I'll be honest... what I see/hear is a whole lot of 'posturing'... not terribly indifferent from the 'left' on gun control, just in reverse. We all agree that criminals shouldn't have guns and that is already illegal..... but when they want to make their point, they almost always include those issues in their rants to simply pump up the 'perception' of volume.

While there certainly are a number of incidents where politicians are 'not letting a crisis go to waste'... there is also a whole lot of 'half-truths' or simply 'padding' of the issues to make it seem a broader issue than it is.

Constitutional violations are a big deal... but not every restriction of your rights, especially during a pandemic is a violation... just like Bearcat's article said... we simply need to recognize the difference between 'temporary' / 'reasonably expected to be effective for the collective purpose' and 'permanent' or 'not reasonably expected to be effective for the collective purpose'.

There is a difference between volume and weight. Citing 37 items, where 25 of them are things that almost nobody believes are a violation only serves to lessen the impact/significance of the 12 items that MOST WOULD AGREE are a violation. Claiming someone violating a law about meeting sizes is being 'denied their right to worship' is like a guy being pulled over for speeding claiming it's because he was 'driving while black'. When someone notes this, calling them a racist or statist doesn't change the fact that the claim being made is simply not factually true and it takes away from those who ARE being denied their religious or civil rights. More importantly, it takes the focus off of the question of whether or not the 'meeting size' law is 'reasonable'.

I think the gun shop law is wrong.
I think restrictions on people who own property being denied the right to go to it are wrong.
I reach those conclusions based on my (limited as they don't apply to me) knowledge of the situation.
I do NOT believe that there are 'no' circumstances under which those same laws might be reasonable... I just don't think we've remotely reached that level/what they accomplish doesn't apply. If there are some special circumstances that I can't personally imagine right now that justify these laws, okay.... but I am not aware of them, nor can I currently imagine them

As to the laws on gathering sizes, I DO see a justification for it... temporarily. As to the claim that it violates the freedom of religion, I don't see that religion is the only thing being restricted nor do I see that the purpose is to thwart religion. I also don't see that there aren't ways to have smaller groups or use the internet or whatever to allow people to get around the purpose of religion, which isn't (in my mind) having a large group in one room. That doesn't mean that there aren't some jurisdictions where they are enforcing it for churches, but not for bars or union meetings or whatever... and if that is happening, that ABSOLUTELY is a violation in application... and again, it doesn't mean that there may not be some religious practices or beliefs or other details that I'm not aware of that would change my mind... but nobody has shown me either of those things.

Instead what I'm HEARING (and others also are hearing) is people simply saying... it's my right and you can't tell me what to do, so despite the unnecessary risk to everyone else, I'm going to selfishly do whatever I want... perhaps even doing things I really don't care about, SIMPLY to flaunt my rebellion.... and if that is what is being intended.... that's crap.... you DON'T have the right to put others at risk just because you can... Such actions in my opinion only give power to those (unlike me) who actually DO want to take away your rights... permanently. You're the guy in Springfield, Mo who decides that he needs to go to WalMart carrying his rifle on his back and wearing a BPV... something no 'reasonable' person would generally do... only to become a poster child for the anti-gun people and a turn-off (people thinking that was stupid... not that you didn't have the right, just that it was a bad idea) some who might agree with you on your right to bear arms.

If that's NOT what's being said, fine... but that is what it sounds like to someone who generally supports everything you represent. Just like there are poor applications of laws... there are poor applications of rights. If you make people embarrassed to be associated with your actions... not your rights, but your actions... then you are losing the battle that you SHOULD be winning.

When we all know about the reliability of polls, but some of those 8 are disturbing.

Conscripting medical workers, we've done that in time of war.
Take over business and property-we do that now with compensation and legitimate reason.
Ban on non-citizens entering-we have forms of that now, just not complete.
Detain in government facilities-seems a little extreme for this virus, but it could be done for a deadly disease and is done for violating crimes.
Movement out of home-sometimes done in natural disasters to prevent crime-but the question is whether it is justified in this case.

