Am I at Risk Getting Fined for Driving A Few Hours Away to Hiking Spot with Girlfriend?

There's a popular thread on here about how a person has been fined for driving unnecessarily (L-plater). I was planning on driving a few hours away to a relatively secluded hiking spot with my girlfriend over the weekend. Full disclosure, she does not live with me.

These laws are targeting people who are of no risk of spreading the virus (slight risk between just the two of us if you want to nitpick), and I can't just not see her for 90 days anyway, it's absurd.

Am I risking getting fined here? (2 people, going to exercise).

I live in NSW.

And for the record, other than this, I am social distancing.


  • +45 votes

    I think state and national parks are closed (definitely in Vic, not sure 100% for NSW). So unless it's private property that you own, you're running the gauntlet I reckon.

    • +138 votes

      People like OP - who've been trying to find loopholes in public safety regulations - are part of reason we are in such mess.

      Stay the fcuk home!

      • Don't you think it's weird that it's acceptable to walk your dog where you come across other people and their dogs regularly, but going for a hike where you probably won't see anyone is somehow worse?

        • +15 votes

          There's like 30 kids at daycare in his class where we are encouraged to send our son. We are trying to be responsible and keeping him home.

          But he better not play by himself in the tiny local playgrounds which are now shut down even though people were already using them 1 family at a time. I was even screamed at for using the playground with my son (alone) just before they closed them.

          And God forbid if we let him play with any neighbours once in a while for his mental health, better call the police right away! But please do send him to daycare.

          I wish common sense would prevail, but too many people like above for that to be possible.

          Edit: Sorry for the rant, got a bit side tracked

          • @fruxo: Not side tracked at all. The gov policies are defying common sense. Theatrical at worst, just like the airport security checks.

          • @fruxo: His mental health will be fine if you make the effort to engage with him for the same amount of time that he's normally spend with other kids. Unfortunately, most parents just youtube their way out of it.

          • @fruxo: I feel for you. It’s funny to think “common sense would prevail” with everything that happened so far in this country / world. Some of my favourite highlights are panic buying tp and emptying long life shelves; bondi beach fiasco; sanitizer madness…

        • This, it's bloody moronic. Walk in the national Park with the nearest person 2km away, not allowed!

          • +24 votes

            @brendanm: No, it actually makes a lot of sense if you think just a bit bigger than your own interest.

            Think of every group of interconnected people as one 'bubble': your family unit, your workplace, that dinner party you went to last month, everybody that went to coles the day you went to coles etc. We all belong to a bunch of these 'bubbles', and every time we leave the house we potentially join a bunch more bubbles. Now remember: every time you connect with another person you add all of their bubbles to your transmission network, and vice versa.

            Self-isolation is about reducing the number of bubbles we each belong to, and social-distancing is about slowing down the rate of COVID19 transmission within any particular bubble it reaches. If you're only thinking of yourself, you say "We'll just go for a drive, out to nowhere, and go for a hike". Epidemiologists know that in reality, people doing that leads to a bunch of new bubbles being interconnected unnecessarily, across hundreds of kilometres. You touched that fuel pump, sat on that bench, bought that packet of chips, opened that gate/door. Sure, you'll be faultlessly careful, but these measures we're all taking were designed to reduce overall risk - precisely because we're fallible, and COVID19 doesn't give two figs about your one 'whoops' moment.

            tldr; "Stay the f#ck at home." - Samuel L. Jackson, 2020

            • @MattyD: So people being allowed to simply walk around the streets, as long as in a group of two, is somehow safer than that group of two walking in a forest miles away from any other people? That doesn't make sense at all. Same as it doesn't make sense that I can't take my boat out, with the same family members I'm stuck at home with anyway, and not go near another soul out on the water. It's plain stupid.

              My cars are basically full of fuel and high get over 1000km to a tank, boat is also full of fuel. Yet I'm allowed to go to random people's houses and into contact with others while at work. Completely makes sense.

              Not only that, can't take a boat out, buy I can take a kayak? Are kayaks immune to diseases?

              • @brendanm: Sigh. Unless the people are walking 300km+ of streets their hardly traversing the same 30 suburbs you're going to travel through on your way to your hiking trail or tinny ramp, are they? But I understand that you don't fully grasp that the rules weren't written based on your iron-clad and completely unjustified sense of "But me and mine will all be totally fine! Waaaaaaahhhhhh!"

                Here's why this country's measures are working: because we're all already acting like we've already got it. And that's lead us to act responsibly in the best interest of everyone else. Well, most of us - fortunately - but it's not too late for you to catch on.

