Troll Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 This guy doesn't always nail it... but always offers very good and reasonable summaries... for discussion... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 hour ago, Troll said: This guy doesn't always nail it... but always offers very good and reasonable summaries... for discussion... Thanks for pointing out that it's simply for discussion and not presenting it in a situation that introduces it as a "matter of fact.. I'll take a stab at chewing on this as a matter of my opinion. Love his intro that good people can have bad arguments and bad people can have good ones. That about sums up a lot of stuff. Idk why he felt it necessary to thus include the opinion that the person bringing the suit was "far right" though. Blah blah blah. OK, so there is a potential gray area where the lawsuit is presenting a case against the defendants about peaceable assembly and protest. During a pandemic, what is then peaceable? (Just walking by someone can be an attack on their health so to that effect, is this assembly really peaceable even if no one intends on harming the other protestors or passers-by?) That's my initial take on what's happening in the video. Technically, the open streets initiative issued by the governor, allows for a parade protest for instance, so to some affect, the first amendment right still stands, just not in the precise (potentially dangerous form during a pandemic) that the plaintiff wishes for, in her own opinion. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 The gray area comes from the word "peaceable" imo. That becomes gray when a health emergency has been issued. There is always gray areas in law. It's funny that this comes up, because as an outdoorsman and fisherman, I've recently been interested in a similar gray area as it pertains to my ability to enjoy recreation on the water. That would be the definition of the word "navigable" and it's application to laws about fishing particular waterways. I was literally just watching some videos on that when checking through here and seeing this one. Take a look if you want. Basically same type of argument about a gray area that involves a word that the opinion can be different at different times depending on the angle it's being viewed from even. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaximumHornetSting Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 hour ago, Troll said: This guy doesn't always nail it... but always offers very good and reasonable summaries... for discussion... I think her case will fail. Like the dude said mostly for social reasons. And my opinion here. I hate the lockdown... A lot! But for health reasons for the sakes of myself and others I obey the rules set in place because I don't want to get sick nor do I wish to get anyone else sick because as far as I know I could be asymptomatic and have it or I could not have it at all. Idk? Personally I feel fine but that leads into another thing... Piss poor testing availability... But that's another argument entirely. What this woman is arguing for is the violation of her rights to Gather in large groups. This is one of the times where I would agree with Deblasio for the sakes of public health you shouldn't gather in large crowds. You want to do something that's going to possibly endanger hundreds to thousands of people either that or she's just looking for something to Bitch about. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted May 10, 2020 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 37 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said: Thanks for pointing out that it's simply for discussion and not presenting it in a situation that introduces it as a "matter of fact.. I'll take a stab at chewing on this as a matter of my opinion. Love his intro that good people can have bad arguments and bad people can have good ones. That about sums up a lot of stuff. Idk why he felt it necessary to thus include the opinion that the person bringing the suit was "far right" though. Blah blah blah. OK, so there is a potential gray area where the lawsuit is presenting a case against the defendants about peaceable assembly and protest. During a pandemic, what is then peaceable? (Just walking by someone can be an attack on their health so to that effect, is this assembly really peaceable even if no one intends on harming the other protestors or passers-by?) That's my initial take on what's happening in the video. Technically, the open streets initiative issued by the governor, allows for a parade protest for instance, so to some affect, the first amendment right still stands, just not in the precise (potentially dangerous form during a pandemic) that the plaintiff wishes for in her own opinion. Thanks, I'm just trying to keep the "eye on the ball"....👀 not the bullshit...💩 I think your note of 'peaceable' being questioned is a good one...(and I might have to chew on that one a bit as it relates to 'intentional or unintentional")...but I don't think any protestors are going to have any difficulty showing that any protest could be arranged in such a way as to be at the very least as 'peaceable' as everything else that is going on in NY. 