Its the other 3 that are disturbing, in order:
Banning misinformation. This is the beginning of totalitarianism, when the government decides what is acceptable to say.
Suspending religious services. Again this is trampling on the Bill of Rights. I do not agree that a ban on numbers is acceptable. Now limiting the number based on capacity of a building and controlling spacing, are acceptable. Of course, governors and mayors have gone far beyond that.
Ban all people from entering. Quarantining citizens for a time is one thing. Banning them is entirely different.

(04-24-2020 10:29 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I'll be honest... what I see/hear is a whole lot of 'posturing'... not terribly indifferent from the 'left' on gun control, just in reverse. We all agree that criminals shouldn't have guns and that is already illegal..... but when they want to make their point, they almost always include those issues in their rants to simply pump up the 'perception' of volume.

While there certainly are a number of incidents where politicians are 'not letting a crisis go to waste'... there is also a whole lot of 'half-truths' or simply 'padding' of the issues to make it seem a broader issue than it is.

Constitutional violations are a big deal... but not every restriction of your rights, especially during a pandemic is a violation... just like Bearcat's article said... we simply need to recognize the difference between 'temporary' / 'reasonably expected to be effective for the collective purpose' and 'permanent' or 'not reasonably expected to be effective for the collective purpose'.

There is a difference between volume and weight. Citing 37 items, where 25 of them are things that almost nobody believes are a violation only serves to lessen the impact/significance of the 12 items that MOST WOULD AGREE are a violation. Claiming someone violating a law about meeting sizes is being 'denied their right to worship' is like a guy being pulled over for speeding claiming it's because he was 'driving while black'. When someone notes this, calling them a racist or statist doesn't change the fact that the claim being made is simply not factually true and it takes away from those who ARE being denied their religious or civil rights. More importantly, it takes the focus off of the question of whether or not the 'meeting size' law is 'reasonable'.

I think the gun shop law is wrong.
I think restrictions on people who own property being denied the right to go to it are wrong.
I reach those conclusions based on my (limited as they don't apply to me) knowledge of the situation.
I do NOT believe that there are 'no' circumstances under which those same laws might be reasonable... I just don't think we've remotely reached that level/what they accomplish doesn't apply. If there are some special circumstances that I can't personally imagine right now that justify these laws, okay.... but I am not aware of them, nor can I currently imagine them

As to the laws on gathering sizes, I DO see a justification for it... temporarily. As to the claim that it violates the freedom of religion, I don't see that religion is the only thing being restricted nor do I see that the purpose is to thwart religion. I also don't see that there aren't ways to have smaller groups or use the internet or whatever to allow people to get around the purpose of religion, which isn't (in my mind) having a large group in one room. That doesn't mean that there aren't some jurisdictions where they are enforcing it for churches, but not for bars or union meetings or whatever... and if that is happening, that ABSOLUTELY is a violation in application... and again, it doesn't mean that there may not be some religious practices or beliefs or other details that I'm not aware of that would change my mind... but nobody has shown me either of those things.

Instead what I'm HEARING (and others also are hearing) is people simply saying... it's my right and you can't tell me what to do, so despite the unnecessary risk to everyone else, I'm going to selfishly do whatever I want... perhaps even doing things I really don't care about, SIMPLY to flaunt my rebellion.... and if that is what is being intended.... that's crap.... you DON'T have the right to put others at risk just because you can... Such actions in my opinion only give power to those (unlike me) who actually DO want to take away your rights... permanently. You're the guy in Springfield, Mo who decides that he needs to go to WalMart carrying his rifle on his back and wearing a BPV... something no 'reasonable' person would generally do... only to become a poster child for the anti-gun people and a turn-off (people thinking that was stupid... not that you didn't have the right, just that it was a bad idea) some who might agree with you on your right to bear arms.

If that's NOT what's being said, fine... but that is what it sounds like to someone who generally supports everything you represent. Just like there are poor applications of laws... there are poor applications of rights. If you make people embarrassed to be associated with your actions... not your rights, but your actions... then you are losing the battle that you SHOULD be winning.

Ok. Bend the knee.

I wont.

Stop making some words all caps like a 3rd grade school teacher with a fat butt . We get it.

