what most everyone else already knew. Mask mandates have ceased in most places. But Maddox just NOW figures this out and has to re-think her thinking about being threatened by someone wearing a mask.

And before you respond we are talking about Rachel Maddow. Do you really want to continue defending something she said? :)
Her record of accuracy is not stellar.
She is an partisan hack who makes far too much money breeding divisiveness. I'm not defending her, I'm defending that we should have felt as she stated and it is understandable to feel strange about it now.

If you had seen what I had seen, I hope you would feel differently. I really don't know if you would.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,744
2,172
1,743
The holier-than-thou was bragging about not looking down at people who were actively spreading a deadly disease. If you gave a crap about your fellow man it very much should have bothered you. And, calling people "Karen" because they didn't like to see their loved ones dead but you don't care is what I am talking about. You are right, holier-than-thou isn't the right term, but I don't want to say what I think about it.
So I am wrong for not looking down at people? You really want to stick with that?

After time to rethink you still double down on drunk driving analogy. When you were in stores were you really unable to figure out how to avoid people that threatened you by not wearing masks?
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
31,099
32,332
1,743
oklahoma city
So I am wrong for not looking down at people? You really want to stick with that?

After time to rethink you still double down on drunk driving analogy. When you were in stores were you really unable to figure out how to avoid people that threatened you by not wearing masks?
Who said only in non-crowded stores? And, distancing and masks because it is aerosol spread. Don't try to limit it to make your incorrect comment sound good. I'm in decent shape and pay attention. I can avoid ax murderers also. That doesn't make it OK to be an ax murderer.

Yes, I am "doubling down" on my drunk driving comment. Are you going to continue to defend people ignoring our options to stop a disease that killed 375K in less than a year while whining about one that kills 10K?

And, are you saying you do not look down on drunk drivers? Sure sounds like you are to me.

Your inconsistencies are unreal.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,744
2,172
1,743
Who said only in non-crowded stores? And, distancing and masks because it is aerosol spread. Don't try to limit it to make your incorrect comment sound good. I'm in decent shape and pay attention. I can avoid ax murderers also. That doesn't make it OK to be an ax murderer.

Yes, I am "doubling down" on my drunk driving comment. Are you going to continue to defend people ignoring our options to stop a disease that killed 375K in less than a year while whining about one that kills 10K?

And, are you saying you do not look down on drunk drivers? Sure sounds like you are to me.

Your inconsistencies are unreal.
Try telling that analog to the mother of a girl that lost her 17 year old daughter to a drunk driver.

You may be a doctor, but a steward of data and risks you are not. Tell me where have you not been able to avoid a unmasked person? And why couldn’t you?
And since you couldn’t avoid an unmasked person, I am sure you isolated yourself for ten days before returning to work at a hospital with vulnerable people. Because if you didn’t then that would be as bad as being unmasked, right?
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
31,099
32,332
1,743
oklahoma city
Try telling that analog to the mother of a girl that lost her 17 year old daughter to a drunk driver.

You may be a doctor, but a steward of data and risks you are not. Tell me where have you not been able to avoid a unmasked person? And why couldn’t you?
And since you couldn’t avoid an unmasked person, I am sure you isolated yourself for ten days before returning to work at a hospital with vulnerable people. Because if you didn’t then that would be as bad as being unmasked, right?
The lack of logic is so typical from you. If only Americans had taken the "how to avoid COVID in the store" course that @cableok is putting on then nobody had to die. :derp:

See, the difference is I am saying BOTH are bad. You are claiming that only drunk driving is bad. I would have no problem at all telling the mother of a 17-year-old that I am adamantly against drunk driving but that COVID has killed 35 times as many people this year. And I also had no problem telling the families of the dead people from COVID that I am against the people needlessly avoiding precautions to stop the spread. Maybe you should tell them you had it all figured out with your avoidance techniques if only their dead loved ones could have listened to you they would still be here.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,744
2,172
1,743
The lack of logic is so typical from you. If only Americans had taken the "how to avoid COVID in the store" course that @cableok is putting on then nobody had to die. :derp:

See, the difference is I am saying BOTH are bad. You are claiming that only drunk driving is bad. I would have no problem at all telling the mother of a 17-year-old that I am adamantly against drunk driving but that COVID has killed 35 times as many people this year. And I also had no problem telling the families of the dead people from COVID that I am against the people needlessly avoiding precautions to stop the spread. Maybe you should tell them you had it all figured out with your avoidance techniques if only their dead loved ones could have listened to you they would still be here.
I am having an absurd debate because a person that doesn’t understand risks, data, and statistics wants me to look down at others and be mad at them.

