Point taken. If we ever have to meet in person it has to be in the middle of the day in a well lit place with plenty of witnesses.
1 Like
LOL. The pirate lady place would be fine with me. (you know who I am talking about on the beach road)They have free breakfast for the next few weeks if you are in the area/county. Outer Bankers take care of each other during all hazards. No worries my friend. They just opened it up to Non resident owners. Hope itâs not too soon. Governor says nothing till May 8th, quite alright with that. Constitutional, I could care less. I ainât going south for a bit. My choice, not the Gov.
I only leave the island under duress. Spending more time on the water as the weather improves. Got the gear to catch dinner if things go that far south.
All good. Duress sucks, so far, donât have it. Waiting on the next daily chuckle.
Tom Clancy writes fiction, not constitutional law. Though they can often be confused
2 Likes
Most likely unconstitutional, though most people will err for âmuh safetyâ
The shelter in place orders should end tomorrow and people should get back to their normal lives, come what may.
1 Like
I think the aliens found out what they needed to know. They havenât been around in a while â youâre probably ok on that score. 
Aye, thereâs the rub. Infected people have already passed the point of maximum spreading effect before any symptoms develop. So how exactly do you demonstrate lack of infection?
2 Likes
You donât. I mean testing to some degree, but itâs not realistic to test everyone every week which would be required to truly know.
The key is this:
And based on that very small negative outcome rate, itâs time to get back to work.
2 Likes
So youâre cool with throwing our generation under the bus, is that it? Let the old farts die. Theyâre nonproducing assets anyway.
I have to say that Typhoid Mary had a similar callous attitude toward the people she infected, putting her own economic gain (persisting in working in food service) above their lives.
I donât understand why some people are so worried about other people going back to work before proper testing is available. Now, true stocks will go down until things go back to normal but 84% are owned by the top 10% and I donât think theyâll miss a meal. On the other hand a resurgence of this disease will practically guarantee a depression which takes a LOT longer to recover from than a recession. Also, as the percent of older citizens shrink so does Trumpâs vote base and I want him to be reelected as I am sure many others do.
We only have two choices here? Total lock down and destroy the economy or wide open and accept the consequences?
Does that make sense? Two stupid ways to do it but no smart way?
2 Likes
I expect there are multiple choices, and different ones for different places â but they all ought to be made thoughtfully and in active consultation with the people whose business it is to understand this stuff; and not by people who think itâs all bat puckey, so to say.
Suppose Georgia, to take an example, turns into a massive spreader. What are other states supposed to do? Suck it up? Pass sundown laws? Erect a cordon sanitaire? Allow entry only to those who can prove a negative test within the last two days? Require non-resident use of full PPE at all times? Fix bayonets?
2 Likes
As to the constitutional issue; from the article the answer seems to be that the measures taken must be proportional to the threat.
Unless there is a specific case of government overreach the apparent lack of action on the part of the ACLU is not relevant.
1 Like
Thatâs why you need competent federal government with an actual real plan. Germany, while much smaller, nevertheless seems to be an example for all.
I believe the OP was pointing to their lack of alarm as indicating that it passed the sniff test of even hypervigilant defenders of freedom under the constitution such as the ACLU.
1 Like
I assume that like everyone else the ACLU has to pick their battles.
Given the the hot button issue used as an example in the OP my guess is that the point is that the ACLU is heavily biased.
The ACLU does pick their battles and many people are surprised to learn they have been on the side of the KKK in Georgia, Rush Limbaugh, Chick-fil-A and even a Confederate group in Texas that wanted to have a specialty plate. They are real big on freedom of speech and in Limbaughâs case doctor patient privacy when Rush was a drug addict. They know the constitution and all those annoying amendments along with the rulings that followed the amendments. They work pro bono; some of the cases they take I wish they didnât and vice versa. But we need folks like them lest we become solely ruled by lobbyists and their employees a.k.a Congress.
5 Likes
They are real big on people in general. They do that by trying to keep the government as far back as they can. Thatâs why they have such a diverse collection of âunpopularâ positions.
2 Likes
Iâm with you on this. I like that they work to protect individuals when big brother steps on their rights but the example in the OP is one battle that makes absolutely no sense to me.
1 Like