Hacker News Reader

Comment by DyslexicAtheist | Hacker News Reader

I'm not afraid. I am triple-vaxxed not for myself but out of solidarity for those around me. I am simply at the end of my patience with people going to protests clogging my city and creating politicians using the greenpass and constant checks and testing to create a divide.

mandatory vaccination will get rid of surveillance solutions like the Greenpass while also protecting everyone. there can still be an exemption if a physician approves that a person can not be vaccinated for some strange reason.

that's the only way to go back to normal, the rest is silly greenpass rules or noisy discussions about "shall we pay un-vaccinated people less?", etc ...

View on HN

Huh? You're leaving out some massive yet important parts of your argument here. It is a complete non-sequitur to go from you, personally, being perfectly safe and therefore mandatory vaccination is necessary to protect everyone.

Fact is that mandatory vaccination doesn't seem to do much to change the risk to society at large. Coronavirus is tearing through fully-vaccinated Australia at a rate which suggests vaccines do literally nothing to stop the spread. Since the vaccines don't protect bystanders, all the surveillance and mandating of medical treatments should be scrapped immediately.

We are in territory where if someone isn't vaccinated, they are bearing all the risk personally and that is acceptable.

There are plenty of countries where the vaccination rate is too low to effectively prevent the healthcare system from being overrun. In Austria, we were in another lockdown due to this just a month ago, with a vaccination rate of about 70% at the time (IIRC). This is in a country with a relatively high number of unoccupied ICU beds, and we still peaked at a level just short of where doctors would have to triage patients (and well where the quality of care could be kept at its usual level due to i.e. fewer nurses and doctors per patient.)

So no, the unvaccinated aren't solely at risk personally, they could also prevent vaccinated people from getting treated at the standard of care that they would normally expect. I'm not okay with that, so mandatory vaccination with fines for non-compliance seems like the lesser evil to me.

I mostly agree. I think it is certain that vaccinations slow the spread somewhat; probable that they're stopping medical services from becoming overwhelmed; and almost certain that they will not eliminate covid from circulating.

You'll probably catch covid, whether vaccinated or not. Your elderly relatives will probably catch covid, whether you and they are vaccinated or not.

They'll probably catch it even if everyone on the planet become vaccinated tomorrow.

Vaccination is simply one tool to moderate the effect. It's wonderful that we have them, but having 20% of the population stay unvaccinated is not going to drastically affect the spread of the disease.

> mandatory vaccination will get rid of surveillance solutions like the Greenpass while also protecting everyone.

It is unbelievably naive to think that after investing in any surveillance/control infrastructure that governments will relinquish that power willingly.

> mandatory vaccination will get rid of surveillance solutions like the Greenpass while also protecting everyone.

Would you not still need a vax-proof when vaccination is mandatory? How does it differ then to the greenpass? It would then be mandatory to be able to produce that proof. Failing to do so may result in fines or land you in jail.

How does that help with the greenpass situation you described?

> And what is more annoying is that the "greenpass" is actually (at least where I live in Europe) a way that allows cops to stop, frisk and harass anyone. It enables the busybodies to play "I aM an auThOrItY and will use my imaginary authority to exercise power over you ..."

> The "greenpass" assumes I am always carrying my phone. It gives me anxiety about my battery going flat.

Making it mandatory seems to only make this worse.

Got it, so you want to get people submitted into a procedure they don't want, while at the same time claiming you are "triple-vaxxed not for myself but out of solidarity for those around me". Why pretend you care about anyone? just say, hey I want everyone to do this so I feel safer.

> so you want to get people submitted into a procedure they don't want

yes. peoples freedom stop where other peoples health begins. co-morbidity can not be solved but getting people vaccinated can. even it means it's "against their will", even they shout "fOrCeD mediCaL prOceDuRe". I don't care if it hurts their fragile egos and means they have to tone down the individualism. Either have a doctors exemption, pay a fine, or go to jail (condition upon entry into prison is mandatory vaccination). Boom. Problem solved.

> just say, hey I want everyone to do this so I feel safer.

it's not about me but the people around me. some of them I've already lost. I'm healthy enough not to care. I eat well and have done sports all my life. I survived several tropical diseases. I also lived my life to the fullest. So idgaf. The only thing I care about is people around me getting hurt that I love (my family, my kids, my friends). And don't worry they're some deluded anti-vaxxers among them. They can only be helped by force at this stage.

Ahh got it. Are you going to round up the people and get them into jail? You are talking about a threat of force, can you back this up? Would you volunteer to knock doors in Middle of Nowhere, AL to catch the people not paying the fine? or are you expecting someone else to do that for you?

Honestly you just sound like a troll, and you were called out on your previous comments. You are talking about some caricature "AntIVaXeR" that you don't even know in real life. After reading your other comments I don't even believe your story, but idk, maybe you do are that dissociated from reality that you believe it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com