If you think passing by someone in a grocery store is anything more than an extremely low-risk then you didn’t read much about COVID transmission. And again, where are you going that you can‘tavoid the few unmasked people over the last couple of months? You are acting like it is difficult to avoid. I can only assume that you begin to feel threatened when you see someone on the same row as you.

Why do you want to live you life feeling like a victim and blame others and get mad at them? And why is it bad that I don’t blame others?

EDIT: I feel the same way about vaccines. I got it first time I was eligible. My entire family did as well. If boosters are required I will get it every year. But even though I dont understand why people, would choose not to be vaccinated..it is their choice and I won’t look down my noses at them either.
 
Last edited:

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
31,099
32,332
1,743
oklahoma city
I am having an absurd debate because a person that doesn’t understand risks, data, and statistics wants me to look down at others and be mad at them.

If you think passing by someone in a grocery store is anything more than an extremely low-risk then you didn’t read much about COVID transmission. And again, where are you going that you can‘tavoid the few unmasked people over the last couple of months? You are acting like it is difficult to avoid. I can only assume that you begin to feel threatened when you see someone on the same row as you.

Why do you want to live you life feeling like a victim and blame others and get mad at them? And why is it bad that I don’t blame others?

EDIT: I feel the same way about vaccines. I got it first time I was eligible. My entire family did as well. If boosters are required I will get it every year. But even though I dont understand why people, would choose not to be vaccinated..it is their choice and I won’t look down my noses at them either.
So, you don't look down your nose at a drunk driver? Or, is that action that harms others worthy of your scorn but going without a mask in a public place where it is required is not? Complete inconsistency or you don't care about people that harm others. Those are your only choices.

And, quit with the melodrama. Nobody is playing the victim other than you with your false claim about "tell that to a mother of a 17 year old...." That is the only false victimization. It is all about when you see someone during the pandemic not wearing a mask do you think "That is a freedom-loving person" like you, or do you think "That fool is possibly passing on a deadly disease to hundreds of people and is too clueless or wreckless to understand." I am not victimized by my thoughts. I don't call the police, yell at them, or anything. I simply think they, and their online advocates, are poor citizens, poor examples of community, only care about themselves, and are exactly the word you claimed they are not, selfish.

And, if you even had the slightest clue about how this thing is transmitted by asymptomatic individuals, you would understand the drunk driving analogy. The vast majority of people driving drunk don't wreck. You can "avoid" most drunk drivers by not driving late at night, paying attention to their actions, etc. Of those that do wreck, most do not kill anyone. Only some actually kill. Likewise, most people walking around in a pandemic are not spreading the virus. Of those that do, many only cause others mild infections. Only some kill. Both are simple social actions, not driving drunk and covering your face in public. Easy, but not all do.

It is basic libertarianism. Your right to do ends when it harms others. The fact that you have a mental block because you have had years of being told that DD is bad, and COVID is new and your conservative side doesn't "believe" in masks does not change the fact that it is a similar action that similarly causes harm to others. And your claim I don't understand data is BS. I wrote on another forum about DD and COVID and pulled the data. If you think I am wrong, prove it. But, we both know you can't because you are all emotion and false insults and with amateur knowledge of the subject. And, the person that agreed with your post solidifies this as he is EXACTLY the same.

I'm done here because you would argue with an astrophysicist about planetary alignment if you felt it helped your politics. @CowboyJD is right, at some point, you have to realize you are playing chess with a pigeon and no matter how many years of training you have had at chess and no matter how simply you try to make the explanation, the pigeon can't get any of it and will keep doing the same thing.
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
18,595
20,544
1,743
I'm done here because you would argue with an astrophysicist about planetary alignment if you felt it helped your politics. @CowboyJD is right, at some point, you have to realize you are playing chess with a pigeon and no matter how many years of training you have had at chess and no matter how simply you try to make the explanation, the pigeon can't get any of it and will keep doing the same thing.
Don’t forget crapping all over the chess board, flying off, and strutting around with the other pigeons acting like he actually won something.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,959
7,153
1,743
Landlocked
So, you don't look down your nose at a drunk driver? Or, is that action that harms others worthy of your scorn but going without a mask in a public place where it is required is not? Complete inconsistency or you don't care about people that harm others. Those are your only choices.