(04-24-2020 10:29 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Instead what I'm HEARING (and others also are hearing) is people simply saying... it's my right and you can't tell me what to do, so despite the unnecessary risk to everyone else, I'm going to selfishly do whatever I want... perhaps even doing things I really don't care about, SIMPLY to flaunt my rebellion.... and if that is what is being intended.... that's crap.... you DON'T have the right to put others at risk just because you can... Such actions in my opinion only give power to those (unlike me) who actually DO want to take away your rights... permanently. You're the guy in Springfield, Mo who decides that he needs to go to WalMart carrying his rifle on his back and wearing a BPV... something no 'reasonable' person would generally do... only to become a poster child for the anti-gun people and a turn-off (people thinking that was stupid... not that you didn't have the right, just that it was a bad idea) some who might agree with you on your right to bear arms.

Well said.

It's all about the Unknown and that scares a lot of people. I hope the scared people are able to recover from this.

(04-24-2020 02:16 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 10:29 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Instead what I'm HEARING (and others also are hearing) is people simply saying... it's my right and you can't tell me what to do, so despite the unnecessary risk to everyone else, I'm going to selfishly do whatever I want... perhaps even doing things I really don't care about, SIMPLY to flaunt my rebellion.... and if that is what is being intended.... that's crap.... you DON'T have the right to put others at risk just because you can... Such actions in my opinion only give power to those (unlike me) who actually DO want to take away your rights... permanently. You're the guy in Springfield, Mo who decides that he needs to go to WalMart carrying his rifle on his back and wearing a BPV... something no 'reasonable' person would generally do... only to become a poster child for the anti-gun people and a turn-off (people thinking that was stupid... not that you didn't have the right, just that it was a bad idea) some who might agree with you on your right to bear arms.

Well said.

Yes. Stay home. Obey. Comply.

I wont. Xxoo

(04-24-2020 01:59 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Ok. Bend the knee.

I wont.

Stop making some words all caps like a 3rd grade school teacher with a fat butt . We get it.

I'm sorry that your sensitive nature is offended by about 4 or 5 'scary' words out of probably 300 that I chose to emphasise... especially since most of them were simply to make sure that you didn't get offended... like 'HEARING' so that it was clear that this was my interpretation, in case you didn't intend it that way... or 'SIMPLY' to differentiate between such an attitude being your primary purpose as opposed to a secondary consequence of your actions.

I can see that my courtesy to you, despite your repeated lack of it is wasted.

Amusingly, my 3rd grade teacher was quite literally a swimsuit model.... in Hawaii.

(04-24-2020 02:58 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Yes. Stay home. Obey. Comply.

I wont. Xxoo

Good. When you go out, you can once again thank people like me and my parents for our sacrifices so that you can piss on them. You're like the spoiled 60's flower child who spat on my uniformed father at the airport in San Diego.

That said, I go out somewhere almost every day... any time I feel the need to do so. I just don't feel the need to be selfish and arrogant about it. Working from home is the best!

It's also your right to defy the state department and travel to Iraq. In fact, I think it would be the ultimate show of your independence to do that, wearing an American Flag and a T-Shirt with a depiction of Muhammad jerking off a camel. Why don't you do that? I'm not suggesting you do, I'm simply asking you why you wouldn't. I suspect the answer is clear... because it's only on here and with the lives of other people that you're so cavalier.

(04-24-2020 04:20 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 01:59 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Ok. Bend the knee.

I wont.

Stop making some words all caps like a 3rd grade school teacher with a fat butt . We get it.

I'm sorry that your sensitive nature is offended by about 4 or 5 'scary' words out of probably 300 that I chose to emphasise... especially since most of them were simply to make sure that you didn't get offended... like 'HEARING' so that it was clear that this was my interpretation, in case you didn't intend it that way... or 'SIMPLY' to differentiate between such an attitude being your primary purpose as opposed to a secondary consequence of your actions.

I can see that my courtesy to you, despite your repeated lack of it is wasted.

Amusingly, my 3rd grade teacher was quite literally a swimsuit model.... in Hawaii.

(04-24-2020 02:58 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Yes. Stay home. Obey. Comply.

I wont. Xxoo

Good. When you go out, you can once again thank people like me and my parents for our sacrifices so that you can piss on them. You're like the spoiled 60's flower child who spat on my uniformed father at the airport in San Diego.

That said, I go out somewhere almost every day... any time I feel the need to do so. I just don't feel the need to be selfish and arrogant about it. Working from home is the best!