                Can they invent a rule that covers every situation? No. Because for every rule there's some moron that exploits a loophole. As if COVID19 sticks to the rules. If this epidemic has taught us anything, it's that you can't contain stoopid.

                Look mate I'm sorry that keeping Australia's health system within capacity is such a huge inconvenience for you, and I understand that your need to ponce around on a mountain outweighs the expertise of Australia's finest medical minds. And it's simply unAustralian for us to ask you to - God forbid - follow a health directive as simple as "stay the f$ck at home!". It speaks to your outlaw spirit that for everything you're being asked not to do, you either (a) think of something like it that's not explicitly covered or (b) point to some other rule and yell "Aha! See? I should be able to…". But remember: when you look into it, most outlaws were actually, you know, selfish d1cks.

                But luckily those leading us through these tough times are coming up with policies that are [a] (so far) navigating our country through this crisis in better shape than a lot of other countries, and [b] allow for a small percentage of our population to continue being self-centred d1ckheads.

                • @MattyD: Each state have different restrictions. If they allow people to go outside to exercise then do it and if they don’t then stay home.

                  OP is in New South Wales where hiking is still permitted.

                • @MattyD: Driving 50km doesn't impact any of he people you pass. I have a private ramp to use, and berth, so again not going near anyone else.

                  Again, why can I take my kayak out? Going to be much closer to people doing that than any of the other activities.

                  Why can I go to work and work around random people and their houses? My son could go to school. Daughter can go to kindy. Wife can work in a hospital. But we can't go in a national Park or on boat?!? It's mental.

                  • @brendanm: Come down to New South Wales and you can fish as much as you want.

                  • @brendanm: Carrying stoopid is exhausting: do what you want sport. Be the 10% the rest of us are carrying.

                  • @brendanm: May you someday find yourself in a position of leading 20 million people through a health crisis.

                    And, on that day - despite your best attempts to keep people alive using the advice of the best medical minds in the country - may you find yourself buried in the minutia of having to explain to each single braindead dunce why they specifically can't drive their unwashed hoard 50km in their d-max to their private boat ramp to "hook some mullet".

                    And may there be such a sense of justice in your world that these pillocks - and only these pillocks - pay the terrible price of the fact that while the rest of the country was trying to out-innovate each other in carefuleness, they were trying to outwit the very laws and guidelines put in place to protect them.

                    And may you find a way to sleep at night knowing that - despite your best attempts to keep the maximum number of people alive - a percentage of these w&nkers heard you say "the only thing that can f$ck this up for all of us is for people to lack any sense of civic-duty" and screamed at the top of their lungs "CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!!!!"

                    • @MattyD: Does the job come with free trips to Hawaii?

                      • @whooah1979: Yes. But you'll be torn a new one by vocal hypocrites who think that as long as any one person in the country is facing hardship, your long-scheduled one week Christmas break with your wife and kids is utterly unreasonable for a man that works 16 hours a day.

                    • @MattyD: I don't have a dmax, and don't have to go 50km to the boat ramp. I also don't want to catch any mullet. I want to take my family out of the house, not go near anyone else, and attempt to maintain our sanity, without affecting anyone else, by cruising around in the boat.

                      Your brain doesn't seem to comprehend the stupidity of not allowing this, but allowing me to walk my kayak down to the beach, passing people as I go, and then paddle around all the liveaboards.

                      I don't go to the shop unnecessarily, I follow social distancing rules, I wash my hands, and do all the correct things. Taking my boat out with the same people I'm stuck in a house with does not, in any way, affect any other person.

                      Feel free to explain to me exactly how it would affect someone else, short of simply slinging personal attacks because I upset you in the other thread. Funnily enough you are doing the same thing in this thread as you did in the other, call me names and not answer any questions.

                      • @brendanm: Actually that came as a complete shock to me too - I literally had a spinning head for a sec at the sheer coincidence of it all.

                        But then I realised it shouldn't come as a surpise: for my part, I'm exhausted and out of patience dealing with small minded people. And the common thread is that you're immune to seeing the bigger picture ;)

                        • @MattyD: The common thread is that you can't have a discussion without attempting to insult someone, to attempt to distract from the fact that you can't actually answer their questions. Bravo.

                          I notice you still haven't answered the questions 🤣

                          Also, remember Luke 6:31 my friend, it's not nice to be rude and attempt to be condescending.

                          • @brendanm: Mate if the National Cabinet can't convince you of a few simple principles, what chance do I have?