And, quit with the melodrama. Nobody is playing the victim other than you with your false claim about "tell that to a mother of a 17 year old...." That is the only false victimization. It is all about when you see someone during the pandemic not wearing a mask do you think "That is a freedom-loving person" like you, or do you think "That fool is possibly passing on a deadly disease to hundreds of people and is too clueless or wreckless to understand." I am not victimized by my thoughts. I don't call the police, yell at them, or anything. I simply think they, and their online advocates, are poor citizens, poor examples of community, only care about themselves, and are exactly the word you claimed they are not, selfish.

And, if you even had the slightest clue about how this thing is transmitted by asymptomatic individuals, you would understand the drunk driving analogy. The vast majority of people driving drunk don't wreck. You can "avoid" most drunk drivers by not driving late at night, paying attention to their actions, etc. Of those that do wreck, most do not kill anyone. Only some actually kill. Likewise, most people walking around in a pandemic are not spreading the virus. Of those that do, many only cause others mild infections. Only some kill. Both are simple social actions, not driving drunk and covering your face in public. Easy, but not all do.

It is basic libertarianism. Your right to do ends when it harms others. The fact that you have a mental block because you have had years of being told that DD is bad, and COVID is new and your conservative side doesn't "believe" in masks does not change the fact that it is a similar action that similarly causes harm to others. And your claim I don't understand data is BS. I wrote on another forum about DD and COVID and pulled the data. If you think I am wrong, prove it. But, we both know you can't because you are all emotion and false insults and with amateur knowledge of the subject. And, the person that agreed with your post solidifies this as he is EXACTLY the same.

I'm done here because you would argue with an astrophysicist about planetary alignment if you felt it helped your politics. @CowboyJD is right, at some point, you have to realize you are playing chess with a pigeon and no matter how many years of training you have had at chess and no matter how simply you try to make the explanation, the pigeon can't get any of it and will keep doing the same thing.
If I'm understanding his posts correctly, I believe he's contextualizing it to account for actual risk of transmission. As you're well aware, some scenarios present near-zero risk to others while others may be far more so. Distancing, itself, is potentially ineffective since it's largely about concentration and time.

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/17/e2018995118

So the drunk driver analogy would be apples to apples if an infected person was sneezing directly into the face of an un-protected individual and/or in a confined space. Otherwise, the analogy really starts to break down. Just going without a mask along a sidewalk outside or even inside a grocery store, where encounters would naturally be very brief and/or distanced just don't seem to present the level of risk that driving a vehicle while impaired would. Just my opinion, of course...
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
31,099
32,332
1,743
oklahoma city
If I'm understanding his posts correctly, I believe he's contextualizing it to account for actual risk of transmission. As you're well aware, some scenarios present near-zero risk to others while others may be far more so. Distancing, itself, is potentially ineffective since it's largely about concentration and time.

https://www.pnas.org/content/118/17/e2018995118

So the drunk driver analogy would be apples to apples if an infected person was sneezing directly into the face of an un-protected individual and/or in a confined space. Otherwise, the analogy really starts to break down. Just going without a mask along a sidewalk outside or even inside a grocery store, where encounters would naturally be very brief and/or distanced just don't seem to present the level of risk that driving a vehicle while impaired would. Just my opinion, of course...
You can be charged with drunk driving because you are sitting in your car driver's seat, not moving, and sound asleep. But, at that point you are not harming anyone and if you never move the car (like if you stay outside on a sidewalk) both are near-zero risk. If you want to take the most extreme of the "low risk" of each scenario to compare, that is fine. But, you can't take the high risk of one and compare it to the low risk of other.
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,959
7,153
1,743
Landlocked
You can be charged with drunk driving because you are sitting in your car driver's seat, not moving, and sound asleep. But, at that point you are not harming anyone and if you never move the car (like if you stay outside on a sidewalk) both are near-zero risk. If you want to take the most extreme of the "low risk" of each scenario to compare, that is fine. But, you can't take the high risk of one and compare it to the low risk of other.
We aren't discussing the legal definition of drunk driving unless that's really your basis for judging other people. I honestly don't see how the legal parameters even matter. I don't judge people based on how closely they follow laws.

