Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="trueriver" data-source="post: 2256" data-attributes="member: 350">Well, I don't think the concerns ppl have about police surveillance and communications are nonsense -- but that too is a discussion for another time.I also do not want to see the army being used to directly arrest people, demand their Id, and so on. That got the UK state into a lot of difficulties in Northern Ireland, and my analysis was that it exacerbated an already difficult situation with the Catholic and Republican citizens who (at the time rightly) already felt treated a second class citizens.However I do think there is a valid role for the army in supporting the civil power. The army could be used to kettle ravers in the area they have chosen for their rave. Exit from the kettle would be supervised by the police (just to be clear: the regular civilian police, not some paramilitary or military police unit) and names taken and fines issued. Those who were repeat offenders would be tagged to identify future gatherings.Those who refused to identify themselves (or provide convincing proof of identity) would be held over for court the next day. Having chosen to meet together, there would be no point in keeping them in cells - thet clearly have no concerns about social distancing and would continue to be kept in the same large group they had chosen to be part of when arrested - segregation into genders and hold in communal custody in any convenient place that provides toilet access. After court, those who had refused to identify themselves or were found to be repeat offenders would be tagged.Those found in a group while already tagged would be curfewed to remain at home 24/7 until the pandemic is over in their area. The tags would also alert police to such gatherings while forming, and allow them to be dispersed (with fines as usual) before the army was needed.Tags would only be removed when the activities they were engaged in on arrest became lawful again (assuming tht there were enough tags to go round).Again the army could secure the perimeter.The army would not carry lethal force, neither in the kettle nor when securing the detention facility. They would be deployed in sufficient numbers that lethal and even "less-lethal" force would not be needed. Keep them contained by sheer force of disciplined numbers.In general, I tend towards the anti-rules end of the spectrum (though I am a lefty anarchist rather than a right wing libertarin like our PM). However there does come a time when even I am prepared to use non-lethal compulsion to prevent ppl behaving in a way that is now known to hurt others.Which others will be hurt? We do not know.How many others will be hurt? we can make a statistical guess based on the R number and the ratio of the time the ravers are together divided by the number of days ppl remain infectious.  Example: If R is 2, and they were raving for 12 hours before arrest, and people remain infectious for 5 days, then each infected person will have infected about 0.2 other people. If the current prevalence of the virus in the area is 1%, then statistically each person in the crowd infects 0.002 new people during the event, who would go on to infect a further 0.004 people who go on to infect another 0.008 people in the next tn to fifteen days (until the tracing service catches up!). That is about one new or cascaded infection for each 70 people in the crowd. If there were 500 people present (as in the rave in the ancient church) they are collectively responsible for one direct case, and 7 or 8 new cases after two further cycles of infection Not many, but enough to be part of the problem. If a crowd lynches one person they are each guilty of murder. I suggest that if a crowd knowingly and recklessly infects one or more people then everyone in the crowd should be liable. I am not suggesting that they be prosecuted for poisoning (it would be too hard to prove to the satisfaction of a jury). I am suggesting that when the expected number of infections is more than 1, it justifies bringing in the army to be deployed as I suggest.The trigger level for calling in the army and tagging should be calculated on the basis of the R number and prevelance at the time and place of the event.In parallel to that, smaller gatherings, and mask refusniks (without reasonable excuse) should also be automatically fined. After multiple repeat offences they could be curfewd to home with a tag.I do not think the problem is people getting tired of the rules. I think it is that people have learnt that the rules can be broken with impunity -- most of us know personally someone who has done so, and we all know a former govt advisor who blatantly opened up loopholes instead of making an appointment for an eye test.It is time for serious, visible, enforcement to replace the serious, visible transgressions.</blockquote>

Verification