virus prediction

[pilut2]

Originally Posted by paulofto

Some people have to be told because, quite frankly, they are too stupid to make the right decision. Common sense it seems is not so common. Freedom is the right to choose but making an obviously wrong choice, even after being told by experts that you are making a mistake, is a sign of ignorance and obstinance and infringes everyone’s freedom.

+1 on this!

I am in Canada- Canadians tend to be more compliant and believe that the government is actually looking out for their safety and best interest instead of infringing on their rights. For example; most Canadians are thankful of our tough gun laws which mean that we don't actually have to carry a weapon to protect ourselves. We, for the most part, have also been very accepting of COVID restrictions and the need to wear a mask.
I realize that there are many factors regarding spread and death rate of COVID but I am proud of how well Canada has handled the pandemic. We have not politicized COVID, we have excellent healthcare available to everyone at no cost and most people are happy to wear a mask. As a result our death rate (as of August 10) is .13 per million whereas the US is tracking 1.55 deaths per million.

[tommy583]

If people are not going to wear a mask, then they probably won't get the vaccine either. They don't seem to think that the virus is a real threat, it's just a made up thing to further a political agenda. Or they will say the Bill Gates is just trying to implant a tracking chip in them. Of course unless you live in the woods somewhere you are being tracked almost constantly anyway. Let's see Cell phone, Credit/debit card use, EZpass, license plate readers, internet ip, cameras in nearly every place of business the list goes on and on. But it's my right not to wear a mask blah blah blah. Maybe there is something about the right not to wear a mask during a pandemic in the constitution, but I must of missed it.

[maytag]

Originally Posted by tommy583

Maybe there is something about the right not to wear a mask during a pandemic in the constitution, but I must of missed it.

Have you READ the constitution of the United States? If you had, then you would understand that the document enumerates those specific areas where government CAN restrict freedoms. So, the fact that facemasks are not mentioned in the constitution actually feeds the argument against the gov't being allowed to mandate them. (So I'd probably quit bringing that point up, if I wanted to encourage the naysayers to wear facemasks)

I think Starter made an important point when he said he'd like to be asked, not required (I'm paraphrasing). I think this is a common theme amongst conservatives regarding many, many issues: You (the gov't) don't have the right to compel me, so just ask us nicely. This is, for instance, how I feel about taxation for social programs, and many other governmental "programs" which may have best-interests at heart, but seek to compel where there is no precedent or constitutional basis for that power being given to gov't.

Having said that, While I bristle at the unconstitutionality of all that's being foisted upon us right now, I try not to let the leaves block the view of the forest. I still give to charity, and I still wear a facemask when and where I'm asked to do so.
I have a BIGGER problem with the seeming-incongruity behind supporting Protests and protesters (even though they are rarely masked and are NEVER social-distancing) while simultaneously shutting-down religious gatherings, schools, in-person voting and an entire host of other activities which could certainly be done with a modicum of safety that far exceeds what is being exercised during a protest / statue vandalizing session.

I don't make decisions based on the "slippery-slope" idea, but you must admit that there is merit to it. You see, while Covid is certainly real and scary, it HAS most-certainly been politicized, and is being used to influence behavior. To what end? Well, I have my own opinions about that; What are YOURS?

[Frodo]

Originally Posted by maytag

Have you READ the constitution of the United States? If you had, then you would understand that the document enumerates those specific areas where government CAN restrict freedoms. So, the fact that facemasks are not mentioned in the constitution actually feeds the argument against the gov't being allowed to mandate them. (So I'd probably quit bringing that point up, if I wanted to encourage the naysayers to wear facemasks)

I think Starter made an important point when he said he'd like to be asked, not required (I'm paraphrasing). I think this is a common theme amongst conservatives regarding many, many issues: You (the gov't) don't have the right to compel me, so just ask us nicely. This is, for instance, how I feel about taxation for social programs, and many other governmental "programs" which may have best-interests at heart, but seek to compel where there is no precedent or constitutional basis for that power being given to gov't.

