Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries?

Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

US airports should have closed airports from Ebola ravaged countries.

29% (13)

The US should immediately close airports from Ebola ravished countries

38% (17)

We should never close airports from any country.

11% (5)

What the hell is going to happen next in this country?

4% (2)

I could care less, until the US has at least 100 cases of Ebola

6% (3)

I am not worried, I will never get Ebola.

4% (2)

I am worried, and I have no idea what I should do.

4% (2)

Total Votes : 44

(last vote on : 11/4/2014 8:15:41 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

Marini -> Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/8/2014 9:45:28 PM)
Now we hear about a 2nd person who might have contracted the Ebola virus, from "casual" contact with the infected person, Thomas Duncan. But, have we not heard that it was almost impossible to contract this virus from "casual" contact? [8\|] I have never been someone that fully trusted the government, and I certainly do not believe that it is as hard to contract the Ebola virus, as some would lead us to believe. Who else feels there is no need to crack open a door, that does not need to be cracked open? Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? What would it take for the US to take more serious action?

MrRodgers -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/8/2014 9:50:46 PM)
Quarantine travelers from such countries.

sloguy02246 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/8/2014 11:17:05 PM)
Refusing to accept flights originating from airports in those countries would not solve the problem. Flights from countries with Ebola outbreaks could still fly to other countries, where the passengers could then board flights to here. E.g., a flight leaves Liberia and lands in Lisbon, Portugal. Passenger then boards a new flight from Lisbon to Miami.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/8/2014 11:46:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers Quarantine travelers from such countries. That's the one! If a person travels to the U. S. from a country where Ebola is an issue, they should endure a quarantine of 7 days more than the longest known incubation period. Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 3:27:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers Quarantine travelers from such countries. That's the one! If a person travels to the U. S. from a country where Ebola is an issue, they should endure a quarantine of 7 days more than the longest known incubation period. Not just that, but the quarantine should be extended to anyone that has been to a country in the past however long, where Ebola is an issue. Otherwise, sloguy's point still stands. Wasn't the guy in Dallas also knocked for having lied about his being in Liberia or in contact with Ebola sufferers?

mnottertail -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 8:20:47 AM)
He was, for lying on his application, but I do not think he lied, he didnt know she had ebola.

Marini -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 9:36:41 AM)
I don't say this often, but I agree with what DS said about the "basic" measures we should take. I would add that the quarantine time should be extended. Obviously people could go to several countries prior to coming here, but that takes a lot of money and effort. There is usually a way to get around any precautions we want to take. But why the hell do we often make it so easy for us to be targets in this country?

DaddySatyr -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 12:48:36 PM)
If you're talking about: quote: ORIGINAL: sloguy02246 Refusing to accept flights originating from airports in those countries would not solve the problem. Flights from countries with Ebola outbreaks could still fly to other countries, where the passengers could then board flights to here. The point is sort of taken. DS; I've had a bad day so forgive me if I get a little smart-aleck with someone I consider a friend: If only there was some way to see where a person has traveled in their life ... Hmmmmm ... maybe some kind of little booklet where every country they go to puts a little stamp in it -as a record - some way of being able to identify the possible "troubled" countries they've been to. Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

mnottertail -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 1:05:12 PM)
And thats why the fed has stepped into 5 airports, where 94% of the Africans fly into. They already know, but apparently Texans, but specifically Dallas, half a million do not have basic literacy, and 25% do not possess even a high school diploma, and they are a red welfare state. They may not be aware of passports. Apparently neither is their medical people, I am sure thats why Kennedy was shot there; their incompetent medical staff, in case they couldn't kill him on the spot. But we don't want intellectuals, its states-rights nutsuckerism.

