Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Why Vaccine Mandates Are A Bad Idea" video.

It was used against Ebola I think, and it was shown to have serious side effects. Kidney failure, I think.
3
No argument, just canned phrases.
2
Not at all. In fact before this happened, flu shots were losing market. Essentially only children and the elderly got it.
2
@mugetsuu23 Why would I be thankful of a nation that erases my freedoms then forces me to make a deal with the devil to get them back? Why should I be thankful of being threatened to lose my job? Why should I be thankful of being denied travel? They work? Then why are cases exploding in highly vaccinated countries? They save others? But people still spread! If you care about other people, stay home and never leave.
2
The FDA has recalled plenty of stuff they approved.
1
I'm European and it's politicized here. Introducing passports, QR codes and apps is political. France has had like 10 weekends of protests against this BS.
1
"You can get covid more then once" - Yes, because of variants. However many I know who had it more than once felt that it became weaker the second time because they were already primed for the previous variant "You always want a backup in case your main safety precaution fails" - This isn't a backup, it's a tool for control. Erase the passport BS, and then we can talk about backups. Until then, this is 100% political.
1
@skymningforelsket1302 There's no infinitely broad antibodies, same reason a person can get the cold every year.
1
That's lying with stats 101. They started the count in mid January, when most people did not have the shots.
1
No argument, just repeating your mantra.
1
No, it doesn't make sense. He wanted to pretend to be a good guy and now gets to be the bad guy because he's already got the votes. It is the same situation. No, stop saying you've "learned". You people have learned NOTHING. You're the one being disingenuous.
1
@lvirag8401 You're just parroting talking points. How are breakthroughs rare when they're at near parity, if not overtaking, unvaccinated cases?
1
@lvirag8401 You have not cited any sources so you have no business asking for anything. Either way, just look at other countries.
1
@lvirag8401 You're the one with no receipts. Thanks for playing, bucko. I got the receipts. Covid-19 vaccine surveillance report - week 36 by Public Health England. Page 20. Roughly 98% of the UK population has antibodies either through infection or vaccination. With around 52M people above the age of 18 in the UK, that's an estimated 1M adults with no antibodies. Table 4. Over a 4 week period 113,846 unvaccinated people had Covid-19 cases. That's 11% of the unvaccinated population. With the report essentially confirming a 99.5% recovery rate, every week 30k people move from the unvaccinated to the naturally immune. The unvaccinated are an ever shrinking target. Wrap your head around those numbers.
1
The data didn't change, they just finally had to admit the data said what it said. Politicians aren't changing their opinions because of data, but because of political reasons.
1
This isn't about caring for others because you can still spread. If anything, if you don't take it you get tested, stay home and minimize exposure for others. If you take it, you'll be spreading without even noticing.
1
So insurers get to charge less to people shedding the stuff onto others? So private venues should be able to risk the people inside their venue by having untested people shed onto others? Nothing about this is sound. This is a mess. Pharma companies delivered half baked goods and charged BILLIONS for it. Tell them to F off and make something that actually works. Then we can have that conversation.
1
@justinshin2279 You embody what everyone hates about libs. So basically we have a world where healthy people who have a low likelihood of having complications pay more insurance than the obese who took a shot that's going to wear off in 6-8 months and are going to be much more costly for the next three decades, where a venue owner can demand an experimental treatment not to mitigate actual risk but just liability because he doesn't give less of a damn if he's hosting superspreader events (but he won't just make people sign a waiver), and products made by people who I quote "are not our friends" should be imposed on people by threatening their free travel, their job, etc.
1
@justinshin2279 "if it were up to me" - It's not up to you. We're working off what we have, not what you want. "I think their right to do so is plainly enshrined in the Constitution" - And venue owners should also be allowed to not discriminate for the same reasons. "For instance, I have to purchase a ticket to see a football game." - This is a ridiculous example and you know it. "I have to be SCUBA certified to go on a dive" - If you go on a dive without knowing how, you die. If you go into a venue you have a lower than 100% chance of being exposed, if exposed a lower than 100% chance of getting infected, and if infected a greater than 80% chance of not even feeling symptoms. The venue owner cannot ensure safety through vaccination. The logic simply does not support your case, unless this is about a circular exercise in ass covering. "By the way, some venues are only allowing UNvaccinated people to enter" - This clearly falls outside of the mandates and those businesses are exposing themselves to fines or closures. "it's perfectly lawful" - Only in the states that have decided to stop giving a damn. As it stands, plenty of business are ignoring the mandates but if we lose, they go down. So you better pray we win.
