Mile High is in Arvada so is not subject to Denver Mayor Hancock rules.
But I called Felt today and they said they would know more this Friday about opening.
As you said Friday is the magic day.
Colorado pool rooms open when?
- Thread starter measureman
- Start date
Mile High is in Arvada so is not subject to Denver Mayor Hancock rules.
But I called Felt today and they said they would know more this Friday about opening.
As you said Friday is the magic day.
I say they should open in July.
Just an FYI, the CDC does not report deaths DUE to COVID-19, as that's too speculative (especially this early on). They report deaths where COVID-19 was present. Now whether or not they are including people hit by a train that had COVID-19 is were the lines start to blur. There seems to be no clear information on how they report deaths where COVID-19 was present, but was NOT the cause of death. However, I guess reporting that would be speculative as well.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html#accordion-1-collapse-3
On a side note, the suicide risk is higher than ever, especially among teenagers. I normally post links, but I won't as any search on any search engine will confirm this, so I'll spare you the 1-click terrible news.
I gave up doing numbers on COVID-19 and started on suicide risk for 1 whopping whole day... it's just one of those things you don't want to know. In that 4 hours of research, using my powers of COMPLETE guesstimation, it appears the young have a 2-state, state of mind. Which is full on physical isolation, and full on social gathering. Removing 1 or the other seems to lead to very bad things. Thinking back to a teenager, I agree with this as a mixture of both (ie. WORKING), seemed like a really bad usage of time (although you had to deal with it).
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html#accordion-1-collapse-3
On a side note, the suicide risk is higher than ever, especially among teenagers. I normally post links, but I won't as any search on any search engine will confirm this, so I'll spare you the 1-click terrible news.
I gave up doing numbers on COVID-19 and started on suicide risk for 1 whopping whole day... it's just one of those things you don't want to know. In that 4 hours of research, using my powers of COMPLETE guesstimation, it appears the young have a 2-state, state of mind. Which is full on physical isolation, and full on social gathering. Removing 1 or the other seems to lead to very bad things. Thinking back to a teenager, I agree with this as a mixture of both (ie. WORKING), seemed like a really bad usage of time (although you had to deal with it).
Last edited:
As the father of a pair of them, I am very concerned about the psychological effects this isolation might cause. And not just coz they are home all day with me! LOL
I am proud of both of them, keeping up with schoolwork, maintaining smiles and positive interaction between themselves and parents...but I do know how incredibly important their social interactions- largely ripped from their day to day life- have to be.
Hold on, kiddos. Life follows: the good and the bad.
ink:
Don't you get tired of preaching the same old stay at home crap in every thread?
We all know that but some just want to get out with proper precautions.
If you want to stay in 24/7 good for you.
What if I got into every thread and said every body go out all the time?
It would be tiring.
Society is doing a great job of flattening the curve and is also generally pretty tired of people who demand that their selfishness be catered to in the face of an extremely new and fairly deadly virus.
I compare the current situation to a siege on a Medieval castle.
Stay inside and keep the enemy out.
But now as in Medieval times you can only stay in the castle so long.
Sooner or later to survive you have to come out and face the enemy.
You aren't facing anything, rather you are potentially giving the 'enemy' access to area (people) it did would not otherwise have access to.
Leeroy Jenkins is a character name for a player character created by Ben Schulz in Blizzard Entertainment's MMORPG World of Warcraft. The character became popular in 2005 from his role in a viral video of game footage where, having been absent during his group's discussion of a meticulous plan, Leeroy returns and ruins it by charging straight into combat shouting his own name.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLyOj_QD4a4
Ridiculous.
If you rewind back humdreds of years to the Crusaders Vs. Jihads days and told either of them the chance of survival is at WORST 95%, I can't help to think that they'd believe they're not in the right place (someone must of grabbed the wrong map).
Your Vietnam example obviously holds extremely strong, but when Vietnam was compared to COVID-19 in this thread, the typical mistake of comparing an all INCLUSIVE number (COVID-19) to an EXCLUSIVE number (US troops) was made. The all inclusive number of Vietnam was ~3.6 million as of 1997. Unlike COVID-19, every death in a war is easy to attribute.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War_casualties
But believe it or not, the Crusaders Vs. Jihads don't have a number due to the enormity of the unknown real number. Last I checked for all the conflicts combined, it was in the 10's of millions and the chance of survival for the unabscornd was about 8% (because they'd just wouldn't ever withdraw for anything... ever). To calculate the number you'd have to go through the list I'm posting and pick all the named wars related, but those do not include the civil wars or whatever regional wars are called over province (because a shit load used the conflict for territory alone, ideology and faith aside).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll
REALLY OFF TOPIC: If you look through that list and follow the Spanish Conquest links.... horrors upon horrors arise. The Spanish were just insane.
I'm not a history buff or anything, I just have an interest in numbers where civilization is involved.
EDIT: forgot, the reason I mentioned the Crusade wars is because those are the largest of the "siege" battles known in the "West" (the Far East has even more massive ones, but the numbers aren't as accountable... even though they're probably right).
Last edited:
The greatest killer in the time of Spanish conquest were epidemics that neither the Spanish or the indigenous people understood. Smallpox decimated millions.