It's also your right to defy the state department and travel to Iraq. In fact, I think it would be the ultimate show of your independence to do that, wearing an American Flag and a T-Shirt with a depiction of Muhammad jerking off a camel. Why don't you do that? I'm not suggesting you do, I'm simply asking you why you wouldn't. I suspect the answer is clear... because it's only on here and with the lives of other people that you're so cavalier.

Awe. Adorable. You and your family are better Americans in your mind than mine. Frick off. You dont know me.

Now go hide in the basement. I dont owe you one damn explanation for exercising my rights. Little totalitarian doesnt get his way and goes full wierdo.

(04-24-2020 04:26 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Awe. Adorable. You and your family are better Americans in your mind than mine. Frick off. You dont know me.

Now go hide in the basement. I dont owe you one damn explanation for exercising my rights. Little totalitarian doesnt get his way and goes full wierdo.

oooh, internet tough guy!!

Maybe that's why you mentioned third grade... sounds like you miss your classmates.

(04-24-2020 04:37 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 04:26 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Awe. Adorable. You and your family are better Americans in your mind than mine. Frick off. You dont know me.

Now go hide in the basement. I dont owe you one damn explanation for exercising my rights. Little totalitarian doesnt get his way and goes full wierdo.

oooh, internet tough guy!!

Maybe that's why you mentioned third grade... sounds like you miss your classmates.

sad bigly. You've been headed to this for days. The mental health aspect should not be ignored. If you think anything I said was tough or threatening then seek help. You're overwhelmed with fear.

Here is a Stanford doctors opinion of what should be done.

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/4...-isolation

Read it thoroughly. I expect maximum skyscreaming.

(04-24-2020 04:46 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Here is a Stanford doctors opinion of what should be done.

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/4...-isolation

Read it thoroughly. I expect maximum skyscreaming.

yawn at your continued pathetic insults.

As for your article, Odd that you seem to hold someone from a liberal bastion like Palo Alto and Stanford in such high regard. I can show you equally as/more impressive resume's who disagree... but so what? the fact that you're still 'here' only demonstrates how little attention you've been paying.

You will not find anywhere in anything that I've said where I've suggested that the nation needs to remain shut down... in fact I've repeatedly said, that's a different and worthy discussion.... so this article and his opinion is meaningless.... unless you're wanting to start a different conversation. My sole contention has been on the factually incorrect opinion that all of these actions are unconstitutional... and my opinion that people unwilling to do a few little things so that other people don't die are selfish pricks. If you think there are better suggestions/measures, that's fine. I've repeatedly asked you and others to state them, and all you've come back with is 'I have the right to risk other's lives and if you disagree, I'm going to call you names'.

At least the democrats trying to take away our rights usually admit that's what they're doing. They're wrong because they've got the goals in mind. People like you seem oddly proud of the negative impact of your actions on others.

(04-24-2020 05:10 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 04:46 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Here is a Stanford doctors opinion of what should be done.

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/4...-isolation

Read it thoroughly. I expect maximum skyscreaming.

yawn at your continued pathetic insults.

As for your article, Odd that you seem to hold someone from a liberal bastion like Palo Alto and Stanford in such high regard. I can show you equally as/more impressive resume's who disagree... but so what? the fact that you're still 'here' only demonstrates how little attention you've been paying.

You will not find anywhere in anything that I've said where I've suggested that the nation needs to remain shut down... in fact I've repeatedly said, that's a different and worthy discussion.... so this article and his opinion is meaningless.... unless you're wanting to start a different conversation. My sole contention has been on the factually incorrect opinion that all of these actions are unconstitutional... and my opinion that people unwilling to do a few little things so that other people don't die are selfish pricks. If you think there are better suggestions/measures, that's fine. I've repeatedly asked you and others to state them, and all you've come back with is 'I have the right to risk other's lives and if you disagree, I'm going to call you names'.

At least the democrats trying to take away our rights usually admit that's what they're doing. They're wrong because they've got the goals in mind. People like you seem oddly proud of the negative impact of your actions on others.

Well you've been wrong. Quit freaking out. It's ok. You'll survive. back to the basement for you

Hambone, you lost me on this quote, can you explain.