Having said that, While I bristle at the unconstitutionality of all that's being foisted upon us right now, I try not to let the leaves block the view of the forest. I still give to charity, and I still wear a facemask when and where I'm asked to do so.
I have a BIGGER problem with the seeming-incongruity behind supporting Protests and protesters (even though they are rarely masked and are NEVER social-distancing) while simultaneously shutting-down religious gatherings, schools, in-person voting and an entire host of other activities which could certainly be done with a modicum of safety that far exceeds what is being exercised during a protest / statue vandalizing session.

I don't make decisions based on the "slippery-slope" idea, but you must admit that there is merit to it. You see, while Covid is certainly real and scary, it HAS most-certainly been politicized, and is being used to influence behavior. To what end? Well, I have my own opinions about that; What are YOURS?

I don’t really want to go too deeply into the whole Constitution thing, other than to say it basically just sets up how the federal government is organized, and the responsibilities and authority of each branch of that government, as well as setting forth how that government, the feds, work in relation to the governments of the various individual states. The 10th Amendment goes on to declare that those powers that aren’t reserved by the Constitution to the federal government are by default powers that fall to the states to control. So, at least to this point in time, it’s been the states (not the feds) who have come up with the ‘mask mandates’ in their various forms. Could the feds do it on their own, for the nation as a whole? Who knows? I, for one, am not enough of a Constitutional scholar to even venture a guess.

But anyway, I think the courts have been pretty consistent that you have the rights enumerated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, but that those rights can have reasonable limits. (The most consistently quoted: One cannot, based on the 1st Amendment right to free speech, shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater…not that those exist anymore ).

And I think the courts have, by and large, allowed states to be guilty of mild infringement on the individual’s rights under the Constitution where there is a clear and rational basis for such infringement (eg, in this case, the protection of public health) AND where that ‘infringement’ is narrowly drawn so as to minimize, as far as possible, the effect on one’s liberties. Probably requiring masks to be worn in public in the midst of a worldwide pandemic would fall into that category.

As far as your preference that we be “asked” to wear masks, as opposed to it being mandated, I understand the sentiment. I do. However to that I feel the need to add this: For months, Gov DeWine has been recommending folks maintain social distancing and wear masks when indoors, or outdoors where social distancing cannot be achieved. He’s done it til he was blue in the face. It was not until the bad numbers started going back up in Ohio that he finally said (paraphrasing…Gov Mike was much more diplomatic), “Enough! Now it’s mandated!” I don’t have any statistics at my fingertips, but I will offer this admittedly unscientific (though somewhat telling, in my book) observation: A few weeks ago, pre-mandate, I was in Home Depot one afternoon at a time when it was pretty darned crowded. In spite of the Gov’s gentle coaxing, week after week, that people should please wear masks indoors when in public, fully HALF of the people there were without masks. I was back in the same HD this afternoon with, by rough estimate, about the same number of folks in the aisles. Out of curiosity I decided to take note: Out of many dozens of people that I saw, there was this many without a mask on: One. Sometimes “Please” just doesn’t cut it..

[maytag]

Originally Posted by Frodo

I don’t really want to go too deeply into the whole Constitution thing, other than to say it basically just sets up how the federal government is organized, and the responsibilities and authority of each branch of that government, as well as setting forth how that government, the feds, work in relation to the governments of the various individual states. The 10th Amendment goes on to declare that those powers that aren’t reserved by the Constitution to the federal government are by default powers that fall to the states to control. So, at least to this point in time, it’s been the states (not the feds) who have come up with the ‘mask mandates’ in their various forms. Could the feds do it on their own, for the nation as a whole? Who knows? I, for one, am not enough of a Constitutional scholar to even venture a guess.

But anyway, I think the courts have been pretty consistent that you have the rights enumerated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, but that those rights can have reasonable limits. (The most consistently quoted: One cannot, based on the 1st Amendment right to free speech, shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater…not that those exist anymore ).

