Hoag
Contributor
- Messages
- 2,389
- Reaction score
- 2,226
- # of dives
- 200 - 499
So when somebody gives you an explanation which you yourself say "sounds reasonable", your first instinct is to push things to an absurd extreme in an attempt not actually give a counterpoint, but in an (unsuccessful) attempt to make that person look foolish."Better safe than sorry" sounds reasonable. But I'm curious as to why the advocates of this philosophy aren't demanding laws that require people to wear helmets when driving cars, or even when walking down the street (or doing anything, for that matter.) After all, you just never know when something might hit you in the head.
I'm a fan of risk mitigation, but I prefer to quantify the risks and the effort required to mitigate them. "Better safe than sorry" seems to dispense with that.
Let me guess, if no steps were taken, and someone who was asymptomatic did infect someone else you would be one of the first crying for the person who got infected to sue because the boat's crew didn't take proper precautions.
Boats, in particular cruise ships, have proven to be extremely susceptible to outbreaks of this virus. Given that LOBs are essentially small cruise ships, it is logical for the crew of any LOB to take extra precautions to minimize the risk, where possible to their crew and their passengers and extra cleaning and screening are reasonable.