Yep, you might be fined. You come all the way from Basel and - unless you own a big bus - can not keep the 2m distance to your friend.
You could go shopping for your friend and bring the things to him. That would be helpful and saver.

Clear, and WRONG.

Tom

Not necessarily. Only if Baselland, Basel Stadt, Argau or Zürich have the same local rule as Ticino. Which, to the best of my knowledge they don't.

Id be happy if public transport were restricted to only medical staff or the like. Other than that we've basically done everything. I've already stopped using public transport myself, rather I just walk everywhere.

I really don't think a total ban on leaving the house is appropriate or necessary. If you are going for a walk in a rural area and don't get close to anyone that is a very low risk activity.

Obviously, if people are all on the same path and close to one another that's dangerous. A bit of common sense policing combined with common sense individual behaviour is all that is required. From what I've observed people are taking this very seriously and almost universally are adhering to the rules. The number of new cases appears to have plateaued. So why tighten it?

Relatively lassez-faire Switzerland seems to be flattening the curve if anything better than big-state France. I'm not surprised. Treat people like adults and they'll behave like adults. Impose arbitrary unnecessary rules and people will be working against you not with you.

I hope "the like" includes staff at grocerie stores, pharmacies, delivery services, post office employees, army personnel etc etc

It is not only the medical staff that keeps this country running

Quite. Anyone who has an essential job. I also understand if it's not practical to enforce this restriction. The Basel tram passes by my apartment. It's nearly empty - I think people are doing the right thing anyway.

You’ve used the term absurd and wrong in this thread.
What is your opinion and why?

I personally believe the restrictions are correct and keep the population safe.

I went running yesterday on nearby hill. I can't remember when it was last time I have seen so many people having picnic in the nature.
I understand people's need for recreation outside, but I was still surprised by the level of ignorance: families with children playing together, group of friends grilling, playing football etc.
It's the same in my office. My boss accept only the official bans and completely ignores "recommendation" including any hygienic precautions.
In last few days I become very disappointed by people (and I was never exactly optimistic about them)



So, in my opinion, measures would be more or less ok, if people were sticking to them. But they are not.

I went hiking on a (low, not dangerous [Napf]) mountain yesterday. The area was quite busy. But I was impressed how everyone maintained distance, greeted from far away, and stepped out of the way to let others pass. My conclusion of yesterday: all is well....going for a bicycle ride now.

It’s upsetting to read about people taking unnecessary risks.

Enclosed space within a car. Very selfish and stupid behaviour.

This.

Mr. Berset said something along the line of "we don't run Switzerland from top to the bottom", but he obviously overestimated people.

It is, but I think we'd all agree with you. Where we might disagree is what is an unnecessary risk. What do you feel are unnecessary risks? And why?

Just out of interest, the Swiss wide poll had these figures to the same question.

16% (Nowhere near far enough)
26% (Not far enough)
58% (Appropriate)
3% (A bit too far)
1% (Far too far).

Well I wrote my initial paragraph and then changed it because I was getting truly upset.

Friends meet up for a get together, one of them has it but innocently doesn’t know it. The others respect social distancing but still get together and do not feel too concerned (perhaps they are young or simply normally healthy individuals). They have a good time at the person’s home and without realizing it they touched something and they leave with it on their clothes and hands.
Upon returning home, maybe one of them will do something, help and cook/clean for an elderly or health-compromised person who has restricted visits to the bare minimum as they are battling cancer or COPD or they have severe Diabetes or a heart condition.
What’s the sequel?

The unnecessary risk of a bit of fun can have a consequence.
A little self-discipline, and accepting personal frustration, a lot of compassion and care and solidarity for others could help. And every bit of responsible behaviour makes a difference.

Yes, we do need to go shopping and take care of the elderly and some have to work.

But why take unnecessary risks?
Is it truly unreasonable to say this?

__________________
.
"Il mondo è fatto a scale, chi le scende e chi le sale"

No. But definitions of risk vary, as does what is necessary. So simply saying "Don't take unnecessary risks", doesn't actually add any information.

Probably best to focus on what we're doing ourselves to minimise risk. If enough of us do that, it compensates for those who don't. Best not worry about other people not doing what we think they should. Especially since we're not capable of doing anything to change their behaviour.

Quite right, too. Totally irresponsible.

Seems pretty clear where I am (in France). Or are you saying the Swiss rules are not ambiguous?

If he's elderly, call him up, take his order, do the shopping and leave it on his door step. You could have a brief chat from 2 or 3 metres away. To take him shopping would be to expose him to unnecessary risk. It's nice that you are helping a friend like this though, so well done.

I fully agree.
But yes I do worry. With 4 close family members in the high risk category, I cannot help but be worried sick.

It’s upsetting when people act as if this were nothing.

The longer this goes on, one wonders if it the measures taken by governments across the world isn't a step too far. Even with the numbers coming out of Italy the number of dead isn't that high in the grand scheme of things.

Is it really worth crashing the world's economy, and the long term damage (including deaths) that will happen just to save people now? I'm starting to think it may not be.