" Good. When you go out, you can once again thank people like me and my parents for our sacrifices so that you can piss on them. You're like the spoiled 60's flower child who spat on my uniformed father at the airport in San Diego."

I've been following you and Shere Klan pissing match but you lost me on that quote.

(04-24-2020 05:21 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  Hambone, you lost me on this quote, can you explain.

" Good. When you go out, you can once again thank people like me and my parents for our sacrifices so that you can piss on them. You're like the spoiled 60's flower child who spat on my uniformed father at the airport in San Diego."

I've been following you and Shere Klan pissing match but you lost me on that quote.

By lost you mean you don't agree or you don't follow?

I think you mean follow.....

He wants to say that those people would be embarrassed by people ceding their rights in a time of crisis, ignoring that the very acts those people took on during THEIR time of crisis (that deserves our respect) was to cede some of their rights in response to the crisis.... and many of them did it voluntarily... it was considered heroic. They didn't clamor for their right NOT to be drafted, or their right not to be told what and when to eat or where to go... THOSE actually were the people 'in the basements' (or in Canada).

People like Shere are trying to wrap themselves in the heroism of that generation, ignoring that the very reason we consider them heroes is that they did the exact opposite... and this is only compounded by the fact that those people are now at the greatest risk from the flippance of people like him.

For those who fought in the WW's, Korea and Vietnam, military service wasn't optional. The specific people we're talking about are those who didn't wait to be drafted (an arguably Constitutional violation... and absolutely one using the definition of people like Shere)... but like my parents, instead VOLUNTEERED to give up their rights when they didn't have to. They sure didn't sit around and protest that their rights were being violated... or like the flower-child who spat on my father, call them baby-killers in order to justify their selfish protests of the draft.

The mere truth that wearing a simple mask in public ISN'T for your own protection, but for the protection of others... and yet people like Shere insist that those who wear them do so out of fear, demonstrates the clear willingness of people like him to ignore facts and reality in order to make themselves feel better about their selfish decisions... like the 60's punk. They weren't avoiding defending their country... they just weren't going to 'bend a knee' to the oppressive government. Sound familiar?

Now, so I'm clear... You can disagree that this has been 'bad enough' to warrant these actions and that is fine... That's not what we're discussing... and people on 'the other side' like to conflate those positions, especially when i say obvious things like the above... There certainly are lots of places where this is almost a non-event... but there are also plenty of places here where it undoubtedly is saving lives. Is it worth it? Are these the right steps? Who knows... But the people who fought in Korea and Vietnam didn't know if it would be worth it... and lots of people like that flower child disagreed that it was... they just knew that their country called, and they answered the call. In hindsight, I think a lot of us would agree that those actions were not worth it... but that doesn't make those people's sacrifice any less heroic.... nor does it make those who 'spit' on those people in ANY way heroic.

Where my parents live, this issue is almost a non-event... 382 cases and 3 deaths in their county. I can't get a haircut or go to a bar or a restaurant or a sporting event. My mother volunteers at her church and the pastor and choir and a few others still put on their services every Sunday... they are streamed and podcasted and they spend a lot of time checking on their people by phone and skype... The pastor himself said the other day, while he can't wait to get back to the fellowship... this has been a great opportunity for this small country church that has been here for 200 years, mostly supported by a dwindling number of older people, to engage in actions that might actually help them attract younger people and to reach their flock who become homebound.... and they plan on continuing lots of these things after this is over...

While absolutely, I do not in any way support these actions under anything remotely 'normal' conditions (like annual flu or even H1N1)... these are INCREDIBLY meager sacrifices that I'm being asked to make, relative to those my parents and their friends made so that I could sit here and talk on the internet about 'my lost rights'.... and if that means that one of them is protected from this situation, then to me and apparently 70% of the population, it's worth it.

People like Shere apparently (based on some comments on here) aren't even willing to temper his right to sneeze on the buffet table for the good of 'his' country.

(04-25-2020 12:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 05:21 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  Hambone, you lost me on this quote, can you explain.

" Good. When you go out, you can once again thank people like me and my parents for our sacrifices so that you can piss on them. You're like the spoiled 60's flower child who spat on my uniformed father at the airport in San Diego."

I've been following you and Shere Klan pissing match but you lost me on that quote.