And I think the courts have, by and large, allowed states to be guilty of mild infringement on the individual’s rights under the Constitution where there is a clear and rational basis for such infringement (eg, in this case, the protection of public health) AND where that ‘infringement’ is narrowly drawn so as to minimize, as far as possible, the effect on one’s liberties. Probably requiring masks to be worn in public in the midst of a worldwide pandemic would fall into that category.

As far as your preference that we be “asked” to wear masks, as opposed to it being mandated, I understand the sentiment. I do. However to that I feel the need to add this: For months, Gov DeWine has been recommending folks maintain social distancing and wear masks when indoors, or outdoors where social distancing cannot be achieved. He’s done it til he was blue in the face. It was not until the bad numbers started going back up in Ohio that he finally said (paraphrasing…Gov Mike was much more diplomatic), “Enough! Now it’s mandated!” I don’t have any statistics at my fingertips, but I will offer this admittedly unscientific (though somewhat telling, in my book) observation: A few weeks ago, pre-mandate, I was in Home Depot one afternoon at a time when it was pretty darned crowded. In spite of the Gov’s gentle coaxing, week after week, that people should please wear masks indoors when in public, fully HALF of the people there were without masks. I was back in the same HD this afternoon with, by rough estimate, about the same number of folks in the aisles. Out of curiosity I decided to take note: Out of many dozens of people that I saw, there was this many without a mask on: One. Sometimes “Please” just doesn’t cut it..

Yup, I'm with you on ALL of this. ALL OF IT. 100%. I live in a community which, while perhaps less than other places in the nation, is the hardest-hit in Utah, barring only the Navajo reservation. And still, even with the mandate (let alone before it) the mask usage is incredibly low. I shake my head.
Now I am NOT one of those guys who's going to get on my high-horse and say these people are selfish (or worse), because I understand their mentality, I really do. I disagree with it, but I try to understand them, and I do.

Where your comments stop abruptly, though, are whether or not you think "please" not cutting-it is justification for government over-reach. (If we define over-reach as anything not specifically enumerated in the US Const. or that of the individual states.)

As I mentioned earlier; I don't necessarily know where I stand on some of this. I lean more libertarian than Republican in my own brand of conservatism, yet, when it comes right down to it, I care deeply for my neighbors and my community. Those are sometimes competing values, and additionally I don't have a ton of patience for Jack-A$$es who are purposely rude, or who hurt others "because they can". (No, I am NOT referring to those who don't wear masks. As I said; I understand their reasoning, and I do NOT think they are simply selfish or whatever other moniker others throw at them.)

[tommy583]

OK I'm not going to debate the Constitution on my favorite car forum. Nor will I call anyone names for choosing to wear or not wear a mask. Politically I think i'm pretty much in the middle. I'm not a gun owner but believe in gun rights. But then again i'm not a woman but believe in her right to choose. I sometimes think Cuomo is a communist, but besides the nursing homes he has done a pretty good job with the virus. NY was in bad bad shape early on. Now with most people on board with wearing the mask, the numbers have come way down. Maybe if we keep wearing them the numbers will stay low. Maybe they won't, time will tell.

[maytag]

Originally Posted by tommy583

OK I'm not going to debate the Constitution on my favorite car forum. Nor will I call anyone names for choosing to wear or not wear a mask. Politically I think i'm pretty much in the middle. I'm not a gun owner but believe in gun rights. But then again i'm not a woman but believe in her right to choose. I sometimes think Cuomo is a communist, but besides the nursing homes he has done a pretty good job with the virus. NY was in bad bad shape early on. Now with most people on board with wearing the mask, the numbers have come way down. Maybe if we keep wearing them the numbers will stay low. Maybe they won't, time will tell.

why doesn't this forum have a "LIKE" button?

how 'bout simply "+1"

[Frodo]

Originally Posted by maytag

Yup, I'm with you on ALL of this. ALL OF IT. 100%. I live in a community which, while perhaps less than other places in the nation, is the hardest-hit in Utah, barring only the Navajo reservation. And still, even with the mandate (let alone before it) the mask usage is incredibly low. I shake my head.
Now I am NOT one of those guys who's going to get on my high-horse and say these people are selfish (or worse), because I understand their mentality, I really do. I disagree with it, but I try to understand them, and I do.

