Even If There Is a Second Wave of COVID-19, There Should Be No More Lockdowns

Townhall ^ | 05/20/2020 | Carl Jackson

[Grampa Dave]

“How will the pandemic drunk power mad, fulfill their greatest wishes to rule the world. There would be no more weeping and wailing of how we are all GOING TO DIE!”

Let them stay home 24/7 and drink alcohol/abuse drugs until they pass out. Then recover and repeat this process for the duration.

[Kaslin]

I agree completely. It’s time to stop with this nonsense

[Georgia Girl 2]

This thing is going to go the way of Zika and West Nile.

[daniel1212]

Again,, why the fixation in the H.K. flu of 68 when the Asian flu pandemic of 1957-1958 resulted in a estimated 116,000 deaths in America (followed by the Hong Kong flu with about est. 100,000 American deaths in 1968–69), when at about 173,000,000, the population size in 57-58 was close to half of what it is now (330,541,000, rounded figures). Meaning that not only was the infection death rate much higher than for COVID-19, but there would have to be about 200,000 COVID-19 est. deaths to be comparable to the Asian flu. Yet that would simply make it basically equal as concerns the numbers of deaths in proportion to population size, but to justify the "CovidCaptivity," one would have to argue that the Asian flu should have necessitated a response like that to COVID-19. The Soviets would have favored that for sure.

The question then is, where was the COVID-19 comparative response in 57-58 in proportion to its threat? Yes, the 116,000 deaths in America to the Asian flu was for the whole year, yet even if we reach about 200,000 deaths (we pray not) for COVID-19 then that type of equality would still mean that the extremely restrictive all-ages long-term response to COVID-19 simply has no precedent in American history, except to a degree with the far more deadly (550,000 to 675,000 Americans, or 0.66% of the population) 1918 flu.

And yet we read ,