🤷♂️ The 'technically speaking' argument is super weak...the law is the law, and I don't think any officer is always going to accept some "technically speaking you can't arrest me" argument....😆 and OBVIOUSLY NO...the first amendment under this circumstance DOES NOT still stand 😲....it BY LAW has been 'temporarily ceased' by executive order.... as has been simply deemed as justifiable, by the government for 'protection' of it's citizens... PS...maybe I should have called this the 👀 on the 🏈 thread 🤔 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaximumHornetSting Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 Granted I live in Georgia where our Governor thinks it's all Good. And has allowed everything to open with limitations.... But as far as social distancing goes Georgia deserves a Fat Ass F.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted May 10, 2020 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 8 minutes ago, TheMaximumHornetSting said: I think her case will fail. Like the dude said mostly for social reasons. And my opinion here. I hate the lockdown... A lot! But for health reasons for the sakes of myself and others I obey the rules set in place because I don't want to get sick nor do I wish to get anyone else sick because as far as I know I could be asymptomatic and have it or I could not have it at all. Idk? Personally I feel fine but that leads into another thing... Piss poor testing availability... But that's another argument entirely. What this woman is arguing for is the violation of her rights to Gather in large groups. This is one of the times where I would agree with Deblasio for the sakes of public health you shouldn't gather in large crowds. You want to do something that's going to possibly endanger hundreds to thousands of people either that or she's just looking for something to Bitch about. I agree and think her case will fail as well. But more for political reasons being in NY and all...This guy always 'takes a shot' at predictions for fun, but I think he is simply deffering to secondary reasoning there (maybe to cut the judge some slack ?). I agree with your thoughts on social distancing, but think you may have shown some bias in the comments against the plaintiff...these type of lawsuits are MUCH more important and relevant to everything that's going on today....and need to be examined regardless. good post tho...and thanks for staying on point 👍 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaximumHornetSting Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Troll said: I agree and think her case will fail as well. But more for political reasons being in NY and all...This guy always 'takes a shot' at predictions for fun, but I think he is simply deffering to secondary reasoning there (maybe to cut the judge some slack ?). I agree with your thoughts on social distancing, but think you may have shown some bias in the comments against the plaintiff...these type of lawsuits are MUCH more important and relevant to everything that's going on today....and need to be examined regardless. good post tho...and thanks for staying on point 👍 I'll admit yea I was a bit biased but for good reason. Atleast I think it's a good reason. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaximumHornetSting Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 @Troll @HawgGoneIt I looked up the Pam Geller lady You can make your own judgement on her... but man she doesn't seem to uh... Stable to me... Just my opinion... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted May 10, 2020 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 9 minutes ago, TheMaximumHornetSting said: @Troll @HawgGoneIt I looked up the Pam Geller lady You can make your own judgement on her... but man she doesn't seem to uh... Stable to me... Just my opinion... Didn't really think it necessary, as it is pretty much only a diversion in an attempt to unduly influence.... That tact only TAKES AWAY from your argument...🤔 But on your suggestion, I checked out a politically charged wiki page... Which seems try try to hide the fact that she appears to be a VERY SUCCESSFUL activist for her causes... As an example of how silly this tact makes ones look, maybe you could explain how that (even if she were anti-muslim) is supposed to make someone "unstable".... Clue: IT DOESN'T....only makes the accuser look bad 🤷♂️ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 17 minutes ago, TheMaximumHornetSting said: @Troll @HawgGoneIt I looked up the Pam Geller lady You can make your own judgement on her... but man she doesn't seem to uh... Stable to me... Just my opinion... Yeah I don't really care who she is or what her overall agenda is. People are right to have concerns about erosion of our rights. I'm less concerned when understanding that in this particular instance it's basically a temporary infringement due to a nationwide public health emergency. She is apparently a little more extreme in her views, but, that is neither here nor there in the legal argument being presented. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaximumHornetSting Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 Just now, HawgGoneIt said: Yeah I don't really care who she is or what her overall agenda is. People are right to have concerns about erosion of our rights. I'm less concerned when understanding that in this particular instance it's basically a temporary infringement due to a nationwide public health emergency. She is apparently a little more extreme in her views, but, that is neither here nor there in the legal argument being presented. 3 minutes ago, Troll said: Didn't really think it necessary, as it is pretty much only a diversion in an attempt to unduly influence.... That tact only TAKES AWAY from your argument...🤔 But on your suggestion, I checked out a politically charged wiki page... Which seems try try to hide the fact that she appears to be a VERY SUCCESSFUL activist for her causes... As an example of how silly this tact makes ones look, maybe you could explain how that (even if she were anti-muslim) is supposed to make someone "unstable".... Clue: IT DOESN'T....only makes the accuser look bad 🤷♂️ Both of you are right I just got curious. But on the topic at hand I stand by my first statement. Yea the lockdown seems harsh but man think about the negative impacts not locking down would have... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted May 10, 2020 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 21 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said: Yeah I don't really care who she is or what her overall agenda is. People are right to have concerns about erosion of our rights. I'm less concerned when understanding that in this particular instance it's basically a temporary infringement due to a nationwide public health emergency. She is apparently a little more extreme in her views, but, that is neither here nor there in the legal argument being presented. great point on the whole "temporary" thing...👍 Yes I tend to be less concerned over temporary matters.... yet somehow I never viewed "the flu" as something that was EVER 'temporary'....🤔 I guess that does boil it down some for me, as I might feel better if it were 'more reasonably explained' as to what is so 'different now' than any other time....we (as in our government) were sold on British medical reporting of severe death "rates" originally (which invoked all this), which have turned out to be SIGNIFICANTLY overstated. That and the fact that in our entire history we have only ever quarantined the sick and those exposed, and never the entire healthy population as protective measures, has me just a little 'more' concerned'... Maybe I just have a hard time without hard evidence 🤷♂️ BTW: that game warden did a fantastic job 👍...We have something here called a "high tide watermark" on our beaches that everyone THINKS they own, and can do whatever they want past...I've had to deal with that from the warden's viewpoint many times when I life guarded. Not an easy task at all. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I AM IRONMAN Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 hour ago, Troll said: great point on the whole "temporary" thing...👍 Yes I tend to be less concerned over temporary matters.... yet somehow I never viewed "the flu" as something that was EVER 'temporary'....🤔 I guess that does boil it down some for me, as I might feel better if it were 'more reasonably explained' as to what is so 'different now' than any other time....we (as in our government) were sold on British medical reporting of severe death "rates" originally (which invoked all this), which have turned out to be SIGNIFICANTLY overstated. That and the fact that in our entire history we have only ever quarantined the sick and those exposed, and never the entire healthy population as protective measures, has me just a little 'more' concerned'... Maybe I just have a hard time without hard evidence 🤷♂️ BTW: that game warden did a fantastic job 👍...We have something here called a "high tide watermark" on our beaches that everyone THINKS they own, and can do whatever they want past...I've had to deal with that from the warden's viewpoint many times when I life guarded. Not an easy task at all. Yup...1 spread to 2...2 spreads to 4...etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 40 minutes ago, Troll said: great point on the whole "temporary" thing...👍 Yes I tend to be less concerned over temporary matters.... yet somehow I never viewed "the flu" as something that was EVER 'temporary'....🤔 I guess that does boil it down some for me, as I might feel better if it were 'more reasonably explained' as to what is so 'different now' than any other time....we (as in our government) were sold on British medical reporting of severe death "rates" originally (which invoked all this), which have turned out to be SIGNIFICANTLY overstated. That and the fact that in our entire history we have only ever quarantined the sick and those exposed, and never the entire healthy population as protective measures, has me just a little 'more' concerned'... Maybe I just have a hard time without hard evidence 🤷♂️ BTW: that game warden did a fantastic job 👍...We have something here called a "high tide watermark" on our beaches that everyone THINKS they own, and can do whatever they want past...I've had to deal with that from the warden's viewpoint many times when I life guarded. Not an easy task at all. For me the temporary in this pandemic is basically until we've hopefully either developed a vaccine for our most vulnerable or developed a herd immunity, if that is possible with this particular virus. Basically or hopefully when we reach the point that it's not killing as many people per month. Also hopefully only during the height of it's season this first season for it. I agree about that game warden. It did help that the fishermen had called him as well, so he came in already having some idea of what he was getting into. For me, those guys needing to get out of the kayak to move from one pool to next really hurt the navigable waterway argument, but, technically, they never leave the waterway, so, the interpretation is consistently gray. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted May 10, 2020 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 minute ago, HawgGoneIt said: For me the temporary in this pandemic is basically until we've hopefully either developed a vaccine for our most vulnerable or developed a herd immunity, if that is possible with this particular virus. Basically or hopefully when we reach the point that it's not killing as many people per month. Also hopefully only during the height of it's season this first season for it. I agree about that game warden. It did help that the fishermen had called him as well, so he came in already having some idea of what he was getting into. For me, those guys needing to get out of the kayak to move from one pool to next really hurt the navigable waterway argument, but, technically, they never leave the waterway, so, the interpretation is consistently gray. well I got my hope on herd immunity.... seeing as we have yet to develop a successful vaccine against "the flu" in the history of mankind....🤔 (moving target and all) So if they told you, that you are not allowed to leave your house, unless they stick you with their needle..... what do you say ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 hour ago, Troll said: well I got my hope on herd immunity.... seeing as we have yet to develop a successful vaccine against "the flu" in the history of mankind....🤔 (moving target and all) So if they told you, that you are not allowed to leave your house, unless they stick you with their needle..... what do you say ? I agree about the vaccine being like throwing a dart at a moving dart board. Even this virus has already had several mutations since the first vaccine started being developed, so the vaccine could probably never be 100% effective. Still, having something with some level of "safe" protection for the most vulnerable is going to be a positive in my view. As for the last... No way can they make me accept a vaccine In order to leave my home. They can however offer it and say they've done their due diligence in attempting to protect me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted May 10, 2020 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 17 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said: I agree about the vaccine being like throwing a dart at a moving dart board. Even this virus has already had several mutations since the first vaccine started being developed, so the vaccine could probably never be 100% effective. Still, having something with some level of "safe" protection for the most vulnerable is going to be a positive in my view. As for the last... No way can they make me accept a vaccine In order to leave my home. They can however offer it and say they've done their due diligence in attempting to protect me. agree .... and yes that was the point I was trying to make....they will never have a vaccine to eliminate, only multiple ongoing shots to try and "stay ahead of the game"....in other words, you would be getting their needle every year at minimum... for life.... I know it was a loaded question that most would prefer not to answer in 'public', and respect your ability to express your opinion. as for my thoughts, I don't generally cross my bridges before I come to them, but I can guarantee you that I will NOT be taking ANY vaccine, that by law I have no redress for any fault contained within. That equates to ZERO Quality control... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 Here's a drive-by post. I haven't read the thread or watched the video. Apologies. (I'll try to get to it later.) It seems to me that we do have a right to assemble, but we also have a right to life, which is more basic. The state's job is to project our rights, which sometimes requires prioritizing some over others. Politics and law aside, there's a conceptual framework for justifying "stay at home" orders. I've seen arguments here that appeal to driving. "Driving's dangerous, but we let people do it. Therefore..." But that misses the point that driving is a heavily regulated activity, precisely because it's so dangerous. Normally, socializing isn't. But now it is. So, there's a reason, grounded in the rights and interests of persons, for states to regulate it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mjd33 Posted May 10, 2020 Report Share Posted May 10, 2020 4 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said: developed a herd immunity Which doesn’t happen until 50%+ minimum in this country go back to their everyday lives. 