COVID-19 Coronavirus Thread

[Nigel]

What is the purpose of those guns?

Are they to fight the virus, or the police that might send them home, or the government?

Presumably not the government since they have a placard supporting Trump, and presumably not the virus since some of them have masks...

They appear to be designed for killing people, so must be for use against the police...

 

[country_hick]

So, posting dick pics and Hitler memes to a social distancing hotline in order to disrupt a mandated health measure recommended by the CDC intended to save lives and relieve a severely overburdened hospital system in a city of 8.5 million people experiencing literally the deadliest COVID-19 outbreak in the world is something you approve of?

I shared a link to show that some people did this. I never said I approved or disapproved of their actions.
For the record I do not approve of anyone sending memes of Hitler's dick to anyone especially me.

People in the USA have used of civil acts of disobedience against many issues that offended people for a very long time. MLK and Al Sharpton used that technique often. Do you disapprove of anyone using this technique that was used by Martin Luther King when it was what eventually led to the civil rights act of 1964 as needed to obtain equal rights for blacks?

 

[Dashmellow]

+1!!!

There's more than enough 'doom and gloom' in the media any time anyone wants to access it, and even if you don't want. We certainly don't need another outlet for speculation, 'opinionating', rumor mongering, and conspiracy theorizing which is what this thread has overall become.

Here's something interesting and perhaps a bit more uplifting.

Why coronavirus will accelerate the fourth Industrial Revolution

 

[Dashmellow]

I shared a link to show that some people did this. I never said I approved or disapproved of their actions.
For the record I do not approve of anyone sending memes of Hitler's dick to anyone especially me.

People in the USA have used of civil acts of disobedience against many issues that offended people for a very long time. MLK and Al Sharpton used that technique often. Do you disapprove of anyone using this technique that was used by Martin Luther King when it was what eventually led to the civil rights act of 1964 as needed to obtain equal rights for blacks?

Your comment, "Apparently asking people to call the state to report something some people found offensive was not well appreciated or accepted" came across as sympathetic to what these people were doing. Glad to hear you do not approve.

But my God! How can you possibly equate posting dick pics and Hitler memes with the non-violent civil rights protests led by MLK in the sixties! So much of what comes out of your mouth is astonishingly unbelievable and frankly, downright ignorant! What the hell is with you?

 

[country_hick]

Your comment, "Apparently asking people to call the state to report something some people found offensive was not well appreciated or accepted" came across as sympathetic to what these people were doing. Glad to hear you do not approve.

But my God! How can you possibly equate posting dick pics and Hitler memes with the non-violent civil rights protests led by MLK in the sixties! So much of what comes out of your mouth is astonishingly unbelievable and frankly, downright ignorant! What the hell is with you?

Civil disobedience is one mans bad behavior and yet another man says it is his right to protest against an injustice he sees. Both things I mentioned are non-violent actions done by those wanting to create social changes hoping to change government. How many people were sympathetic with those who arrested Rosa Parks? How many thought she should go to jail for daring to take a white mans seat on that bus? How many people supported her completely? Her rights did not depend on how much anyone else liked or disliked her using her rights. Her rights exist because she already had those rights that no one could take away from her. If the majority opinion in that state were to control her rights Rosa Parks would have gone to prison and blacks could not sit down in designated white only seating buses. The rights of the minority can not be removed because the majority wants those rights to go away.

This action of overwhelming the phone lines by exercising the right of free expression is the same tactic often used by the left. Rules for radicals essentially says if you want to change the system overwhelm it. The mass protests of the 60's did overwhelm the system and did create change. The response to that phone line in 2020 did the same. Will it result in any government changes? Maybe, maybe not. The right of free expression does not depend on success in meeting a goal.

Did you know that the offensive conduct of burning an american flag was recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court? They said that sending a message to government that would be recognized as a protest is allowed under the 1st amendment. The right of protest and to burn the american flag is constitutionally guaranteed.

This current phone protest has the potential (even if not the likelihood) to once again create changes in how government works. I can appreciate someone who acts to preserve what they think are their rights even if I disagree with their thinking or their approach. The overwhelming of the phone system by those people is nothing less than them exercising their 1st amendment U.S. Supreme Court recognized right of free expression. You should appreciate and accept the old saying. "I disagree 100% with what you are saying but I will fight to the death to defend your right to say it."

I either have to accept MLK's right of free expression during his protests, the right to burn the american flag, and the right to send offensive memes to government protesting against what is perceived to be an injustice or I have to reject the rights of all 3 to protest if I am to be consistent in recognizing everyones rights.