PeonForHer -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 1:30:14 PM)
People in these countries seem to be terrified out of their minds. Not surprisingly, I guess. Ordinary rules, and punishments for the breaking thereof, won't much matter to them. They will go where they believe they'll be safest, or best cared-for if they think they've contracted the bug, assuming they've got the wherewithal for the journey. I don't suppose it's a difficult matter to cross the border into a nominally 'ebola-free' country - because none of these countries have the infrastructure to control their borders effectively - and get a flight from there. I think it's a common mistake to underestimate how little so many people out there have to lose. The long and short of it is that if it gets too out of hand in Africa, it will make its way to the West.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 2:24:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr If you're talking about: quote: ORIGINAL: sloguy02246 Refusing to accept flights originating from airports in those countries would not solve the problem. Flights from countries with Ebola outbreaks could still fly to other countries, where the passengers could then board flights to here. The point is sort of taken. DS; I've had a bad day so forgive me if I get a little smart-aleck with someone I consider a friend: If only there was some way to see where a person has traveled in their life ... Hmmmmm ... maybe some kind of little booklet where every country they go to puts a little stamp in it -as a record - some way of being able to identify the possible "troubled" countries they've been to. lol! Right?!? Now, this guy lied about having been in contact with an Ebola patient, or a dead body in a hot zone. The entirety of the countries ravaged by Ebola are not necessarily contagious, either. Even taking a VISA into account, when does that person get quarantined? Does that person get quarantined at a US airport? What about all the other passengers/crew on that plane? What about the baggage handlers? It'd be damn difficult to prevent someone who is carrying a virus. Eric Duncan wasn't exhibiting any symptoms when he flew out of Liberia. With an incubation period of up to 21 days (have read that up to 4.1% of patients could see incubation periods over 25 days), and the carrier being contagious during incubation, quarantines could have amazingly vast implications.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 2:55:55 PM)
I agree whole-heartedly with one minor exception: quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri With an incubation period of up to 21 days (have read that up to 4.1% of patients could see incubation periods over 25 days), and the carrier being contagious during incubation, quarantines could have amazingly vast implications. So? Would these people rather be dead than quarantined? More importantly; where does their right to be an ignorant ass (refusing quarantine/travel to dangerous places and bringing germs to the rest of us) end and my right to not get ill begin? Normally, I'm all about individual rights. truth be told: I am, here, as well but in this case, it's my individual rights with which I am most concerned. Around here, people like to bandy about terms like "thisphobia" or "thatphobia". I will tell on myself, here: I AM a germophobe. Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

Sanity -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 6:51:08 PM)
[img]http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_cdc_ebola_scare_plane_kb_141009_16x9_992.jpg[/img] CDC agents board plane to reassure passengers that there is no need to fear exposure to Ebola (Okay, so thats just slightly tongue-in-cheek)

DesideriScuri -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 7:09:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr I agree whole-heartedly with one minor exception: quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri With an incubation period of up to 21 days (have read that up to 4.1% of patients could see incubation periods over 25 days), and the carrier being contagious during incubation, quarantines could have amazingly vast implications. So? Would these people rather be dead than quarantined? More importantly; where does their right to be an ignorant ass (refusing quarantine/travel to dangerous places and bringing germs to the rest of us) end and my right to not get ill begin? Normally, I'm all about individual rights. truth be told: I am, here, as well but in this case, it's my individual rights with which I am most concerned. Around here, people like to bandy about terms like "thisphobia" or "thatphobia". I will tell on myself, here: I AM a germophobe. So, you were on an airplane with Eric Duncan. Now, you've been exposed, through no fault of your own. Now, you get to be quarantined for 3-4 weeks to make sure you're not going to accidentally, expose someone else. Everybody on that plane could be quarantined for a month. Is it their fault that someone else made a shit-poor decision, or lied to be able to fly?

Kaliko -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 7:28:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sloguy02246 Refusing to accept flights originating from airports in those countries would not solve the problem. Flights from countries with Ebola outbreaks could still fly to other countries, where the passengers could then board flights to here. E.g., a flight leaves Liberia and lands in Lisbon, Portugal. Passenger then boards a new flight from Lisbon to Miami. But wouldn't that person have a Liberian passport? All passport activity could be looked at to determine risk, no? Why wouldn't we look at individual passport activity, rather than just the origin of the flight?

