Not for nothing, but isn’t the FRA a bit late to the party with this? The pandemic has been on for how long now?

I have heard this is fallout over a court case in the last few weeks, but have not dove any further. Just about every other industry has had this same style of ruling in place for some time

I wouldn’t go that far in saying they’ll make it permanent, but the ideas behind “put it back on every bite and every sip” are not good ones. COVID transmission is highest when a person is speaking. Do they have the right to regulate how much we can say at a certain time? Of course this is just an exaggeration, but given what kind of things people regulate at certain points, I genuinely wouldn’t be surprised.

The worst part about all of this isn’t the fact of what we’re being told but what we aren’t being told. If I told you (rhetorical you) that cases were decreasing significantly and things were improving heavily on the vaccine front, then I think you’d be pleasantly surprised. The FDA permitted the use of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine just today, and they promised 100 million single shot doses for the United States by the end of June. That’s over 20% of the necessary shots to reach that coveted “75%” for herd immunity that promises full reopening. What we know from Israel, the country furthest in vaccine use so far, is very promising when it comes to vaccine and transmission data. You probably haven’t heard that. Or the fact that one of the things Covid targets is obesity, yet we’ve seen practically zero push for people to actually exercise to improve their health and immune systems.

Government and media (in general, so don’t get any ideas about partisan politics, I nor anyone cares or should care who you support or voted for) work together to control the narrative, and the restrictions released by the FRA are just another example of keeping you in that hole of hopelessness, despite the fact that there’s hope everywhere being tactfully shooed away by major publications.

The FRA’s harsh guidelines were poorly timed, and overzealous given currently improving conditions.

I suspect this comes from an executive order by Biden two days into office, mandating mask-wearing in federally-regulated transportation entities, it simply has taken several weeks to work out the rules by the different agencies: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/tr ... story.html
The move is completely appropriate given the confined spaces in federally-regulated transportation entities such as trains, plains, buses, and in general corresponds to the wishes of workers there who are tired of dealing with anti-maskers. Even officials from the previous administration are admitting that their biggest mistake was failing to announce and enforce a binding mask mandate early in the pandemic, e.g., this past Sunday the former deputy national security adviser (see starting around 30:30 to around 33:20): https://www.cbsnews.com/video/face-the- ... 1-02-21/#x


What you are saying is a lot like being with a group of people in the ocean in a lifeboat with a hole in the bottom, almost sinking until you manage to bail the water out with a lot of effort, and then deciding the danger has passed so you no longer need the nuisance of bailing. Once you stop bailing, the boat sinks.

Thank you. I’m glad someone understands this.

It’s extra upsetting when I’ve been bailing out water for almost a year and the guy next to me says I’m wasting my time and refuses to help.

Well, someone still has to row the boat.

If they were going to make these sorts of restrictions, they should’ve been made months ago (can we say April or May of last year) when the problem was at its worst and should’ve been dealt with. For your boat analogy, it’s like forcing the crew to jump overboard when the leak is being patched and is improving.

The problem we currently are under is sorting itself out, and with each passing day, things get better. That is truth. We have evidence even here in the United States that shows little difference in the results of high and low restrictions in two similar locations (being of course California and Florida), and I could make the argument that people are overwhelmingly not in favor of the more restrictive options, and that opinion is growing more popular with each passing day, as proof continues to come out that the more restrictive options offer fewer benefits than advertised, and instead provide more downsides.

It’s just too much, and too late in the game for it to provide any use. I get your argument, and I see where you’re coming from, but I respectfully cannot agree with either of you.

What I'm hearing about the new mutations of the virus is that this current decline in cases could very well be a calm period before the new, tougher, more virulent strains become the majority of new cases and once again fill the ICUs and morgues. How this ends is we quit giving it opportunities to spread from person-to-person and mutate. It's a numbers game and starving it of victims is the answer long-term. Patience, just a little longer.

"Just three weeks to flatten the curve."

Somewhere else in this very forum:



Danger or not, there are good reasons why increasing numbers are no longer "buying" what's being "hawked" with regards to "safety."

If there is a hole in the boat, bailing is only a temporary solution. The official narrative seems to have the date of reopening moving further into the future. Right now we are told that about one year from now, we should be getting a better idea of whether it is safe enough to consider ending the restrictions.

But with the growing amount sacrifice made in pushing the pandemic back; there comes an increasing interest and motivation to make sure the pushback effort is not wasted by ending it just a little too soon.

Add to that, the discovery of potential new variations of the disease springing up along the way, and the growing risk of ending the restrictions will prevent it from happening. The battle cry is, “We have come so far, so we can’t stop now.” Yet we don’t have the luxury of waiting indefinitely for perfect safety.

The public has been provided the information, science, and tools to combat the virus and is continually updated as new information becomes available. I think that it is safe to say that everyone has been educated and/or is aware of the risks associated with this virus. There needs to come a point at which the government returns the right to choose to its citizens. Give the People the freedom and opportunity to make their own choices again, whether it is to stay home, wear masks, not wear masks, frequent establishments, partake in entertainment, gather in both social and private settings, etc. Return the People’s’ freedom and right to choose for themselves. We the People have had enough (totally fair statement as everyone has had enough of something).

"I think that it is safe to say that everyone has been educated and/or is aware of the risks associated with this virus."

And you are wrong. I read misinformation every day.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.", Benjamin Franklin


If you want to wear a mask, do so
If you want to stay at home, then do so

Stop forcing people in to your beliefs, the FRA is being politically manipulated, this has nothing to do with Railroad safety. I have spent this pandemic living in a country that has been abusing it's citizens with heavy handed lockdowns and mask regulations, it's not working.

That is your opinion. You have that right and I respect it. However, so do I. I will have my own opinion and make my own choice.

I am a healthcare professional and work on the front lines. It gets no more “frontline” that my job. I go into peoples’ homes, into their environment with the virus when they are in crisis, provide them with vital care, and take them facilities where they can get continued care. I have been educated and am keenly aware of the risks.

I respect your right to choose. Please respect mine. Thanks.