The best way to destroy an argument is to allow that argument to be presented in the middle of the public square. The people can then decide just how wise or foolish that argument is after hearing it. This was recognized by the founding generation. Allowing the people to express their appreciation or scorn towards every message presented to them instead of forcing the silence of those who want to protest or present an alternative message is the best solution. A conversation regarding the argument against self-isolation and not being allowed to leave your house is happening now because of those admittedly offensive phone calls. Conversations about important issues are always good even if the end result is not.

For the record, I have not left the house to buy food or go into any crowded place, into a store, or any public place since before the governor said to stay home. I made that decision myself. I have the right to make my own medical decisions. If I believe something is or might be a threat to my physical well being I have the right to avoid it. I avoid certain foods you probably eat for health reasons. You have the right to make your own decisions regarding your own health as do I.

 

[Nigel]

Did you know that the offensive conduct of burning an american flag was recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court? They said that sending a message to government that would be recognized as a protest is allowed under the 1st amendment. The right of protest and to burn the american flag is constitutionally guaranteed.

Typical,

In the USA you have a right to burn your flag.​

In the UK, by default we are free to do whatever we like, so we don't need such rights, and we have zero laws related to our flag.​

In Denmark, they have laws making it illegal to desecrate the flags of all nations, except their own!​

 

[country_hick]

Typical,

In the USA you have a right to burn your flag.​

In the UK, by default we are free to do whatever we like, so we don't need such rights, and we have zero laws related to our flag.​

In Denmark, they have laws making it illegal to desecrate the flags of all nations, except their own!​

I hate the Court declaration that there is a right to burn the flag. However, because of freedom of speech I know exactly why they correctly ruled that way. To have ruled differently would have been legally wrong no matter how I and others feel about it. The rights of the minority and this form of dissent must be allowed.

I only wish the Courts would apply the Constitution that strongly in all of their cases.

I am shocked that Denmark would allow their own flag to be desecrated but not any other flag. If they have an equal protection clause in their Constitution that law should be a constitutional violation. If they do not the legislature and courts do not have to provide equal protection until the Constitution is updated to require it.

 

[country_hick]

Dashmallow, Do you know what intellect is? You are the only one on here that attacks others like this. You have been told not to by dashcamman. I do not know why you do this. When I was in 4th grade I read at a high school level. When my class was given IQ tests I was the second smartest kid in my class. I was beat out of first place by a girl named Karen Smith. As I recall that class had a lot more than 3 kids. Where did your IQ test place you in your class? I got a 97 on the asvab test (armed services vocational and apptitude battery). I could have gone into any military MOS I wanted including the nuclear field. A 4th rate intellect could not do that. I wonder if you could. I suspect you dislike the way I think far more than you actually consider my thoughts. I have lost some intellect from various things but still have a decent amount left.

 

[country_hick]

On the lighter side...

































After all of this...

 

[Dashmellow]

Dashmallow, Do you know what intellect is? You are the only one on here that attacks others like this. You have been told not to by dashcamman. I do not know why you do this. When I was in 4th grade I read at a high school level. When my class was given IQ tests I was the second smartest kid in my class. I was beat out of first place by a girl named Karen Smith. As I recall that class had a lot more than 3 kids. Where did your IQ test place you in your class? I got a 97 on the asvab test (armed services vocational and apptitude battery). I could have gone into any military MOS I wanted including the nuclear field. A 4th rate intellect could not do that. I wonder if you could. I suspect you dislike the way I think far more than you actually consider my thoughts. I have lost some intellect from various things but still have a decent amount left.

When it comes to the concept of defying social distancing orders as some sort of allegedly legitimate "protest" movement you seem unable to grasp that the whole "movement" has been and is still being orchestrated by deep pocketed cynical right wing special interests attempting to create chaos and political division in Democrat controlled "blue states" for political purposes, regardless of how many people's lives are put at risk. In fact, there are already some documented spikes in cornonavirus infection rates as a result of the protests. Of course, we've got Donald Trump tweeting “LIBERATE MINNESOTA!”, “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!”, “LIBERATE VIRGINIA" to help fan the flames. Real presidential leadership during a time of deadly national health crisis, that.

Somehow to you the idea that breaking quarantine measures and flooding a phone hotline in the middle of a raging pandemic with "dick pics" and Hitler memes is a "freedom" issue and that you see it as a legitimate protest "movement" right up there with Rosa Parks and MLK is among the reasons I question the quality your intellect. You seem so very easily manipulated by these wealthy special interests behind these protests along with the far right wing propaganda outlets you like to quote.