Sure, I hate when people drive drunk, more so when they injure others as a result. I have no reason to hate them for sleeping in their cars and putting nobody at risk. Why would you care about the latter? How would a person sleeping in a parked car put anyone at risk?
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
31,099
32,332
1,743
oklahoma city
We aren't discussing the legal definition of drunk driving unless that's really your basis for judging other people. I honestly don't see how the legal parameters even matter. I don't judge people based on how closely they follow laws.

Sure, I hate when people drive drunk, more so when they injure others as a result. I have no reason to hate them for sleeping in their cars and putting nobody at risk. Why would you care about the latter? How would a person sleeping in a parked car put anyone at risk?
We weren’t discussing someone walking outside on a sidewalk either when talking about failing to use masks until you added that. The point is that drunk driving and failing to use masks are similar. Getting very drunk and driving through a city you aren’t familiar with is very unsafe. Having just one too many and driving in the neighborhood you have lived in for 20 years is still unsafe but less so. Same with masks. Being in a room full of people talking maskless was unsafe. Quietly walking in a large, uncrowded building was much less unsafe.
You started the comparison of extremes, not me.
I didn’t say I care about people sleeping in a car. I also don’t care about someone walking outside on a sidewalk. I was giving a counter-example to your “outside on a sidewalk” point.
Both situations have higher and near-zero risk scenarios. You attempted to compare them unequally.

The point is that I do not like selfish people putting others at risk by either way. The other person doesn’t like some people putting others at risk in one way but isn’t bothered by others doing it in a different way. Did you hate it when people were going in crowded spaces not wearing a mask and putting others at risk?
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,744
2,172
1,743
So, you don't look down your nose at a drunk driver? Or, is that action that harms others worthy of your scorn but going without a mask in a public place where it is required is not? Complete inconsistency or you don't care about people that harm others. Those are your only choices.

And, quit with the melodrama. Nobody is playing the victim other than you with your false claim about "tell that to a mother of a 17 year old...." That is the only false victimization. It is all about when you see someone during the pandemic not wearing a mask do you think "That is a freedom-loving person" like you, or do you think "That fool is possibly passing on a deadly disease to hundreds of people and is too clueless or wreckless to understand." I am not victimized by my thoughts. I don't call the police, yell at them, or anything. I simply think they, and their online advocates, are poor citizens, poor examples of community, only care about themselves, and are exactly the word you claimed they are not, selfish.

And, if you even had the slightest clue about how this thing is transmitted by asymptomatic individuals, you would understand the drunk driving analogy. The vast majority of people driving drunk don't wreck. You can "avoid" most drunk drivers by not driving late at night, paying attention to their actions, etc. Of those that do wreck, most do not kill anyone. Only some actually kill. Likewise, most people walking around in a pandemic are not spreading the virus. Of those that do, many only cause others mild infections. Only some kill. Both are simple social actions, not driving drunk and covering your face in public. Easy, but not all do.

It is basic libertarianism. Your right to do ends when it harms others. The fact that you have a mental block because you have had years of being told that DD is bad, and COVID is new and your conservative side doesn't "believe" in masks does not change the fact that it is a similar action that similarly causes harm to others. And your claim I don't understand data is BS. I wrote on another forum about DD and COVID and pulled the data. If you think I am wrong, prove it. But, we both know you can't because you are all emotion and false insults and with amateur knowledge of the subject. And, the person that agreed with your post solidifies this as he is EXACTLY the same.

I'm done here because you would argue with an astrophysicist about planetary alignment if you felt it helped your politics. @CowboyJD is right, at some point, you have to realize you are playing chess with a pigeon and no matter how many years of training you have had at chess and no matter how simply you try to make the explanation, the pigeon can't get any of it and will keep doing the same thing.
Our difference here boils down to our views on risk and specifically risk tolerance. You seem to think that there is a large enough risk that someone may somehow come up to you without a mask and that is a large concern for you. I don't remember ever having that concern. I live in Tulsa...I think you said you live in OKC. Both of those cities had mask mandates for most of the 2nd half of last year and up until a few weeks ago. If there were a lot of unmasked people in stores ....I was oblivious. Seeing an unmasked person was very rare and I certainly never felt triggered or was mad at the person because they didn't wear a mask.