Where your comments stop abruptly, though, are whether or not you think "please" not cutting-it is justification for government over-reach. (If we define over-reach as anything not specifically enumerated in the US Const. or that of the individual states.)

Ahh, there’s the rub: what DOES constitute ‘over-reach’? One person feeling their rights are being trampled on is viewed by another person as the government doing what is supposed to be done to protect the health and welfare of its people. The governor, like the president, has pretty broad authority to issue executive orders when needed to insure that that is what happens. And if it’s not specified to be solely within the strict purview of the federal government (it’s not) and it’s not otherwise ‘unconstitutional’ (which is at least arguably true), then mandating mask usage is not technically over-reach. Ultimately, like always, it’ll eventually come down to what the courts think—which, of course, will depend in large part on WHO appointed the particular judge(s)/justice(s) handing down the decisions.

Originally Posted by maytag

As I mentioned earlier; I don't necessarily know where I stand on some of this.

Man do I ever hear you on this. Between covid and this impulsive, divisive, highly unorthodox administration we have in the White House these days, I don’t know if I’m comin’ or goin’ sometimes. (When he won the election, I was more than willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. In fact, I took my hat off to the man—he pulled off a major, largely unexpected victory. There’s still things he asserts that I agree with (occasionally). But geeeeez, the man’s a bull in a China shop. Over time he’s just committed way too many major blunders and stupid indiscretions and unforgivable gaffes. And the worst of it? The very worst, in my mind? He’s created a civil war mentality, developed and nurtured animosities between people that hadn’t existed before, turned folks that may previously have had minor disagreements into bitter enemies. That just doesn’t sit well with me.)

All in all, I don’t think that we (those of us still left in this discussion) are ALL that far apart on most of this stuff. Subtle differences in opinions can blossom into major disputes when one’s reasoning is publically called into question. It’s like one too many inside fastballs: usually they get shrugged off with a minor grumble, but sometimes they end up with pitcher/batter/catcher rolling in the dirt. I think we can probably succeed in staying out of the dirt.

[piper6909]

Originally Posted by maytag

I think Starter made an important point when he said he'd like to be asked, not required (I'm paraphrasing). I think this is a common theme amongst conservatives regarding many, many issues: You (the gov't) don't have the right to compel me, so just ask us nicely. This is, for instance, how I feel about taxation for social programs, and many other governmental "programs" which may have best-interests at heart, but seek to compel where there is no precedent or constitutional basis for that power being given to gov't.

The government doesn't ask you not to harm others. It mandates it. The government doesn't ask you not to smoke in public. It mandates it.

Since when did conservatives become such snowflakes that they need to be
'asked' to do something? Want us to say, "Pretty-please with sugar on top" too?

Originally Posted by maytag

I have a BIGGER problem with the seeming-incongruity behind supporting Protests and protesters (even though they are rarely masked and are NEVER social-distancing) while simultaneously shutting-down religious gatherings, schools, in-person voting and an entire host of other activities which could certainly be done with a modicum of safety that far exceeds what is being exercised during a protest / statue vandalizing session.

While I agree with you that protesting at this time is far from safe, first and foremost I need to check you on the protester's wearing of masks. The vast majority do. Just google images of George Floyd protests and you can see for yourself.

Secondly, how long would you sit by and watch your people repeatedly get cut down? There's a limit people can take. And people have reached that limit when a cop put his god damn knee on an unarmed man's neck for 8-1/2 minutes, staring into the camera while the other cops just stood by and watched until the man died. F Uck yeah I'm going to protest! This can't wait until the Coronavirus is over. He was just killed, the heat of the moment is now. There's emotion, there's anger, there's a need to make a change. Jesus died 2000 years ago, church can wait.

Besides, when are protests ever 'appropriate'? It's always, "now is not the time" or "can't you find another way?" Can't kneel, can't march. Do you have any suggestions? I'll wait to hear them.

