Do you think the lockdown curfew serves a purpose?

Do you think the lockdown curfew serves a purpose?

  • Yes

    Votes: 139 33.1%

  • No

    Votes: 281 66.9%
  • Total voters
    420
It definitely serves a purpose, just not the purpose of protecting South Africans from anything.

The real purpose:
Ayn Rand said:
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
Click to expand...

Lovely source of revenue for the police.
 
If the "purpose" is to give the goons an excuse to beat up and arrest then yes the curfew serves a purpose.
The curfew should be interpreted to mean when should venues used for gatherings close at night. Nothing more than that.
 
Hephaestus said:
No, none at all. It makes absolute no sense.
People are ignoring it anyway
Click to expand...
People in my area aren't ignoring it, the roads are clear as heck after 10pm (yes, I know what it sounds like, yes I have disobeyed the curfew once for a few minutes :P ) but it's mostly clear on the roads after curfew.
 
Just like the alcohol ban, I do not agree with it in principle as it infringes on our rights as citizens. But, just like the alcohol ban, I think it does serve a purpose because the country is unfortunately overrun by imbeciles who the government thinks it needs to protect from themselves.
 
ambroseg1 said:
Just like the alcohol ban, I do not agree with it in principle as it infringes on our rights as citizens. But, just like the alcohol ban, I think it does serve a purpose because the country is unfortunately overrun by imbeciles who the government thinks it needs to protect from themselves.
Click to expand...

And we all know that the moment any one of the imbeciles joins the government, they immediately become a superior type of person.
 
I cannot see any reason for the curfew, at all.

Occupying powers use curfews to control their subjugated populations, to prevent them from moving about and meeting with each other etc (ie to divide and conquer - that sort of thing), or when you expect crime and violence to break out at levels that cannot be controlled by the existing forces (eg in situations like Portland where you have violent riots every night) - those sort of situations, none of which seem to apply here (maybe you can make some sort of argument about our out-of-control crime rate - but then are you willing to say we should have a curfew every night?).

Seems to be nothing but a massive over-reach from the government, that is just abusing the power it awarded itself IMO.

I don't see how this has anything to do with the virus - in any event?
 
Yes, it deters drunks from stabbing anyone but their closest neighbours.

It's also easy to police.
 
Unfortunately no-one knew exactly what was about to be inflicted on us. We didn't need to happen to us what happened during the Spanish flu epidemic where millions died. The obvious safest route to take was complete lockdown.
 
dabbler said:
The obvious safest route to take was complete lockdown.
Click to expand...
It most certainly was not and is still not the obvious choice of weapon to combat this flustercuck of an engineered pandemic.

By the way, the random thread of the day is about the curfew, not the crackdown in total.

As you were.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X