A couple of things:
* Understand risk factors: Walking past someone in a store is already an EXTREMELY low risk for COVID transmission. If you are wearing a mask, your risk to get COVID is even lower. We are never going to be completely devoid of risk. There is a reason that the CDC first listed guidelines of 15 minutes of exposure to someone before needing to quarantine. (later dropped to 1 min)

* Living in fear: Your post appears to inform me that you believe anyone that is not living in fear is a COVID non-believer. It is not a binary choice of "that is a freedom-loving person" or "That fool is possibly passing on a deadly disease". As I mentioned I am not rooting on people not wearing a mask in a store ....it just hasn't bothered me because I don't believe it causes me anything more than a very very minimal risk --- and it is easy for me to avoid the risk completely by going the opposite way.
I will ask again, where you have felt trapped from a maskless person? --- I can't imagine that OKC is that much different than Tulsa.

* Drunk Driver analogy: I am still surprised you are keeping this up. It is silly in multiple ways. This is not why I disagree with your analogy, but your brought up that you would have telling the mother of a 17-girl that died from a Drunk Driver that COVID killed 35x more people.
I am sure you are a wonderful doctor, but you again misunderstand risk. In Tulsa County, there was only one death from COVID in 2020 and that was a young man with a heart-problem from birth. During that same time frame, at least three Tulsa County residents died from a drunk driver.

* Libertarianism: One thing we do agree is your definition of libertarianism. I concur that "Your right to do ends when it harms others". I couldn't have said it better myself.
But you are wrong that my "conservative side doesn't believe in masks" I have mentioned several times in this thread that it is absolutely logical and understood that a mask would curtail a viral load from being transmitted. That is why I stated in my very first post about Maddow about airplanes. Airplanes, buses, subways, crowded theaters, are wholly different than being at a Home Depot. I can't get around a maskless person on an airplane and I am stuck there for a period of time --- risk of transmission increases. Not remotely the same as even purposely briefly passing someone in an aisle.
I was in a board meeting last week for a school non-profit. I was there for three hours in a closed classroom with 30 people --- we all wore masks the entire time--- again completely different situation.

* Risk moving forward: The COVID risk is not going to be zero for a long time, if ever. We are not going to be able to eliminate risk -- it is inherent. But it is important to understand the difference between high-risk situations and situations with extremely low risk. If you decide you want to judge people negatively because you think situations are higher risk that what they actually are ... that is your personal choice. And to be upset that many others don't view very minimal risk the same as you is also a personal choice.
 
Last edited:

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
31,099
32,332
1,743
oklahoma city
Our difference here boils down to our views on risk and specifically risk tolerance. You seem to think that there is a large enough risk that someone may somehow come up to you without a mask and that is a large concern for you. I don't remember ever having that concern. I live in Tulsa...I think you said you live in OKC. Both of those cities had mask mandates for most of the 2nd half of last year and up until a few weeks ago. If there were a lot of unmasked people in stores ....I was oblivious. Seeing an unmasked person was very rare and I certainly never felt triggered or was mad at the person because they didn't wear a mask.

A couple of things:
* Understand risk factors: Walking past someone in a store is already an EXTREMELY low risk for COVID transmission. If you are wearing a mask, your risk to get COVID is even lower. We are never going to be completely devoid of risk. There is a reason that the CDC first listed guidelines of 15 minutes of exposure to someone before needing to quarantine. (later dropped to 1 min)

* Living in fear: Your post appears to inform me that you believe anyone that is not living in fear is a COVID non-believer. It is not a binary choice of "that is a freedom-loving person" or "That fool is possibly passing on a deadly disease". As I mentioned I am not rooting on people not wearing a mask in a store ....it just hasn't bothered me because I don't believe it causes me anything more than a very very minimal risk --- and it is easy for me to avoid the risk completely by going the opposite way.
I will ask again, where you have felt trapped from a maskless person? --- I can't imagine that OKC is that much different than Tulsa.

* Drunk Driver analogy: I am still surprised you are keeping this up. It is silly in multiple ways. This is not why I disagree with your analogy, but your brought up that you would have telling the mother of a 17-girl that died from a Drunk Driver that COVID killed 35x more people.
I am sure you are a wonderful doctor, but you again misunderstand risk. In Tulsa County, there was only one death from COVID in 2020 and that was a young man with a heart-problem from birth. During that same time frame, at least three Tulsa County residents died from a drunk driver.