                            If the established guidelines of an internet community can't compel you not to air your intolerance on a bargain website, what chance do I have?

                            Of course these are rhetorical questions: but let's see you have a parting swipe in 3…2…1….

                            • @MattyD: I'd like you to simply answer my non rhetorical questions.

                              I also haven't aired any intolerance, in fact you are the one who has been attacking and abusive, it'll be nice for it to be left here for others to see how you act when someone asks you simple questions, and you can't answer them.

                              • @brendanm: Okay I'll answer your non-rhetorical questions, but you won't understand.

                                Feel free to explain to me exactly how it would affect someone else

                                Because the rules aren't written for you, and just you. They're written to protect the most people from unnecessary social contact. And for every person that leaves their house unnecessarily, the risk goes up. Enough risk, and you have: Italy, Spain, America. Can the deaths be traced back to one boatie? Of course not. It was the mindset of millions like them that said "this will be fine". Multiply that thinking by enough people, and mistakes happen. The rest is maths. Don't argue this with me: it's the cornerstone upon which Aus' medical leaders are advising the National Cabinet.

                                I also haven't aired any intolerance

                                Yes you have. Just because it's fashionable to state broad ignorant attacks condemning roughly 85% of the world's population, doesn't make it okay. You'll notice you did so - not in a forum where people get together to discuss each other's faiths or beliefs - but in a bargain forum where people just want to find cheap stuff irrespective of faith.

                                But this is where I really get to shine: because I've not stated my opinion here. These are the facts, and from the start I've only deferred to the authorities on each of the matters in question (the national council here, and the Ozbargain voting guidelines there). But whereas in the perfect world the ready access of facts should render such a debate moot, it only serves as a platform for people like yourself to dig in and convince themselves that their own opinion somehow outweighs provable facts and expert opinion. And before you butthurt at that last comment, I'm referring to other people's expertise, not mine.

                                Of course you'll have a perfect response for all of this, but NONE of it will speak adequately to the authorities I'm referring to. And that's the problem with the internet: everyone gets a voice, and everyone's convinced they're right. The difference between you and me: I'm convinced they're right, because they're the ones with credibility.

                                • @MattyD: It's quite simple. Why can I go on a kayak, but not on a boat. My entire point is that someone simply comes up with something, blurts it out, then it's law. There is no thought process. Some things make sense, some don't, but as they've said them, they can't go back in it.

                                  As to the other, I grew out of fairytales as a kid, what you choose to do as an adult is up to you, however when certain things are systemic to certain groups, there is a problem. I don't need a 2000 year old book to try to scare me into not being a bad person. It obviously hasn't helped you with how you talk with others.

                                  • +10 votes

                                    @brendanm: Dude, seriously? Are you that self-centred that you can't follow your own question to any logical conclusion that doesn't revolve entirely around you and your tiny world?

                                    Ok, here's even one scenario that should answer that comprehensively for anybody that is thinking of anyone other than themselves.

                                    I'm a volunteer lifesaver; my dad's in volunteer marine rescue. Both of these are classified as essential services under Qld's emergency services. I suspect it's similar in other states, but with a population of 5 million let's use Qld as an example.

                                    I've got to patrol the beach with my team, and my father has to skipper a rescue vessel with his during a health crisis when we're all being asked to stay home as much as possible. Why? Because SLS and VMR are emergency services, and we need to be there for the reckless and selfish who don't heed the advice to not go swimming or boating at a time like this, and who are so convinced of their infallibility that they have cognitive dissonance enough to assume that the rescue stats will never apply to them. Except they do, brendan: we're constantly called to respond. "It'll never happen to me" is the catchcry of every person we've ever fished out of the drink, btw, so I [email protected]&ken-dare you to say it.

                                    And that's one small but statistically certain reason why you should keep your ass out of a boat and stay the f%ck at home. Because why should my patrol mate with her mum recovering from chemo be unnecessarily exposed to the selfish chump we fished out of the surf today? Why should my stepmother with her heart condition be exposed to your fellow boatie who got rescued off coochie on Wed? The answer is as simple as the illustration: stay at home mate. Be part of the solution.

                                    • @MattyD: People don't have to be rescued from kayaks? Quite amazing.

                                      • @brendanm: Now let me be quite careful about my words; because you keep referring to 'name calling'.

                                        It's not that I'm saying you're a stupid moron brendan. Rather, I'm saying that's a stupid moronic response.

                                        You're able to read a logical, factual response to the selfish question you've been banging on endlessly about, and still stubbornly cling to the inability to go the last mile in answering your own question. So let me spoon feed you that last morsel, since you're lacking the wisdom to figure it out for yourself. And like I said: I'm exhausted. Today all over Australia people in essential services go out again to risk their own lives and families to serve ungrateful people like you who just don't get it.

                                        Because a kayak falls under individual, personal exercise equipment brendan. And it's not any of us wants you to actually go kayaking; it's just that we're trying to walk an incredibly fine line between what's best for all of us (social isolation) and giving you a small amount of freedom to stretch your legs and exercise a bit of good judgement for yourself. Your endless questioning, bleating on about your own individual needs and inability to divine the essence of the directive is a wonderful illustration of exactly what our leaders are up against when it comes to the small minority of thickheaded individuals.

                                        So take your kayak. Take your windsurfer, kite rig, water cycle and pink pool noodle. Take your huck-finn raft and anything else you can think up that skirts the directive to please only leave the house for essential services and a small amount of personal exercise. Just exercise more brains with it than you're showing with your responses here.

                                        And we're all braced for your next enlightening, other-centred response brendan. Because that is the wonder and the magic of internet arguments. You're not interested in having your questions answered; you're simply invested in not being wrong. And you'll write any senseless petty thing to try to sound like you've still got a leg to stand on.

                                        Instead, and here's an odd suggestion: next time you come into contact with someone in an essential service, simply say: "thanks friend. I was being an internet d1ckhead and railing against these restrictions but now I get it. I'm staying the f#ck at home!"

                                        • @MattyD: My wife works in an essential service 🤣 She has to deal with people who are about a million times more at risk of having coronavirus than you do, as they are mentally ill, often homeless, often drug addicted. I'll tell her some internet d1ckhead said she can't have her one outlet from the stress she's currently under, simply "because he said so", even though it doesn't actually make sense.

                                          But poor you has to deal with one person at the beach who doesn't get more than a few metres from you, life must be hard 🙁

                                          You're in Brisbane, go to any of the public hospitals, head to the mental health wards and tell me what that's like compared to your petty whining.

                                          • @brendanm: Mate you know exactly squat. My wife and I are front line every day, and our gov't authority has mandated that we put our kids there too. SLS is something I do on the weekend to keep you safe in your floaties, in between - you know - ensuring people like your wife can still go to work.

                                            So before you start crying again about how "wifey can't have a chardy on the poop deck" try (really hard, tiger!) to remember: there are more people in world than just you. And most of them right now are making more sacrifices than you can imagine to keep you and yours alive.

                                            • @MattyD: Sure mate, you have a lot of time on here for a frontline health worker. In the meantime, some of the rules just flat out don't make sense, and that's a fact. Also the fact that you think someone driving along in a car can infect people along the way is quite worrying.

                                              • @brendanm: Saying "that's a fact" whilst stating anything but is the last grasped straw of a person bereft of commonsense. I never said I was health, but then I understand you're dealing with both a profound sense of self-focus and - from you misinterpreting the whole why they don't want w#nkers driving all over the shop rationale - a multitude of comprehension difficulties. I'd suspect you're reading at a y4 level, but that's encouraging.

                                                Your denial and cognitive dissonance is so wonderfully comprehensive that you're even deluding yourself that I'm the one you're arguing with, when I'm merely deferring to the wisdom of Australia's best medical minds charting our course through this.

                                                You're superduper special regardless, brendan; don't let anybody take that away from you.

                                                • @MattyD: Haha I think you are one of the most passive aggressive people I've dealt with in a long time. If you aren't health, you aren't front line mate. Have a good weekend, keep sticking to those good Christian principles, you do it well.

                                                  • @brendanm: Ad hominem. All that's left when you reveal the true depths of a person's ignorance and they're too oafish to grow.

                                                    I'll take that as the equivalent of a white flag mate. Thanks for playing, I was just getting warmed up. Next time, try more actual facts, referencing wiser people and not so much foot stamping. Not that I tire of referencing sources with more credibility than you to point out how consistently wrong you are with almost every assertion, but some might challenge you to broaden your own interpretation of 'frontline' in these trying times. Not that you will, mind, because that humility and learning malarky is not how you roll.

                                                    But I'm sure you didn't mean specifically to ostracise the many other hundreds of thousands of non-health professionals putting their necks out for you daily. We all understand from your repeated posts that you're shallow, ill-read and pathologically self-absorbed.

                                                    Relying on your own smarts was a bit like trying to fly by flapping your arms and running off the roof of the house. And the result was the same, for all involved.

                                                    • @MattyD: Oh, so you work retail. Frontline lol.

                                                      • @brendanm: Yes. Because the qld government has mandated that retail workers take their children to work with them…

                                                        My wife and I are front line every day, and our gov't authority has mandated that we put our kids there too

                                                        You use a slide rule and calculator to arrive at that conclusion?

                                                        Keep rockin' that single figure IQ, champ. LOL

                                                        • @MattyD: So what is it then? The only thing I can think that kids would be going to is school, and as that isn't on, you wouldn't actually be a "frontline" worker. You'd be a sitting at home worker.

                                                          • @brendanm: Because you're not a smart man brendan. The only thing you can and usually do think based on all of your words is the wrong thing. Over and over again. About almost everything you say. It would be funny if it wasn't so embarrassing. No wait: it's still funny.

                                                            But I'll give you another go, since you're so caught up in finally undoing all your incorrect assertions about what I do for a job (as if that matters to anybody but you). Here's a big hint: those articles consistently list as front line workers people in health, retail and teachers.

                                                            I'm not in health. I'm not in retail. Can you do it little fella? Can you rub those two cells together to make 'em spark? Yes you can! I believe in you champ…

                                                            • @MattyD: Did you read my comment? I suggested school, but also suggested that if you were a teacher, you'd actually be at home, as school isn't on, so you aren't a "frontline" worker, you are sitting at home. Unless you are the school janitor, I suppose they may still be there cleaning.

                                                              • @brendanm: Dang you're committed to being wrong on every front, aren't you tiger? Look at you go, all spittle and falsehoods.

                                                                But I applaud you after discrediting the vast majority of frontline professionals following that up with another prodigiously stupid assumption like "teachers wouldn't be at school right now - it's holidays! And they definitely wouldn't be going in daily with all their children in tow in order to desperately scramble together in two weeks something that allows the nation's next generation some semblance of continuity in their education."

                                                                I was going to caution you against it. You've been wrong enough about enough this week: I'd hope to give you this one for free, but apparently the only thing faster than the speed of light is the speed of dumb.

                                                                • @MattyD: Well you would definitely be "frontline" going into an empty school, so brave! What school do you work at, I'll make up a care hamper and send it up, I'll put in some face masks and hand sanitiser.

                                                                  Hell, I would deal with more people than you on a daily basis and sure don't have the gall to call myself a "frontline" worker. I would reserve that for doctors, nurses, paramedics etc, who are actually in constant contact with sick people.

                                                                  Even when school goes back it's all going to be online 🤣🤣🤣. Truly amazing, on the frontline of webcams.

                                                                  • @brendanm: Amazing. You've outdone yourself special one! You're comprehensively wrong four times in four sentences. But don't worry: I've isolated the one word you got correct in your brainfart guess at what most teachers are doing right now: "school". Go brendan! Are you smacking your head with a big rock in between each post or do you just naturally tail off when it comes to holding your own in conversations?

                                                                    But listen, in all seriousness: you've insulted medical experts, you've trivialised the contribution of retail workers and volunteer emergency services, made light of cleaning staff and definitely missed the point of all that teachers are doing for our nation right now. And you've definitely insulted yourself time an time again until I'm starting to suspect you've got a little undiagnosed sum' sum' going on there that you might want to get checked.

                                                                    You're a gold-plated champion of society brendan. And as much as I'd like to see what you're wrong about next, they say you become like the 5 people you spend the most time around: and we simply can't risk adding another 'you' to the world right now, can we?

                                                                    So I'm going to take your concession and leave now. Bye silly!

                                                                    • @MattyD: Thankyou for your service sir, if only we were all so brave as to be able to go into deserted buildings, and then teach children online. What a place the world would be. "Frontline"! Hahahahaha

                                                                      The guy selling TVs at Harvey Norman is more frontline than you. Absolutely hilarious.

                  • @brendanm: Just adding to what MattyD said above.

                    You can go to work, your son can go to school and your daughter to kindy because this is more essential than going on a hike or a kayaking trip (Yeah, I am amazed too!).

                    'Wife can work in a hospital'??!!. Are you seriously including this as a reason?

                    Yes it would be great if everybody stayed at home and stopped interacting to reduce the spread of this virus. Unfortunately that is not possible so the government needs to strike some kind of balance. People need exercise so walks are allowed as a bare minimum. Hiking and kayaking are not bare minimums. A few months without are not going to kill you.

                    You think the rules should be relaxed for you because you have the good fortune to own a private ramp. Unfortunately that's now how rules work because a loophole for every situation and person renders the law useless. Also, if you have an accident, somebody is going to have to come and rescue you and our emergency services cannot afford that at the moment.

                    You can not go to a national park or on a boat because this is not essential. Because when one covidiot tries to find a loophole, everybody piles on and you get Manly and Bondi beach all over again where people feel their entitlement (not right) to exercise outside their home is more important than somebody's grandmother.

                    All that being said, I do find it ridiculous that a learner driver was fined but I guess these things have to be worked out as we have never had this kind of situation before.

                    • @gramoras: So I'll just take my kayak out, that's allowed, and completely essential 🤣.

                      Also "member since 10 minutes ago" and has only posted in this thread, nice one 😉

                      • @brendanm: Oooh you went after him personally after one post brendan. Aren't you going to at least ply him with all your non-facts first? Or have you hit rock-bottom?

                      • @brendanm: Oh I have just lurked around mostly for six months but seeing OP's post and the replies tipped me over. So congratulations. Thanks to this thread, I am officially an Ozbargainer :).

                        If the kayak is allowed, go for it. I love kayaking and hiking myself. Just don't claim it to be essential.

                        • @gramoras: I'm not claiming it's essential, the government is, it's their rules.

                          So you are happy that kayaking is allowed, simply because some faceless number in government said it so? Does it not make more sense that it not be allowed?

                          • @brendanm: Mate, even if it is allowed, I am not going kayaking.

                            I personally think it should not be (even though I enjoy it and regularly used to do it before this). But I guess it has been because some faceless number in the government agreed with you that kayaking is a solo activity. Until of course other people also want to take advantage of the same loophole or have an accident they need to be rescued from.

                            The reason I don't think it should be allowed is because the people who have flagrantly disobeyed the social distancing rules all had the same excuses. Jogging is solo, surfing is solo, swimming is solo, sunbathing is solo so let's all head to the beach. When one activity is allowed, it becomes a slippery slope as everybody rushes in to take advantage of the loophole. Or complain that if one is allowed, why not the other. Reducing everything to essential movement makes it easier to police.

                            The rules definitely need to be worked on. The lack of cohesion between the states and feds is confusing. Travel bans should have been enacted sooner. But despite all that, we are managing to get the numbers under control and might even drive this thing under. The sooner we can do that, the sooner the country can be opened up again and we can all get back to our activities with a new found sense of appreciation. I don't mind sacrificing my fun if I can help to make that happen.

                            In the meantime, our rivers and lands are getting a bit of a breather so that's no bad thing.

                            • @gramoras: I also don't believe it should be allowed if similar things are not. Boating can be solo, hiking can be solo etc. This is the entire point of my post, it is just stupid, and seemingly picked from thin air.

                              • @brendanm: I agree it is not very cohesive. I guess they are working it out as they go. Hopefully, calmer heads will prevail and we will get a more sensible set of guidelines.

            • @MattyD: Self isolation is a band aid. Everyone will eventually get infected but at a slower rate. Those that are strong enough will survive while others won't.

              • @whooah1979: Luckily I don't take health advice from randoms on the internet. The leading medical minds of this country say that self-isolation will keep transmission rates below our health system's capacity to deal, and that's the difference between the comparatively low numbers of dead Australia has seen and the thousands we're seeing in Spain, Italy, US. It's dead simple maths champ, and it's happening right now in other countries: when the number of people who need ICU and Oxygen equipment/staff exceeds our capacity: those who miss out die.

                So let me fix your post in line with what the smartest medical minds around the world are agreeing:

                Self isolation is a band aid because we don't have immunity to this thing: it's brand new! Until we have an approved and tested vaccine everyone will eventually get infected but at a slower rate. Those that are strong enough have access to ICU resources and staff when they need it will survive while others if we exceed that capacity by being reckless morons, like other countries they probably won't.

                But seriously, you can learn all this for yourself by simply tuning in to what the leaders of this (and every other nation currently leading in survival rates) are trying to communicate to keep you and your loved ones alive. I'm not going to waste my breath if you're one of these people that chooses to read/spread the latest viral misinformation campaign from that one doctor in Italy whose been working front line who needs world leaders to know blah de blah of gawd I'm tired of this sh1t I'm going to get a beer and stay the f#ck at home.

        • Of course it is - on any evening I see hundreds of people walking in close proximity to each other around the beach near where I live - yet the police are moving-on single people sitting by themselves with no one around. It defies logic.

        • They can’t enforce the lockdown if they allow this. Anyone who is unnecessarily travelling far from their residence can come up with the excuse that they are travelling to find an exercise spot.

          • @lowlifesphere: LOL. This thread is entertaining…

            Going for a hike is probably okay. I can imagine everyone in Sydney turning up to the hiking trail (duh, nice weather, got nowhere else to go), and that is probably not very sensible given the current situation.

            Boating… in theory okay, and shouldn't be a problem for the 95% with common sense and comply with what they should do. It is always the minority that ruins it for everyone. I can bet with anything if boating is allowed, there's bound to be one or two boats with people from all different households.

            Problem with this COVID19 business is that it's very contagious, and infection rate goes up in an exponential rate (simple arithmetic 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32…).

            Our friends and relatives in the medical field in both AU and overseas (Singapore, Hong Kong) are quite concerned that we may go into the same trend as Italy (well, now the US). That was 3 weeks back… As medical people, they are not only VERY concerned for their own wellbeing, but also possibility of infecting their family, not able to see their parent/kids for months if they are infected/battling a full blown pandemic, need to choose which patient the available ventilator will go to… Trust me, they were under enormous on what may hit our home.

            Time is tough, but let's all hang in there.

  • +148 votes

    For NSW
    Can I visit my romantic partner if we don’t live together?
    New South Wales – Although legislation would suggest the answer is no, police commissioner Mike Fuller said on Wednesday that yes, you are allowed. This is considered to come under the “care” exemption.

    So you can visit your girlfriend. That ticks your 90 day issue.
    So go visit her in her home, or she in yours.

    Travelling a few hours away to go hiking though is not required for 'exercise' and would therefore be deemed non-essential travel.


    "These laws are targetting people who are of no risk of spreading the virus "

    They are targetting everyone. Stop trying to find loopholes

    • +46 votes

      This. What if a situation arises while you're hiking where you need rescue or medical attention? Just meet up at home.

      While hiking is exercise, state and federal governments want people to limit time spent out of the home and only travel for essential reasons.
      Your options are already limited, after many states closed high-traffic areas within national parks, while other sites are closed altogether.
      So if your nearest is closed, driving an hour for fresh air is unlikely to cut the mustard.

      I believe Scomo actually said in one of his press conferences that exercise around the block is perfectly fine, but if you're driving an hour to get somewhere to exercise, it's not ok. Otherwise everyone would be open to driving to the same spots.

      • Yes, but it's extremely unlikely, we are both fit, young adults who do/did this regularly. I'd argue going far away from the city I'm less likely to be brushing against other people.

        • +103 votes

          I'm pretty sure the majority of people who have ever needed emergency assistance would have said it's extremely unlikely beforehand.

          we are both fit, young adults

          You're fit and young so you have plenty of time to do hikes when this pandemic is over.
          You're adults so don't act like entitled children.

          If this virus was extremely dangerous to young people and the government asked old people to stay at home for the sake of the younger people, you bet all our parents and elders would do everything they can to stay home.

          • @unco: True. These so fit people's foolish acts like we saw on Bondi beach and wild parties are now filling the hospitals. Even few not do that, but they will be transmitting it to other vunerable people.

          • @unco: Sorry for the late post, but the "fit young adults" words also trigger me, they don't seems understand the full extend of the need of isolation.

            OP mentioned the girlfrend does not live with him, but she could already carry the virus from her neighbour somehow, transmit it to him on the weekend, which he then pass the virus to his parents after he return home.

            These so called fit young adults never think that way and always look at themselves.

        • It amazes me that people still havent learnt anything from the global crisis theyre observing. Look at countries where the population took the threat seriously vs countries that believed they were somehow above it all - invincible and how they suffered as a result of it.

          if you're fit - find other ways to remain fit - argument of "we did this regularly before so its only fair to continue" is reckless given nothing is what it was few months ago.
          Youre not the only one who would like to get out of the house - now imagine 100 or 1000s decided to go to the same place - we already saw what happened when people decided to jump to the beaches thinking open air is fine.
          Also it really does not matter whether you're young and healthy - you ARE a potential carrier - which is really worse cause you could be asymptomatic and still spreading it.

          • @zine21: Partly the problem is because Australia has escaped the worst of the pandemic (Lucky Country, whoop, whoop!). People therefore do not take this seriously.

            It's worse because so many people have not been directly touched by infectious fatal diseases or seen the after effects, they have grown complacent. Hence the growth of the anti-vaxxers. A generation of people who have not experienced the horrors or polio or whooping cough and think that pandemic diseases only happen somewhere else to other people.

        • From what I have seen in the media, it seems that older people have higher mortality rates. However younger people have higher transmission/infection rates. I think the virus prefers young and healthy hosts.

        • @sp3c.You are living in an “alternate” world,with thoughts like that.

        • And that's what everybody else with the same idea is also thinking. Plus all the other people who can no longer go to a gym or play sports or just want to get out of the house somewhere.

          End result? Bondi and Manly with the other entitled c0v!diots.

        • How f hard is it for you to just STFA home?

          You're no more important than anyone else.

    • "They are targetting everyone. Stop trying to find loopholes"

      I am not trying to find loopholes, there's plenty of things you can be doing that don't spread the virus (such as the L-plater driving), and me going to visit her/see her at her place, or her coming to mine, is no different than me going on an isolated trip with her in regards to risk/exposure.

      At least I suppose there's leeway in regards to the 90 days rule, so thanks for pointing that out.

  • Expect to cop a fine and deservedly so.

    The instructions are to avoid all but essential travel. This is not essential travel.

    It is not acceptable to class this as exercise, given the long distance you are driving.

    Do everyone a favour and stay home

      • Why are you acting like the rules don't apply to you?

        It's pretty simple. The instructions are to stay at home unless you are doing one of the very limited list of activities.

        One of these is exercise. This means exercising locally.

        If people act like they're above the rules and know better, they will prolong this whole ordeal.

        By travelling, you risk spreading the virus. Do your bit and stay at home

      • +21 votes

        You'll be stopping for supplies and petrol, potentially spreading the virus to areas that might not have been exposed to it yet. Stop being so selfish, organise a facetime session with the gf and pull the front off yourself.

          • +26 votes


            How do you know he has a virus? If he doesn't have it then how can he spread it?

            How do you know he doesn't have 'a' virus (and may be asymptomatic)
            How can he be sure he wont spread t?

        • And that's the main issue I think a lot of people are dealing with. There's no clarity or consistency to these laws, you bring up needing to get petrol or supplies but it's perfectly fine for people to do that at their local petrol station/supermarket. You're making the assumption that they're going to leave with no petrol and supplies and go out shopping on route or at their destination.

          NSW Police in their own statement said that it's ok to go fishing but don't organise a fishing trip with mates. The National Park and Wildlife Service announced that they have closed the campgrounds in NSW but have left walking tracks open and said that hiking was acceptable.

          At the end of the day it seems to be entirely at the personal discretion of any officials you encounter.

      • +27 votes

        Drive a couple of hours; do you have enough fuel? Of course, just call into a petrol station and fill up (touching a pump that others have used; being in close contact with the service operator; etc.), maybe buy a coffee while you are there (close contact with the operator; touching counter tops; etc.).
        On your way, you get a flat tyre. Your own car's jack doesn't work, so call NRMA or similar (close contact; touching surfaces; etc.).

        Then you find out later that your partner had inadvertently been in contact with someone in a supermarket, who had broken their self-quarantine. So now you have been in contact, and on it spreads.


      • Can't get those Insta selfies running around the block.

      • You're completely missing the point of local exercise…

        They don't want anyone to be going anywhere at all. They, however, correctly recognise that the damage to physical and mental health if you were banned from leaving the house is worse than the risk of spreading the virus further. Letting you run around the block is therefore a compromise between the two.

        If you let everyone start criss-crossing across the state claiming that once they get to their destination they'll supposedly be alone, it would defeat the entire point of the lockdown and risk mass spread again.

    • Alright, now that you've gotten your few seconds of feeling morally superior, would you like to explain how going for a drive (and remaining in your car) contributes to spreading the virus?

      For the record, I don't really have any interest in driving around, but you're the one saying it should be banned, so the burden of proving that is harmful is yours. Saying that "it's the rules" and "do everyone a favour" doesn't mean jack.

      • +4 votes

        I don't think there is a need to analyse the risks of one activity over another.

        The simple fact is that almost all state governments, and the federal government, have requested that we #stayathome.

        That request can be turned into an order by them, as in place in numerous countries around the world just now.
        That becomes more of a possibility the more people don't listen and accede to the request.

        • I don't think there is a need to analyse the risks of one activity over another.

          This is exactly what we should be doing. The problem is that society has seemed to lose the ability to think critically. You can criticise rules and discuss whether certain rules are effective in achieving the outcomes they want to achieve without breaking said rules. This is how society progresses and has been the case for hundreds of years.

          Again, I'm not saying people should drive around. I'm asking the question of what the exact harm of driving around is.