More and more the scale continues to tilt. COVID-19 isn't panning out. At first, this was suppose to be the plague to end all plagues. Worse than the Spanish Flu of 1918. The models failed. The numbers didn't add up. Then there were outbreaks in areas that couldn't handle the load on their medical systems. Italy, France, and Spain were tops on the list. Sadly, socialized medicine wasn't built for a high volume of critical patients and decisions had to be made whether or not to let the elder and/or infirm live. Consider it a different form of "value based" system. As time continued on, the scare was still presented as the worst thing to happen to the world. Governments shut citizens in and businesses down. Economies suffer. People are locked in their homes. The government gets to choose who goes where, buys what, and when. It's all still touted, as it had been from the start, as part of everyone's safety. The government knows what's best, and the stay-at-home orders are for your protection. The death tolls are still high; but at least the curve is flattening, right? And it's set the government up for a can't-lose position. Had the numbers not dropped, they'd have said "See?! You should have listened to us!". With the numbers dropping, they get to say "See?! Our efforts have saved you all!". And yet… Something still doesn't end up falling into line with this narrative. Facts are coming out about the death toll numbers being purposefully padded by including people who didn't actually die of COVID-19 complications, but were positive for the virus on a post-mortem test. Suddenly, articles begin cropping up regarding antibody testing. These test results are further crashing the models that were presented as it is likely that far more people had already been affected and survived handily. The combination of these two things are creating a tremendous problem for the models that even remain currently. With the possible, and likely, result of the adjustments from these two findings, the mortality rate of this virus suddenly plummets to less-than-flu numbers. Less-than-flu numbers even over the same course of time. Why is any of that relevant, though? Because it has shown not only America, but the world at large, just how willing civilized society will give up their freedoms for the perception of safety. Even with this new evidence coming out, evidence that is completely bashing the face off the scare, people are STILL convinced that they need to give up freedom. I've seen people talking about how this isn't a oppression, it's only an inconvenience. I pose a question for these individuals: If people are being fined, arrested, and imprisoned for not following the direction of the government in that they can't even go outside… If businesses aren't allowed to open under penalty of fines and licensing being pulled… Yet, you're not willing to call it oppression… When does the governments control of us become too much? When is it oppression? Those afraid complain about their rights somehow being robbed if people are "allowed" to go about their lives normally. Something we all have to understand is that the well-being of you and your family is on your own shoulders. It is not societies responsibility to control the actions of others so that you can feel secure. That goes against the very reason America has a Bill of Rights at all. Let's put it into perspective… There is a large section of our society that believes that there is an additional level of safety to be had if we were all to own guns. Our government does not force this upon anyone, though. Why is it fair of you to demand that I stay locked in my house for your safety, but not fair of me to demand you own a firearm for the sake of my safety?
-Mike H