1
@justinshin2279 This argument is about mandates, not healthcare. "I support any policy that allows insurers to charge me less for making choices that are less risky" - Even when backed by dogsh!t science? "For the insurer, the choice is simply between a person who chooses to get the vaccine and a person who does not." - Not until they start charging for everything else. "then you should support insurers being able to charge them accordingly" - No, because those people were either fooled or coerced into taking it. If insurance companies are coercing it... they can charge themselves. And the money comes back to us. "Comparing SCUBA requirements to vaccination status is not really the point" - Yes, it is. You're not asked for a driver's license to ride the bumper cars at the fair or to do some laps on a go kart. "the courts would rule in favor of businesses" - Sure, we just don't have time for courts. Things are happening now.
1
@justinshin2279 "I am engaging in risky behaviors" - Not taking a shot is not risky. Look up the long term survival rates for myocarditis. "If it means requiring either vaccination or more frequent testing, I am okay with it."/" If it means forcing everyone to get vaccinated against their will, I oppose it strongly" - The hell is this wishy-washy bs? You're okay with "requiring" it but not people being forcibly jabbed? What's the difference? The former is insidiously evil, the latter is cartoonishly evil. At least being cartoonishly evil will set off the alarms and get people to start fighting, when it's insidious people at the top can treat you like cattle with a smile, the police will say "hey I'm just doing my job", and if you do anything about it you'll be called crazy. "I can tell you that businesses are not generally enforcing the mandate" - But saying the law doesn't matter because everyone is ignoring it is not enough. The actual text of the law needs to be erased and the people responsible for it need to face consequences for governmental overreach. "It's performative" - Don't care. Punitive action is necessary for even trying. Treating overreach with kid gloves because it resulted in "lol jk!" just opens the door for real overreach that won't be fought because people are already pacified by all the times it didn't amount to anything and there was no need to fight back. "when there is a public safety concern" - There's always a public safety concern. "many gun ranges go out of their way to do more than the standard check" - The hell does that mean? The gun store either performs the NICS check or the state-specific variant they're mandated to perform by state legislature. There's no way to do "more" than the standard, and the standard is all there is. With a few states having standards different from the federal one. "But the range could be liable if it was determined they did not take obvious steps to ensure dangerous people did not fire weapons at the range." - I don't know why I have to explain this, but comparing high velocity metal to a bug most people don't know they have it unless tested is simply not sane.
1
@justinshin2279 1. Meanwhile in the real world, cardiac complications nearly doubled in Israel compared to the 2019-2020 average, due to a mass campaign that was not worth the trouble because it affected people who were not likely to get complications from the disease. 2. You're being wishy-washy, not pragmatic. There is no nuance in using unchecked corporate power to sidestep the issue of unchecked government power. Privatizing the means of control is not pragmatism. It's a fundamentally anti-human stance and you need to own up to it. 3. I am entitled to say that the people responsible for restrictive regulations need to suffer punitive action. If I screw up on my job, I can get fired. I care about what's happening in the real world - real politicians are using real political power irresponsibly and you're saying it's not really happening because people this time have chosen not to comply. Even though at least 60% are complying, but that's just a tiny little detail. Do you have a single argument that isn't running interference for these people? 4. That's whataboutism. For twenty years I've spoken against a multitude of issues and you don't get to shame me just because you're Johnny come lately and didn't see me do it. Meanwhile, you have a paradigm shift that's going to affect regular people even more than the War on Terror did, and your concern is "dude weed lmao". We already congratulated drugs for winning the war on drugs. You say things aren't an issue if people don't comply, seems to me drug laws are something people have no issue with non-compliance so I don't need to press that further. This is going to affect even more people than the war on drugs, essentially unpersoning them without trial or conviction. If you thought plea deals were rough, that is worse. 5. Florida is a partial point of contact state where FDLE is responsible for the check even though they use the FBI NICS system. From what I understand other states can place a NICS flag on you, and FDLE cannot do anything about it so there's non-prohibited persons failing checks in Florida. Your acquaintance may need to check the conditions for his discharge, what state it happened in, etc to get it cleared out.