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 8:36:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kaliko quote: ORIGINAL: sloguy02246 Refusing to accept flights originating from airports in those countries would not solve the problem. Flights from countries with Ebola outbreaks could still fly to other countries, where the passengers could then board flights to here. E.g., a flight leaves Liberia and lands in Lisbon, Portugal. Passenger then boards a new flight from Lisbon to Miami. But wouldn't that person have a Liberian passport? All passport activity could be looked at to determine risk, no? Why wouldn't we look at individual passport activity, rather than just the origin of the flight? And what about aid workers that don't originate from said hot-spots but from elsewhere? They wouldn't have a Liberian passport. So where does that leave you? The only way to be sure is to quarantine every person from every flight for a minimum of 4 weeks.

Musicmystery -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/9/2014 8:47:16 PM)
Well, the doctors disagree with you.

BenevolentM -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/10/2014 1:08:02 AM)
Sounds like the doctors are thinking about themselves and what it might mean to them. I say to freedomdwarf1 poppycock! It is well known that diseases are unable to thrive after their effectiveness is diminished below a certain threshold and such measures though not perfect, don't need to be perfect in order to be effective. quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: Kaliko quote: ORIGINAL: sloguy02246 Refusing to accept flights originating from airports in those countries would not solve the problem. Flights from countries with Ebola outbreaks could still fly to other countries, where the passengers could then board flights to here. E.g., a flight leaves Liberia and lands in Lisbon, Portugal. Passenger then boards a new flight from Lisbon to Miami. But wouldn't that person have a Liberian passport? All passport activity could be looked at to determine risk, no? Why wouldn't we look at individual passport activity, rather than just the origin of the flight? And what about aid workers that don't originate from said hot-spots but from elsewhere? They wouldn't have a Liberian passport. So where does that leave you? The only way to be sure is to quarantine every person from every flight for a minimum of 4 weeks. quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Well, the doctors disagree with you.

joether -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/10/2014 2:19:47 AM)
You folks do take into account the following, right: A ) Quarantining all passengers for up to 4-5 weeks is going to be....HELLISHLY....expensive. Not to mention a civil rights case that goes straight to the US Supreme Court. B ) Where do we house these individuals for that time period? C ) Do you know how many people arrive to this nation from abroad? Not just by airplane, but by other forms? D ) That as people arrive from abroad slows to a trickle, how it will effect American businesses big and small? The travel, hotel, and entertainment industries will be hit hard. Not to mention other industries related to those three? E ) With flu season starting, the number of moments of 'false positives', not just arriving in the nation, but the nation itself? Is someone coughing on the street because a bit of dust went down the throat? They have a 24 hour bug? Its just the standard flu? Or its Ebola? There will be many moments of panic across the nation. F ) How could Ebola effect the busiest shopping time for American businesses? Will people be as willing to shop in those crowded shopping malls? On Black Friday? This is the sort of stuff the US Government already knows and understands. Its that the American people (not to mention other nations) are forced to play 'catch up'. Its going to be a rough flu season....

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Should the US close airports from Ebola ravaged countries? (10/10/2014 2:33:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BenevolentM Sounds like the doctors are thinking about themselves and what it might mean to them. I say to freedomdwarf1 poppycock! It is well known that diseases are unable to thrive after their effectiveness is diminished below a certain threshold and such measures though not perfect, don't need to be perfect in order to be effective. Well then Einstein, how do you explain that a hospital worker, fully kitted up with only 2 visits to an Ebola patient and had very little contact, managed to contract Ebola in Spain??? She had never been to Africa or been in contact with anyone else with Ebola, is now in a very bad state in isolation at a Madrid hospital. It has baffled doctors and health officials as to how she contracted Ebola when she had apparently followed all the protocols and was "fully protected" at all times. The speculation is that the Ebola virus is able to survive on surfaces long enough to infect someone else when they come into contact with it. Maybe the doctors in the US aren't up to speed with the developments??? It would appear that this woman has defied all the logic and safety procedures that doctors considered as "safe". So.... what was thought of as safe, obviously isn't. Care to comment??

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.1601563