By lost you mean you don't agree or you don't follow?

I think you mean follow.....

He wants to say that those people would be embarrassed by people ceding their rights in a time of crisis, ignoring that the very acts those people took on during THEIR time of crisis (that deserves our respect) was to cede some of their rights in response to the crisis.... and many of them did it voluntarily... it was considered heroic. They didn't clamor for their right NOT to be drafted, or their right not to be told what and when to eat or where to go... THOSE actually were the people 'in the basements' (or in Canada).

People like Shere are trying to wrap themselves in the heroism of that generation, ignoring that the very reason we consider them heroes is that they did the exact opposite... and this is only compounded by the fact that those people are now at the greatest risk from the flippance of people like him.

For those who fought in the WW's, Korea and Vietnam, military service wasn't optional. The specific people we're talking about are those who didn't wait to be drafted (an arguably Constitutional violation... and absolutely one using the definition of people like Shere)... but like my parents, instead VOLUNTEERED to give up their rights when they didn't have to. They sure didn't sit around and protest that their rights were being violated... or like the flower-child who spat on my father, call them baby-killers in order to justify their selfish protests of the draft.

The mere truth that wearing a simple mask in public ISN'T for your own protection, but for the protection of others... and yet people like Shere insist that those who wear them do so out of fear, demonstrates the clear willingness of people like him to ignore facts and reality in order to make themselves feel better about their selfish decisions... like the 60's punk. They weren't avoiding defending their country... they just weren't going to 'bend a knee' to the oppressive government. Sound familiar?

Now, so I'm clear... You can disagree that this has been 'bad enough' to warrant these actions and that is fine... That's not what we're discussing... and people on 'the other side' like to conflate those positions, especially when i say obvious things like the above... There certainly are lots of places where this is almost a non-event... but there are also plenty of places here where it undoubtedly is saving lives. Is it worth it? Are these the right steps? Who knows... But the people who fought in Korea and Vietnam didn't know if it would be worth it... and lots of people like that flower child disagreed that it was... they just knew that their country called, and they answered the call. In hindsight, I think a lot of us would agree that those actions were not worth it... but that doesn't make those people's sacrifice any less heroic.... nor does it make those who 'spit' on those people in ANY way heroic.

Where my parents live, this issue is almost a non-event... 382 cases and 3 deaths in their county. I can't get a haircut or go to a bar or a restaurant or a sporting event. My mother volunteers at her church and the pastor and choir and a few others still put on their services every Sunday... they are streamed and podcasted and they spend a lot of time checking on their people by phone and skype... The pastor himself said the other day, while he can't wait to get back to the fellowship... this has been a great opportunity for this small country church that has been here for 200 years, mostly supported by a dwindling number of older people, to engage in actions that might actually help them attract younger people and to reach their flock who become homebound.... and they plan on continuing lots of these things after this is over...

While absolutely, I do not in any way support these actions under anything remotely 'normal' conditions (like annual flu or even H1N1)... these are INCREDIBLY meager sacrifices that I'm being asked to make, relative to those my parents and their friends made so that I could sit here and talk on the internet about 'my lost rights'.... and if that means that one of them is protected from this situation, then to me and apparently 70% of the population, it's worth it.

People like Shere apparently (based on some comments on here) aren't even willing to temper his right to sneeze on the buffet table for the good of 'his' country.

Thanks for the reply Hambone. I know tensions are high with the lock down and I think we have turned the corner on the Bug going around. I just hope everyone learns something from all of this and we are better prepared for the next time this happens.

May you and your family be safe and healthy and everybody else on this Board.

(04-25-2020 12:43 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-24-2020 05:21 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  Hambone, you lost me on this quote, can you explain.

" Good. When you go out, you can once again thank people like me and my parents for our sacrifices so that you can piss on them. You're like the spoiled 60's flower child who spat on my uniformed father at the airport in San Diego."

I've been following you and Shere Klan pissing match but you lost me on that quote.

By lost you mean you don't agree or you don't follow?

I think you mean follow.....

He wants to say that those people would be embarrassed by people ceding their rights in a time of crisis, ignoring that the very acts those people took on during THEIR time of crisis (that deserves our respect) was to cede some of their rights in response to the crisis.... and many of them did it voluntarily... it was considered heroic. They didn't clamor for their right NOT to be drafted, or their right not to be told what and when to eat or where to go... THOSE actually were the people 'in the basements' (or in Canada).