Despite a number of fanatical Evangelist preachers who defiantly keep holding church services in the face of stay-at-home orders claiming "religious freedom" no matter the grim consequences to the congregants and those they come into contact with, even Pope Francis advocates social distancing and has been conducting Mass online with no crowds present.

Speaking of intellectual endeavors, you're the guy who has posted about toilet paper at least 33 times 34 times so far to this is thread. It's weird and more than overdone at this point.

4th rate intellect? I only listed 3 levels, but if you want to go for 4, be my guest.

"Dick Pics for Freedom!" , that's what I say.

 

[country_hick]

 

[country_hick]

When it comes to the concept of defying social distancing orders as some sort of allegedly legitimate "protest" movement.

I would not and do not get very close to other people at this time. Unless this virus scare is a worldwide fraud it is safest to keep a distance from others. I accept the right to protest but do not speak about the wisdom involved in these protests. Why can people go to certain stores but not others? Shouldn't a quarantine that is in place apply to everyone without exception including "essential" businesses being off limits?

Somehow to you the idea that breaking quarantine measures and flooding a phone hotline in the middle of a raging pandemic with "dick pics" and Hitler memes s a "freedom" issue and that you see it as a legitimate protest.

Large numbers of people sending a message against the political policy the phones are meant to uphold this way is a legitimate protest. The message being sent is not limited to pics of Hitler and dicks. Why you concentrate on those things alone I do not understand. I see a protest. You see only certain types of pics that were sent by people who are protesting. Surely you see the reason those type of pics were sent. There is a message being sent by the type of pictures chosen.

Speaking of intellectual endeavors, you're the guy who has posted about toilet paper at least 33 times 34 times so far to this is thread. It's weird and more than overdone at this point.

When this started I had 3 rolls of tp left. I do not have all of those rolls now. I am low on certain supplies. The defining characteristic of this for many people will be the lack of tp.
Why are you counting pics of tp? That is weird. I had no idea you had a tp fetish. I hope it is a fetish rather than you being attracted to or cyber-stalking me.

Answers in red above.

Social distancing orders? Where does a governor get that right or the right to quarantine healthy people? In this state the legislature has sole constitutional authority to pass laws and regulations. the governor has no such authority. I am asking you to provide the constitutional section of your state constitution that allows the governor in your state to issue these type of orders to civilians.

Overwhelming the system to send a message is not weird. Using free expression is not weird. Sending dick pics is weird. Having those pics to be able to send them is weird. Something else is weird. I will let you figure out what it is.

 

[country_hick]

This is bad news. The virus can travel on air pollution.

 

[Dashmellow]

Answers in red above.

Social distancing orders? Where does a governor get that right or the right to quarantine healthy people? In this state the legislature has sole constitutional authority to pass laws and regulations. the governor has no such authority. I am asking you to provide the constitutional section of your state constitution that allows the governor in your state to issue these type of orders to civilians.

Overwhelming the system to send a message is not weird. Using free expression is not weird. Sending dick pics is weird. Having those pics to be able to send them is weird. Something else is weird. I will let you figure out what it is.

All state and federal regulations regarding quarantine and isolation are statuary in nature rather than constitutional. Governments have expansive emergency powers when it comes to public health.

The federal government derives its authority for isolation and quarantine from the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S. Code § 264), the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to take measures to prevent the entry and spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the United States and between states.

The authority for carrying out these functions on a daily basis has been delegated to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

States have police power functions to protect the health, safety, and welfare of persons within their borders. To control the spread of disease within their borders, states have laws to enforce the use of isolation and quarantine.
State and local governments are primarily responsible for maintaining public health and controlling the spread of diseases within state borders. Among other state public health emergency preparedness powers, every state, the District of Columbia and most territories have laws authorizing quarantine and isolation, usually through the state’s health authority. The federal government has authority as well, through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to monitor and respond to the spread of communicable diseases across national or state borders, or if the state government is unwilling or unable to effectively respond.

Isolation and Quarantine

Isolation and quarantine help protect the public by preventing exposure to people who have or may have a contagious disease.

• Isolation separates sick people with a quarantinable communicable disease from people who are not sick.
• Quarantine separates and restricts the movement of people who were exposed to a contagious disease to see if they become sick.

In addition to serving as medical functions, isolation and quarantine also are “police power” functions, derived from the right of the state to take action affecting individuals for the benefit of society.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/state-quarantine-and-isolation-statutes.aspx

CDC: Legal Authorities for Isolation and Quarantine

People can go to certain stores and locations deemed by their local governments as essential such as grocery stores and pharmacies in order to maintain critical functions of society during a crisis of this nature. They are prevented from going to certain establishments and locations such as bars, hair salons, restaurants and schools to prevent runway mass infection of large segments of the population during pandemic conditions. Under state law in practically every state these measures are determined by the chief health officer and implemented by other public officials.