* Libertarianism: One thing we do agree is your definition of libertarianism. I concur that "Your right to do ends when it harms others". I couldn't of said it better myself.
But you are wrong that my "conservative side doesn't believe in masks" I have mentioned several times in this thread that it is absolutely logical and understood that a mask would curtail a viral load from being transmitted. That is why I stated in my very first post about Maddow about airplanes. Airplanes, buses, subways, crowded theaters, are wholly different than being at a Home Depot. I can't get around a maskless person on an airplane and I am stuck there for a period of time --- risk of transmission increases. Not remotely the same as even purposely briefly passing someone in an aisle.
I was in a board meeting last week for a school non-profit. I was there for three hours in a closed classroom with 30 people --- we all wore masks the entire time--- again completely different situation.

* Risk moving forward: The COVID risk is not going to be zero for a long time, if ever. We are not going to be able to eliminate risk -- it is inherent. But it is important to understand the difference between high-risk situations and situations with extremely low risk. If you decide you want to judge people negatively because you think situations are higher risk that what they actually are ... that is your personal choice. And to be upset that many others don't view very minimal risk the same as you is also a personal choice.
I have already asked you for the data to show that the 350k deaths from Covid are less than the 10k from DD per instance. But, your anecdote is not data, it is a pointless anecdote. And, I don’t live I Tulsa county but would be absolute shocked if there was only one death from COVID in 2020 so I don’t even believe the anecdote.

Yes, I understand risk. That is the primary job of an ER physician is parsing out risk all day long. I send home people with severe disease, they die. I admit too many people with little disease I lose my job. Your attempts to claim otherwise were humorous but are now just stale. If you have real data that shows an instance of drunk driving is high risk but going into a public space at the height of the pandemic without protection is low risk share it. Because that wasn’t the case a few months ago when I researched it with the medical librarian so I’m fairly confident you don’t have it now.
But, hey, keep strutting if you want.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,744
2,172
1,743
And, I don’t live I Tulsa county but would be absolute shocked if there was only one death from COVID in 2020 so I don’t even believe the anecdote.


But, hey, keep strutting if you want.
I have zero idea what “keep strutting“ means.

But here is link to Tulsa County Health Dept. Easy to sort by age of cases and deaths. And I admit I was wrong. It is one death under age 18 since they started calculating ...not just 2020....but for last 14 months. You may think Tulsa County Health Dept data is an anecdote, I refer to it as a fact.
https://www.tulsa-health.org

You also might want to read the interactive MIT COVID for risk on being in indoors in different settings, both masked and unmasked, multiple size rooms, and for duration. It may help you feel more comfortable the next time you pass an unmasked person in a store.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/oth...people-may-really-be-safe-indoors/ar-BB1bxOn0
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
12,959
7,153
1,743
Landlocked
We weren’t discussing someone walking outside on a sidewalk either when talking about failing to use masks until you added that. The point is that drunk driving and failing to use masks are similar. Getting very drunk and driving through a city you aren’t familiar with is very unsafe. Having just one too many and driving in the neighborhood you have lived in for 20 years is still unsafe but less so. Same with masks. Being in a room full of people talking maskless was unsafe. Quietly walking in a large, uncrowded building was much less unsafe.
You started the comparison of extremes, not me.
I didn’t say I care about people sleeping in a car. I also don’t care about someone walking outside on a sidewalk. I was giving a counter-example to your “outside on a sidewalk” point.
Both situations have higher and near-zero risk scenarios. You attempted to compare them unequally.

The point is that I do not like selfish people putting others at risk by either way. The other person doesn’t like some people putting others at risk in one way but isn’t bothered by others doing it in a different way. Did you hate it when people were going in crowded spaces not wearing a mask and putting others at risk?
I think the biggest difference is that you view a person without a mask is selfish, presumably across the board, with no context. As if not wearing a mask necessarily means they are selfish... If you're not saying that, I apologize.

I disagree with the view that people not wearing masks are always being selfish, and would only "judge" someone if they were actually doing something very risky. Trust me, I saw plenty of that during the pandemic. There were some very obviously selfish people out there. I thought they were idiots, just like you did. But those people were in the extreme minority as far as I saw in OKC. Of course, we didn't get out that much, so it may have been worse than I perceived.

That said, I realize you were on the front lines putting people on ventilators, etc....which gives you a really unique (though very biased) perspective. Most of us just sat in our houses the whole time and got bored, depressed, and overweight.
 
Last edited: