4 ms·

The article is a bit confusing because as you read along > A Sydney Local Health District spokeswoman confirmed the limits are in place in NSW Health’s Special

The article is a bit confusing because as you read along > A Sydney Local Health District spokeswoman confirmed the limits are in place in NSW Health’s Special Health Accomodation, where Covid-positive patients and close contacts are sent for isolation. > [. . .] A NSW Police spokeswoman said Police officers are not confiscating alcohol delivered to residential buildings, and do not have powers to do so. Digging further it seems like the building is a homeless shelter and is under a 2 week lockdown https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/health-wellbeing/mission-australias-common-ground-camperdown-homelessness-service-in-lockdown-after-four-covid-cases-c-3854039 https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/health-wellbeing/mission-aust... Placing restrictions on deliveries to people’s homes that they own would seem excessive but I’m not sure if the same should apply to a social housing building of this type. I think homeless shelters elsewhere restrict alcohol and impose other stringent rules.

throwawaylinux 5y ago
These are formerly-homeless people's homes. It's not a "shelter" you might traditionally think of, it's a block of apartments that people live in. It's a social housing project, and probably there is a relatively high proportion of residents with mental health issues, but that does not mean they forfeit their fundamental rights. Or rather, it should not: the exact same slippery slope argument has been used countless times in the past to strip people of their freedom, privacy, autonomy, and to take their children away from them.