You would be deemed a danger to society in my eyes.
I've been listening to our local radio talk show and there are guys like you that say..."I don't a problem going out and getting infected and infecting others." That is the caller's exact words.
Like I said before be patient and the curve is trending down. My suggestion is we should cut down our peaks in half then I can confidently say we should reopen but with caution. It's getting there in my neck of the woods.
I don't mind counties opening up if their infection rate and death rates are low. I'm speaking to members in high infection areas wanting to go out and spread this disease and they want to do it too because they feel it's good for society to be immune to it. This is a disgusting train of thought.
Oh yeh, without even checking the numbers I 100% have to agree. You COULD even say the confusion caused by those diseases lead rise to "witchcraft" and "voodoo" which would kill unknown amounts of people for hundreds of years. I can't help too think that those diseases even caused civil unrest and pressure resulting in many casualties. Penicillin was undoubtedly a long over due "silver bullet".
Well we all have a lot of different opinions.
But when the pool room opens I'm going.
Mask and hand sanitizer on board.
Maybe they will allow only every other table to be used.
And for the numbers regarding the Viet Nam death rate compared to Covid do not show the true picture for me.
If I go outside the chances of being hit with any type of bullet,mortar,booby trap or any other ordnance is about 99.999 % not.
The chances of that happening in the Nam were a lot higher.
It was way more dangerous to my thinking.
And I was there.
If you weren't there you have no idea what you are talking about.
But when the pool room opens I'm going.
Mask and hand sanitizer on board.
Maybe they will allow only every other table to be used.
And for the numbers regarding the Viet Nam death rate compared to Covid do not show the true picture for me.
If I go outside the chances of being hit with any type of bullet,mortar,booby trap or any other ordnance is about 99.999 % not.
The chances of that happening in the Nam were a lot higher.
It was way more dangerous to my thinking.
And I was there.
If you weren't there you have no idea what you are talking about.
You don't have to go, if they open sooner than you think they should, Karen.
animatedvmaker
Banned
If you are wearing the proper type of mask, then you will not be infecting anyone.
People can go out, and not have to worry about infecting others, or getting infected, just so they take the proper precautions.
We were sold the lockdown as a means of flattening the curve. Not of shutting down the country until there is 0 virus. And the minute I hear someone criticize people for their selfishness for wanting to re-opening I'm pretty sure I've got someone who is lucky, like me.
Still get my pension, still get my SocSec - sure my 401k took a hit but it will be temporary and is already more than halfway back. But even though the virus has had minimal impact on my personal life, I have tons of empathy for those 'selfish' people whose finances and businesses are being destroyed and want to re-open. I wonder how many of the ones calling out 'selfish' people have given their un-needed stimulus check to a small business that is struggling to survive. Not many, I'd bet.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
You're so tough, going to face a viral outbreak wow.
If this was just "the flu" it would be a completely different story. We're going to learn from the side effects of this virus for years.
I laugh because you're saying that waiting inside for another month to see what happens is too heavy a cross to bear. Unreal.
animatedvmaker
Banned
I like that message. People will not be able to hide from the Virus forever, unless it completely goes away on its own. Not even a vaccine is 100% effective in protecting people from these viruses. Go out, live your life, but just be careful.
The 2007housing market crash wrecked many businesses and livelihoods, purely because of Wall Street greed.
The Great Depression wrecked a lot of livelihoods because of Wall Street greed.
A viral outbreak is hurting people and killing people, and now Wall Street greed is pressing for the country to reopen.
A bunch of whiny retirees are mad that they can't go have coffee with their friends and preventative measures are "an infringement of their rights". What about the rights of the people who aren't as "lucky" as you put it, and would be forced to go back to work since unemployment will be suspended if their state reopens.
If the entire country locked themselves away for a month this would be over with. People aren't taking this seriously enough until they pop up a GoFundMe for the funeral of their family member that just spent 12 days choking on their own blood in the ICU.
I can tell you that a pool hall is an incubator of illness, and waiting a month longer to continue to watch trends is not going to kill anyone or ruin the game. Finding out on the evening news that 100 or more people died as a result of rushing back to a pool hall may out it out of business, though.
It sure is a shame that so many refuse to keep options open about the impact of the virus, just out of short-term concern.
Nobody is going to starve to death because of the virus, but some people have and will die from it.
Hopefully we can look back on this soon and acknowledge the isolations were unnecessary in some areas, what if not?
Is it really better to resume normalcy and cause another- potentially worse- round, or is it better to shutter our daily doings until a strategy with a reasonable chance of success is developed, even in areas that havent seen the more dramatic effects yet?
In case it remains unclear, the latter option provides the best likelihood for favorable long-term outcome for the most people.
Nobody is going to starve to death because of the virus, but some people have and will die from it.
Hopefully we can look back on this soon and acknowledge the isolations were unnecessary in some areas, what if not?
Is it really better to resume normalcy and cause another- potentially worse- round, or is it better to shutter our daily doings until a strategy with a reasonable chance of success is developed, even in areas that havent seen the more dramatic effects yet?
In case it remains unclear, the latter option provides the best likelihood for favorable long-term outcome for the most people.