For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1837363
Almost everything you do is conditional.

So if I buy a bottle of whisky in a supermarket I have to prove I'm over 18. I'm not allowed to drink in a pub unless I can prove I'm over 18. The pub landlord can throw me out if he doesn't like the look of me. The restaurateur can pretend he has no tables.

You can't hire a car without showing a (forgeable) driving licence

The list goes on and on but still people who happily comply with all of the above ( and more ) day in day out can still find an example that is unacceptable for no obvious rational reason....except that it's a new one :roll:
seanxair, T6Harvard, Flyin'Dutch' and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By Charles Hunt
#1837371
As Frank has shown all we need is our old vaccination booklet and some new rubber stamps. We really don't need a new phone based QR code reading megaproject. (Outsourced to Capita?)

Is there no problem on earth that governments can't make worse?

Yes they're forgeable, but as John points out so is everything else.
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1837383
This thread will not run for long.

Pilots are on the whole rule followers and happy to carry whatever is expected before committing to flying, including headsets and kneeboards.

And where there is a seeming unclarity of the rules we have many happy to interpret them in the most draconian manner, outdoing each other in encouraging the hapless OP to act in manner A or B, and strenuously arguing with those who demonstrably know irrefutable facts.

:)

The list of those not going to fly to Le Touq for lunch for having to travel with a vaccination record will be truly very short....
By A4 Pacific
#1837390
I have read this elsewhere:

On the one hand, if this level of intrusion into our lives is ‘proportionate’ then probably it's not safe to open up the economy.

On the other hand, if it is safe to open up the economy, to come out of this lockdown and this crisis that we have been living under, then why do we require a division between those who have been vaccinated, and those who have not?
skydriller, lobstaboy, Spooky and 1 others liked this
By Paultheparaglider
#1837394
lobstaboy wrote:Well I suppose the concept is an erosion of liberty and so on, ID cards by the back door, that sort of thing. But I guess if it meant I could go to the pub I'd accept the principle.


As someone who lived and worked in a country for many years that required ID cards, I personally don't see the big deal. The practical advantages far outweighed any, mostly imaginary, loss of liberty. I would have them in a shot.

As for needing to produce a vaccination passport to enter a pub, it just won't happen. At least not government mandated, anyway. So, why worry about it?

What will be more interesting will be to see the complete nightmare that politicians of different countries will make of the almost inevitable requirements of vaccine passports (and testing requirements) to permit international travel to reopen fully. The possibilities to irritate us all are endless.
JAFO, lobstaboy liked this
User avatar
By kanga
#1837399
ISTR that when the idea of 'vaccine passports' was first mooted as something potentially useful to venue managers (pub landlords and others), it was as something on which such managers might or might not choose to insist, but which to be useful would have to be of a form with some authoritative (eg 'governmental', such as Public Health authority) 'certification' (document, QR code, .. ) like a driving licence (or 'proof of age' for young-looking over-18s who do not drive (I gather these exist but do not know who issues them). I personally see no 'threat to civil liberties' in such. I was therefore unimpressed by hearing interviewed on the Today programme a government backbencher (from the 'libertarian' wing thereof) saying that AIUI (and my gist) for 'government' to have any part in such would be the equivalent of forcing every citizen to tell 'government' everything they were doing and everywhere they were going.
Last edited by kanga on Fri Apr 02, 2021 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MikeB, JAFO liked this
By A4 Pacific
#1837405
I presume a vaccine passport will only be ‘issued’ one week after a second jab? Which for anyone under 60 with no underlying blahs, will be after the pubs have been reopened?

For many under 50, (no blahs) I would imagine no passport until September/October? :roll:
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1837408
A4 Pacific wrote:I presume a vaccine passport will only be ‘issued’ one week after a second jab? Which for anyone under 60 with no underlying blahs, will be after the pubs have been reopened? For many under 50, (no blahs) I would imagine no passport until September/October? :roll:


Exactly, so you now have half the population that even if they were to want a vaccination, cant have one because the government decides who gets the vaccine and who doesnt. That is the principle that should be being debated wrt such passports.
A4 Pacific, flybymike liked this
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1837413
A4 Pacific wrote:On the one hand, if this level of intrusion into our lives is ‘proportionate’ then probably it's not safe to open up the economy.

On the other hand, if it is safe to open up the economy, to come out of this lockdown and this crisis that we have been living under, then why do we require a division between those who have been vaccinated, and those who have not?


No, ostensibly it isn't safe to open up the economy. It's estimated that around 1 in 360 or so people in this country have Covid at present. We've seen how this escalates, it's an exponential progression, starting off slow and then going ballistic, depending on what the R number is. Obviously they're hoping that in a slow opening up of activities, they're hoping the numbers decrease, but at the moment the R number is greater than 1 in some parts of the country as it is.

The hope is that the vaccine will have protected enough people so that the spread won't matter, or better still will in itself bring the R number down to a small number.

A4 Pacific wrote:Until proven otherwise, I’m afraid that for the foreseeable, (certainly in close indoor proximity!) we are all going to have to proceed on the presumption that anybody can give you covid, and you yourself may be infectious.

If that’s the case, what on earth is the point of a so called vaccine passport?


Well hopefully it'll give some assurance to people that if they go to a venue where they insist on one, there won't be anyone there who can give you Covid. It'll be a Covid free "bubble".

A4 Pacific wrote:“Ver are your papers” is not something we are used to in this country! Others may be more familiar with such a regime when venturing out?


I was out in Reading one night after a company Christmas party and one of the bars in which we were going to meet wouldn't let anyone in without a (real) passport, which they scanned on entry. Needless to say I hadn't brought mine.
kanga liked this
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1837414
Pubs are no longer a high priority in my humdrum life.............. :roll:

Now there was a time.............................
JAFO liked this
User avatar
By T67M
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1837416
I have had the first jab, but I won't accept a "passport" for entry to pubs, shops and other public places to stand alongside a number of friends who can't have the coronavirus vaccine for medical reasons. I strongly believe that people who cannot have the vaccine for whatever reason must not be excluded from any public places in their home country - and I include religious beliefs into the "cannot" category.

Even for international travel, I would only accept a passport as a way to reduce the level of precautions required, for example from 5-days quarantine to negative test result.
Spooky, flybymike liked this
User avatar
By kanga
#1837421
T67M wrote:..I won't accept a "passport" for entry to pubs, shops and other public places ... I strongly believe that people who cannot have the vaccine for whatever reason must not be excluded from any public places in their home country..

Even for international travel, I would only accept a passport as a way to reduce the level of precautions required, for example from 5-days quarantine to negative test result.


Which is absolutely your choice, including thereby to forego the opportunity to visit some places and to undertake some journeys, in accordance with those strong beliefs.

As others may think/belief differently, and as managers/owners of such venues or means of travel may want there to be some document with a 'government' attestation of validity which those managers may choose (or not) to impose on potential clients (at the risk of losing some, such as those who share your beliefs; but possibly of attracting others), is it unreasonable for some agency of 'government' to ponder enabling the creation of some such document ?
Flyin'Dutch' liked this
By A4 Pacific
#1837426
Well hopefully it'll give some assurance to people that if they go to a venue where they insist on one, there won't be anyone there who can give you Covid. It'll be a Covid free "bubble".


Will it?

Is that data available somewhere?
flybymike liked this
User avatar
By MikeB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1837428
Pubs already require smokers to go to a segregated area to emit noxious vapours. I cant see why the same principle cant be used on those who statistically are far more likely to emit contagious vapours.
Flyin'Dutch' liked this