People like Shere are trying to wrap themselves in the heroism of that generation, ignoring that the very reason we consider them heroes is that they did the exact opposite... and this is only compounded by the fact that those people are now at the greatest risk from the flippance of people like him.

For those who fought in the WW's, Korea and Vietnam, military service wasn't optional. The specific people we're talking about are those who didn't wait to be drafted (an arguably Constitutional violation... and absolutely one using the definition of people like Shere)... but like my parents, instead VOLUNTEERED to give up their rights when they didn't have to. They sure didn't sit around and protest that their rights were being violated... or like the flower-child who spat on my father, call them baby-killers in order to justify their selfish protests of the draft.

The mere truth that wearing a simple mask in public ISN'T for your own protection, but for the protection of others... and yet people like Shere insist that those who wear them do so out of fear, demonstrates the clear willingness of people like him to ignore facts and reality in order to make themselves feel better about their selfish decisions... like the 60's punk. They weren't avoiding defending their country... they just weren't going to 'bend a knee' to the oppressive government. Sound familiar?

Now, so I'm clear... You can disagree that this has been 'bad enough' to warrant these actions and that is fine... That's not what we're discussing... and people on 'the other side' like to conflate those positions, especially when i say obvious things like the above... There certainly are lots of places where this is almost a non-event... but there are also plenty of places here where it undoubtedly is saving lives. Is it worth it? Are these the right steps? Who knows... But the people who fought in Korea and Vietnam didn't know if it would be worth it... and lots of people like that flower child disagreed that it was... they just knew that their country called, and they answered the call. In hindsight, I think a lot of us would agree that those actions were not worth it... but that doesn't make those people's sacrifice any less heroic.... nor does it make those who 'spit' on those people in ANY way heroic.

Where my parents live, this issue is almost a non-event... 382 cases and 3 deaths in their county. I can't get a haircut or go to a bar or a restaurant or a sporting event. My mother volunteers at her church and the pastor and choir and a few others still put on their services every Sunday... they are streamed and podcasted and they spend a lot of time checking on their people by phone and skype... The pastor himself said the other day, while he can't wait to get back to the fellowship... this has been a great opportunity for this small country church that has been here for 200 years, mostly supported by a dwindling number of older people, to engage in actions that might actually help them attract younger people and to reach their flock who become homebound.... and they plan on continuing lots of these things after this is over...

While absolutely, I do not in any way support these actions under anything remotely 'normal' conditions (like annual flu or even H1N1)... these are INCREDIBLY meager sacrifices that I'm being asked to make, relative to those my parents and their friends made so that I could sit here and talk on the internet about 'my lost rights'.... and if that means that one of them is protected from this situation, then to me and apparently 70% of the population, it's worth it.

People like Shere apparently (based on some comments on here) aren't even willing to temper his right to sneeze on the buffet table for the good of 'his' country.

You dont speak for me you freaking lunatic. Go hide in the basement and suck your thumb.

Audemus jura nostra defendere

(04-25-2020 01:13 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  Thanks for the reply Hambone. I know tensions are high with the lock down and I think we have turned the corner on the Bug going around. I just hope everyone learns something from all of this and we are better prepared for the next time this happens.

May you and your family be safe and healthy and everybody else on this Board.

To you as well dog, and you're right about tensions.

I agree 100% that we need to learn things from all this and that is specifically my job right now... which is part of why I'm so passionate about it. Whether we agree this response was correct or necessary or too long or too short or whatever is a matter of opinion and will never be something that everyone agrees about... which is why I say so little about it...

but one thing that can be learned is that the less we casually transmit bodily fluids, the less risk diseases transmitted by this means represent. Because those sorts of practices would generally apply to anything from 'Covid-20 and H5N12' to seasonal flu... why wouldn't we voluntarily do those things? The answer 'everyone dies' or 'it's my right not to' is not (imo) a valid reason... mostly because it's not YOU you're being asked to protect.

