Not really 'want', but OK. It's pretty straightforward that is what it means.
But just out of curiosity ... "if" they were going to enforce a top-down mandate where nobody could opt-out, how do you think they'd phrase it?
If you're going to ask me to draft a law for New Zealand, for which there is no precedent, I'm obviously not going to be able to do that. But obviously, the law would have to be very clear, obvious, and non-vague to be used in such a draconian manner and to infringe on people's autonomy.
The People of Australia and New Zealand have made their feelings about all this very clear
They have? I've been rather disappointed. They were fine with people being kidnapped without trial and put into 'quarantine' camps for weeks, even without the government proving that they had contracted the virus.
You're partially right. But these insane policies were, as far as I know, wildly popular - at least in the beginning. You can't be running quarantine camps without a great measure of public support. Not even the European tyrannies did that.
That wasn't public "support," it was compliance based on fear and ignorance of the situation. That changed very quickly to the where people were protesting in clashes with the police, who responded by beating people back into their homes and imposing curfews afterward. It became very quickly that gov't had no support once people figured out the situation and demanded an end to lockdowns.
Not really 'want', but OK. It's pretty straightforward that is what it means.
If you're going to ask me to draft a law for New Zealand, for which there is no precedent, I'm obviously not going to be able to do that. But obviously, the law would have to be very clear, obvious, and non-vague to be used in such a draconian manner and to infringe on people's autonomy.
You can look to this enacted but never-implemented law in Austria.. You would have to prove your coronavirus vaccination during routine checks or be given a fine.
They have? I've been rather disappointed. They were fine with people being kidnapped without trial and put into 'quarantine' camps for weeks, even without the government proving that they had contracted the virus.
There were all-out protests in the streets and clashes with police near the end. That's when they were finally allowed to leave their homes again.
You're partially right. But these insane policies were, as far as I know, wildly popular - at least in the beginning. You can't be running quarantine camps without a great measure of public support. Not even the European tyrannies did that.
That wasn't public "support," it was compliance based on fear and ignorance of the situation. That changed very quickly to the where people were protesting in clashes with the police, who responded by beating people back into their homes and imposing curfews afterward. It became very quickly that gov't had no support once people figured out the situation and demanded an end to lockdowns.