4 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said: Basically or hopefully when we reach the point that it's not killing as many people per month. Like Elon musk said, we overshot/estimated the death toll by at least a 10 X multiple and probably closer to 50 X. You do realize MOST of the people who died from covid 19 had underlying conditions yes? And The average age of covid + death is older than the avg lifespan of both males and females here too yes? The mortality rate was significantly lower than expected. Not to mention USA Today reported the monetary incentive for these hospitals to put patients on ventilators and classify them as covid 19 ...... certainly troubling when recording data. Cigarettes and Tobacco kill over 500k a year.... crickets. Where we at w covid deaths now 80k? In 5-10 years we will view this time period as the ultimate moment of mass hysteria perpetrated on us by politicians drunk on power and control. We destroyed our entire economy for it and I don’t think it will come back for years. And when a more dangerous pandemic hits us down the road with a higher mortality rate many will tell the government to fuck Off because how they handled covid 19. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsefly Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 40 minutes ago, Mjd33 said: Which doesn’t happen until 50%+ minimum in this country go back to their everyday lives. Like Elon musk said, we overshot/estimated the death toll by at least a 10 X multiple and probably closer to 50 X. You do realize MOST of the people who died from covid 19 had underlying conditions yes? And The average age of covid + death is older than the avg lifespan of both males and females here too yes? The mortality rate was significantly lower than expected. Not to mention USA Today reported the monetary incentive for these hospitals to put patients on ventilators and classify them as covid 19 ...... certainly troubling when recording data. Cigarettes and Tobacco kill over 500k a year.... crickets. Where we at w covid deaths now 80k? In 5-10 years we will view this time period as the ultimate moment of mass hysteria perpetrated on us by politicians drunk on power and control. We destroyed our entire economy for it and I don’t think it will come back for years. And when a more dangerous pandemic hits us down the road with a higher mortality rate many will tell the government to fuck Off because how they handled covid 19. The biggest difference is smoking/tobacco leads to ailments that a person can live years with:heart disease, emphysema, cancer, heart disease and succumb years later. Covid deaths were all from people that contracted the disease within the last few months and died from complications fairly quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted May 11, 2020 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Horsefly said: The biggest difference is smoking/tobacco leads to ailments that a person can live years with:heart disease, emphysema, cancer, heart disease and succumb years later. Covid deaths were all from people that contracted the disease within the last few months and died from complications fairly quickly. interesting, but I kinda thought the biggest difference is that smoking/tobacco is a form of 'suicide' (which government tends to stay out of unless it's hitting the wallet)... where as now the covid or 'this years bad winter flu' is being projected as a form of 'manslaughter'... at least for purposes of changing societies rules for the benefit of ??? 🤔 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 Just an FYI for folks pondering death rates and potential causes... https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-05-vitamin-d-role-covid-mortality.html https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.08.20058578v3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsefly Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Troll said: interesting, but I kinda thought the biggest difference is that smoking/tobacco is a form of 'suicide' (which government tends to stay out of unless it's hitting the wallet)... where as now the covid or 'this years bad winter flu' is being projected as a form of 'manslaughter'... at least for purposes of changing societies rules for the benefit of ??? 🤔 I highlighted the difference as I quoted it related to the number of deaths/year. Let me ask you this. Do you think the country has an obligation to protect our citizens if we were being attacked from a foreign nation, or do you thInk preserving individual rights would be more critical during such a national crisis? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted May 11, 2020 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 51 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said: Just an FYI for folks pondering death rates and potential causes... https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-05-vitamin-d-role-covid-mortality.html https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.08.20058578v3 are you watching my weatherman 🌞 now ? 🤣 Read that a couple days ago LOL...that's actually always been there, between flu and vitamin D (in the form of 🌞)... ever hear stories of putting patients outside, and getting better success ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.