1
You've already accepted the narrative of our masters. So because we're noticing that Big Pharma made a bad product, we're anti-vaxxers. Because we're noticing the passports, QR codes and tracking apps, we're anti-vaxxers. Because we're noticing that our jobs are being threatened, we're anti-vaxxers. Stop being their lapdog.
1
Darwin is survival of the fittest. Culling the weak makes the species strong. Nature is extremely cruel and does not protect the weak. That joke doesn't even work because the real Darwin award is protecting people so much, we all become vulnerable as a result and go extinct.
1
Probably not, but stay off boosters.
1
BS. They're still having cases but simply downplaying the issue.
1
@PunkOnARant "I mean you could call WATER an "experimental substance"" - Water has existed in the universe for billions of years and it's the basis of life. "some guy on the internet says "we are being lied to"?" - You can just look at the numbers. The number of cases we're seeing in many countries make it mathematically impossible for the unvaccinated to be the ones getting infected. "i would assume that your politicans with staff are being closely monitored in regards to covid, probably tested very often for it" - That's not an excuse. "Usually a vaccine mandate only means that people who attend different things, such as concerts." - Then you are wrong. The US president issued a mandate that essentially forces all workers in companies with more than 100 workers to get it. "A vaccine mandate only means that us who choose to be vaccinated would get to do things such as go to concerts, and you who choose not to would not." - That right there says why it's a bad idea, you want a two-tier society. "By being against a vaccine mandate for things like concerts, you're actively opposing my freedom." - BS. The vaccinated can still spread. So when you attend your concert, you're exposed to untested vaccinated people. "For why should I not be able to do things i want because YOU choose not to be vaccinated?" - The other way around. Why should you be allowed to say who has freedom? Why should be be able to spread the disease to others by presenting a card? "So a vaccine mandate is good because it allows freedom" - IT DENIES FREEDOM. This is blatant 1984 newspeak. War is peace. Ignorance is strength. Papers please is freedom. "and why your politicians and their staffs probably dont require vaccinations." - That doesn't even explain it. You're just saying you justified it without justifying it!
1
@PunkOnARant "Okay. I dont really care." - You meant to type "I was wrong, sorry". That's what you say when you are wrong and act like you aren't. "i dont even see why we're talking about their work place related issues now" - Because the mandate was introduced through workplace regulations???? "they'd have to stop with concerts and stuff again of course. Easy as that." - This is completely disconnected from reality. If the economy stops again it will be a catastrophe. "So you're against me being able to go to a concert" - I'm not. I'm against your hypocrisy. "not doing math guessing games" - Where are the extra people coming from, then? Math doesn't lie. "That's really unsolidaric" - It's also "unsolidaric" to demand people who have a 1/5,000 chance of developing myocarditis or pericarditis to take the shot at their own risk so that you can go to concerts. "WHY are vaccine mandates BAD?" - Because it denies freedom. "You want me not to go to concerts" - No, I want you to stop being a hypocrite and thinking you going to concerts is the biggest problem here. "so you'd rather have a shut down" - No, this is you strawmanning what other people say.
1
@PunkOnARant So you scatter a bunch of nonsense that has to be addressed separately, and then complain that you can't work with that? It does work on youtube. It had worked for 13-14 years so far. They're not out of context. Do you understand what context is? If I am addressing separate claims, each of them are addressed separately. The context is available for everyone to see, it's on your comment. This is not decontextualization. You're just using an excuse without even knowing what it means. I'm also not strawmanning. I'm addressing specifically what you said. I never argued against concerts. You're the one strawmanning. I'm not having it both ways. It's you who's misreading. You don't want people to "freely chose" if their choice is being made under coercion. There's no ad hominem anywhere. Do you know what ad hominem is? Ad hominem is "you can't trust what he says, because he shoplifted once". Ad Hominem is attacking the man rather than the claims. I only attacked your claims. Again, you misuse the names of logical fallacies as excuses when you don't even know what they mean. Again, you accuse others of using logical fallacies but you ridicule all opposing arguments. I am for your freedom because I don't think you should be controlled by mandates, QR codes, tracking apps, etc. You're not being offended. You're being told the consequences of what you support.
1