What is "weird" is the idea of self described so called "Patriots" pounding the table with arguments as to why they believe they have the right to go anywhere and doing anything they wish during a deadly pandemic when doing so puts themselves and anyone they have further contact with at risk of illness and death. It's the same reason you don't have a "free speech right to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater.

 

[country_hick]

All state and federal regulations regarding quarantine and isolation are statuary in nature rather than constitutional. Governments have expansive emergency powers when it comes to public health.

Statutes can not violate the constitution including the rights held by the people that are referenced in the 9th and 10th amendments. The question is what rights did the people have during the period of time from when the first white men lived in north america I believe 1611 up until 1787.

The federal government derives its authority for isolation and quarantine from the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Under the decision that says a farmer who grows wheat for his own use on his own land engages in interstate commerce this is correct. Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942), is the supreme court decision that changed the regulatory power of the federal government to allow what had never been allowed by the constitution before.

From an originalist perspective the commerce clause is not applicable to this discussion. Some day the Court could reverse that case. As long as judges want the feds to have all that power the wickard case will stand. I do not see how the commerce clause which requires to bw allowed to continue could be used to prevent commerce from continuing.

States have police power functions to protect the health, safety, and welfare of persons within their borders. To control the spread of disease within their borders, states have laws to enforce the use of isolation and quarantine.
State and local governments are primarily responsible for maintaining public health and controlling the spread of diseases within state borders.

I will try to respond without having even a 3rd rate thinking ability. I did not copy and paste this response from a website. I did my own research.

You are close, but not quite right. From an originalist perspective the commerce clause is not what allows a state to quarantine people, police power is.

They form a portion of that immense mass of legislation, which embraces every thing within the territory of a State, not surrendered to the general government: all which can be most advantageously exercised by the States themselves. Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description, as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.​

​

No direct general power over these objects is granted to Congress; and, consequently, they remain subject to State legislation. Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 US 1 - Supreme Court 1824 ​

​

​

In giving the commercial power to Congress the States did not part with that power of self-preservation which must be inherent in every organized community. They may guard against the introduction of any thing which may corrupt the morals, or endanger the health or lives of their citizens. Quarantine or health laws have been passed by the States, and regulations of police for their protection and welfare. Smith v. Turner, 48 US 283 - Supreme Court 1849 ​

​

The police power is a governmental function, an inherent attribute of sovereignty, and the greatest and most powerful attribute of government. It was born with civilized government, and was possessed by every state before the union was formed. Although the basis of the police power lies in the constitution which regards the public welfare, safety, and health of the citizens of the state, and although it may be given to the people of the state by the constitution, the power exists without any reservation in the constitution, being founded on the duty of the state to protect its citizens and provide for the safety and good order of society. PARISH COUNCIL, ETC. v. LOUISIANA HIGHWAY, ETC., 131 So. 2d 272 - La: Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit 1961

The right to so seize [poisoned food] is based upon the right and duty of the State to protect and guard, as far as possible, the lives and health of its inhabitants North American Cold Storage Co. v. Chicago, 211 US 306 - Supreme Court 1908​

I hope my defective thinking as you explained it did not impact my reply to negatively.

 

[Dashmellow]

I will try to respond without having even a 3rd rate thinking ability. I did not copy and paste this response from a website. I did my own research.

You are close, but not quite right. From an originalist perspective the commerce clause is not what allows a state to quarantine people, police power is.

They form a portion of that immense mass of legislation, which embraces every thing within the territory of a State, not surrendered to the general government: all which can be most advantageously exercised by the States themselves. Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description, as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.​

​

No direct general power over these objects is granted to Congress; and, consequently, they remain subject to State legislation. Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 US 1 - Supreme Court 1824 ​

​

​

In giving the commercial power to Congress the States did not part with that power of self-preservation which must be inherent in every organized community. They may guard against the introduction of any thing which may corrupt the morals, or endanger the health or lives of their citizens. Quarantine or health laws have been passed by the States, and regulations of police for their protection and welfare. Smith v. Turner, 48 US 283 - Supreme Court 1849 ​

​

The right to so seize [poisoned food] is based upon the right and duty of the State to protect and guard, as far as possible, the lives and health of its inhabitants North American Cold Storage Co. v. Chicago, 211 US 306 - Supreme Court 1908​

I hope my defective thinking as you explained it did not impact my reply to negatively.