Well I decided to go forward with my bachelor party in Gatlinburg at the end of May. I spoke to the property owner and she said that bars should be open at 50% capacity soon and they'll monitor how things are going before increasing or decreasing bar and restaurant capacity.

Worst case and they have to shut things down again, I figured it'll still be a good time spending time with my buddies in the cabin. There's a nice fire pit and a hot tub and we'll buy enough food, beer, and liquor to keep everyone happy for the weekend.

(04-25-2020 01:50 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-25-2020 01:13 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  Thanks for the reply Hambone. I know tensions are high with the lock down and I think we have turned the corner on the Bug going around. I just hope everyone learns something from all of this and we are better prepared for the next time this happens.

The first and foremost thing that I hope we learn is that the reason we were so badly unprepared is that we don't make being prepared in advance to deal with such situations a priority, even though we know they are going to happen.

We have this, "locals respond, states direct, federates support," to emergencies, but most locals don't have the resources to be prepared, so what inevitably happens is that we get off to a slow start until we form some sort of ad hoc group to deal with it. Look at our history of emergencies:

Katrina in New Orleans - Blanco and Nagin screwed the pooch with their "shelter in place" approach, when school buses and other vehicles that could have carried people to safety sat idle and unused.

The BP blowout - Nobody had any idea what to do, and response efforts were frankly pathetic.

Maria in Puerto Rico - The island was totally unprepared to deal with the problem, and so disaster ensued.

CV-19 - We needed massive testing early to define the problem, but we had nobody to do the tests, nowhere to do them except overloaded hospitals, doctors' offices and ER's, and most importantly, no tests. So we resorted to a massive shutdown that threatens to do far more damage to our economy and society than 0.015% of our population dying could possibly do.

What we need to do is to create an emergency response mission and identify, equip, and train people to do it. That's not FEMA--they are a management (i.e., administration) agency, not a response (action) agency. That's clearly not CDC, FDA, or NIH--they have different missions, and they lack the staff, the equipment, or most tragically the mindset to do emergency response.

My idea, and I've repeated many times, is to repurpose the National Guard from a backup army reserve to a civil defense and emergency response agency. They have the people in numbers, they could be given the equipment in place of their tanks and artillery, and they are part-time so you don't have to pay for the capacity 24/7/365.

In this case, as soon as CV-19 appeared to be a potential major problem, you could have mobilized the Guard, had them set up mobile testing tents in Walmart, Target, and shopping mall parking lots, and had their medical personnel administer tests on a large volume basis (as soon as somebody told CDC and FDA to quit being bureaucrats and start acting like emergency responders and either give us some damn tests or let us get them elsewhere). That would have gotten us way ahead early. Then as hospitals started to fill up, they could have erected field hospitals in the hardest hit areas to cover that need.

The one disaster that doesn't exactly fit for the NG is the BP blowout. But the solution there is also clear. We could have a Sea Guard component equipped with oil cleaning equipment like the German Bottsand class clean-up boats and the SeaClean barge developed by Herman Schellstede of Lafayette (do an Internet search if you are unaware of each, and I think you will be surprised to learn that we haven't already done this), and they could have been activated and dispatched to the scene and removed probably 90+% of the oil that was spilled.

As long as we keep acting like disasters don't need to be prepared for, even though they keep happening, we will keep having the same problem with slow starts to response. Given the tools available, I think Trump has actually done a pretty decent job with this. The problem is not Trump (or Obama or Bush or any of their predecessors) except in their failure to prepare for the next one. Let's change that going forward.

What is the saying, insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results? Our failure to be prepared is insane.

(04-27-2020 09:53 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The first and foremost thing that I hope we learn is that the reason we were so badly unprepared is that we don't make being prepared in advance to deal with such situations a priority, even though we know they are going to happen.

My idea, and I've repeated many times......

edited for brevity

and not in any way conflicting with yours... my idea is that with the means of transmission of these diseases with pandemic potential being so similar, that having the population be more generally prepared for addressing the spread is similarly a way to get people to be prepared in advance

Having a stockpile of N95 masks and gloves and a team prepared to dispense them would be part of preparation, but so too should be teaching everyday people how to properly wear and use them. If all you do is wear gloves all day long, you aren't really protecting anyone... but you think you are so you likely aren't careful... which is actually worse than the guy who isn't wearing them but is careful.