So what's your point with all this exactly? You seem to believe people have the right to go out and infect each other and everyone else they come into contact with during a pandemic and government has little power to protect public health.

 

[Dashmellow]

There it is folks!

Give me liberty, and give you death!

 

[SawMaster]

Here's something interesting and perhaps a bit more uplifting.

Why coronavirus will accelerate the fourth Industrial Revolution

Interesting indeed. But these lofty and necessary goals won't be met. There are simply too many thinking only of self or their own kind, and too many who are so vehemently against something to have any space to be for something. And there are those who will not open trust to others. Some of this is human nature, but that can be overcome by willpower and recognition of a tendency. Politics always pushes toward this (and that's ALL politics) because division allows them to conquer and control. Same for religion, and all of those too. We're either going to have to wrap our heads around the uncontested fact that there is one world for us all, or we're going to have to fall back to continental isolation from each other so that thee is no place where conflicting ideas can meet and clash. It seems to me the answer is clear, but I see a world chock-full of people who have not yet reached this depth of understanding, and so will not allow the necessary to occur.

The US government has long been off-track; this includes the State governments too. The process began long ago and is continuing. There are many reasons for this and as much as I like and believe in our Constitution this has desecrated it. Certainly there have been Supreme Court decisions which have added to the problem; also States who didn't want to do what their neighboring States were doing. At this point I don't see it as something which can be fixed without violence and I don't want to see violence among ourselves so I can't offer any ideas toward a solution. In regards to these 'lockdown protests' what I see are faces of people who are willingly risking the health of the communities which they purport to represent when that is not necessary. And in fact is counter-intuitive to the sending of a message which will gain you adherents and compatriots to your cause. It's as much in how something is said as what it says that decides whether the message becomes acceptable and accepted, and if acceptance of your message isn't the point then what is? Same goes for the Churches still holding mass services and the Politicians crammed together without masks during Press releases. One of the most important parts of our Constitution is that all people are to be held as equals, which isn't happening and hasn't been happening in ages.

The declaration of an "Emergency" overrides many of our individual rights for the good of the whole, and in that it is both a good and necessary function as long as it is not abused. I don't see it being abused at this point myself- including lockdowns and social safety mandates- but I can see where others might disagree. They have the right to disagree, even during the emergency, but they do NOT have the right to break or usurp the social safety mandates to make that point. Civil disobedience as ML King and Ghandi concieved and used is not a sufficient argument here, for it's clear that their intentions were to protect the people they were standing for from harm; they would most certainly NOT have been out in numbers during a pandemic without following the necessary social safety guidelines which were protecting their people along with everyone else. I find it both hilarious and sickening to see that in this case it's the ones claiming to be "conservatives" who are espousing the use of what they themselves have historically deemed as a bad "liberal" idea. They are figuratively shooting themselves in the feet with their actions and I'm happy to let them continue their course because I know where it's going. Just remember that you can have no complaint when you get what you've asked for even if it isn't what you actually wanted.

Nobody for any reason ever has the right to unnecessarily place at risk the life or health of any other person, and especially of society as a whole.

Phil

 

[Nigel]

This is bad news. The virus can travel on air pollution.

This is really bad reporting, and maybe bad science behind the reporting!

"Coronavirus could be more contagious than previously thought."
We know exactly how contagious it is, we have seen it spread around the world and seen what level of lockdown is required to keep it under control and how much is needed to wipe it out. This news is not going to result in it spreading any faster than we have previously experienced!

"The virus can travel on air pollution."
Every scientist should know that virus particles can travel in the air, but they should also know that they don't infect people at long distance, and so although we should be worried about air pollution, it is because of the pollution, not the virus. In the early stages of the epidemic, many countries were doing contact tracing and managed to trace every case through a chain of close contacts, it was absolutely clear that it spreads through close contact, handshakes, kissing, other things we no longer do. The virus particles found on pollution are dead ones, or at least if there is any spread via those routes then it is insignificant.

We should be more worried about bats than pollution, or maybe the bats should be more worried about us, since it appears that this virus originated in humans before it got into bats about 35 years ago, and then underwent a few mutations/combinations with bat viruses that have left it more deadly to us than the original human virus. That is the way that it can fly, with wings, not through pollution!

 

[Nigel]

Borris is back in No. 10; must be well, his hair is looking even more of a mess than normal .

Must also have been following the science, no relaxing of lockdown yet, we are only 1/3rd of the way through the epidemic, plenty more infections to come.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1254684355118551041