[Starter986]

Originally Posted by piper6909

The government doesn't ask you not to harm others. It mandates it. The government doesn't ask you not to smoke in public. It mandates it.

Since when did conservatives become such snowflakes that they need to be
'asked' to do something? Want us to say, "Pretty-please with sugar on top" too?



While I agree with you that protesting at this time is far from safe, first and foremost I need to check you on the protester's wearing of masks. The vast majority do. Just google images of George Floyd protests and you can see for yourself.

Secondly, how long would you sit by and watch your people repeatedly get cut down? There's a limit people can take. And people have reached that limit when a cop put his god damn knee on an unarmed man's neck for 8-1/2 minutes, staring into the camera while the other cops just stood by and watched until the man died. F Uck yeah I'm going to protest! This can't wait until the Coronavirus is over. He was just killed, the heat of the moment is now. There's emotion, there's anger, there's a need to make a change. Jesus died 2000 years ago, church can wait.

Besides, when are protests ever 'appropriate'? It's always, "now is not the time" or "can't you find another way?" Can't kneel, can't march. Do you have any suggestions? I'll wait to hear them.

Should we start a George Floyd thread... because I'm all in. That drug-addled loser was a dead-man walking long before the cops arrived. He's no martyr.He's no saint.

Lets go!!! But give me until at least 4A to launch.

[piper6909]

Originally Posted by Starter986

Should we start a George Floyd thread... because I'm all in. That drug-addled loser was a dead-man walking long before the cops arrived. He's no martyr.He's no saint.

Lets go!!! But give me until at least 4A to launch.

Yeah, 'cause you're a saint and a winner! Maybe he was a loser because he was on drugs. What's your excuse?

[maytag]

Originally Posted by piper6909

The government doesn't ask you not to harm others. It mandates it. The government doesn't ask you not to smoke in public. It mandates it.

Since when did conservatives become such snowflakes that they need to be
'asked' to do something? Want us to say, "Pretty-please with sugar on top" too?



While I agree with you that protesting at this time is far from safe, first and foremost I need to check you on the protester's wearing of masks. The vast majority do. Just google images of George Floyd protests and you can see for yourself.

Secondly, how long would you sit by and watch your people repeatedly get cut down? There's a limit people can take. And people have reached that limit when a cop put his god damn knee on an unarmed man's neck for 8-1/2 minutes, staring into the camera while the other cops just stood by and watched until the man died. F Uck yeah I'm going to protest! This can't wait until the Coronavirus is over. He was just killed, the heat of the moment is now. There's emotion, there's anger, there's a need to make a change. Jesus died 2000 years ago, church can wait.

Besides, when are protests ever 'appropriate'? It's always, "now is not the time" or "can't you find another way?" Can't kneel, can't march. Do you have any suggestions? I'll wait to hear them.

Dood..... when you're done putting words in my mouth, come join me in the street where I'm supporting the protests over the too-frequent brutal treatment of some at the hands of the police.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[piper6909]

Originally Posted by maytag

Dood..... when you're done putting words in my mouth, come join me in the street where I'm supporting the protests over the too-frequent brutal treatment of some at the hands of the police.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Sorry, How did I put words in your mouth? And cheers for supporting the protests!

[maytag]

Originally Posted by piper6909

Sorry, How did I put words in your mouth? And cheers for supporting the protests!

All that intimation you did that I was suggesting the protests shouldn't be happening. You couldn't bear to hear the incongruity i pointed out, so you tossed in a straw man to deflect to.

How about address the real point I made? Why is one okay and the other is not?

Oh, and yes, by the way, leave your mask at home for the protest. The ONLY masks being worn at these are the people who are afraid they'll be recognized causing property damage when the video gets played back at 11.

Remember the '60s, when people were ready to go to jail for their cause?

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Starter986]

Originally Posted by pilut2

Canadians tend to be more compliant and believe that the government is actually looking out for their safety and best interest instead of infringing on their rights. For example; most Canadians are thankful of our tough gun laws which mean that we don't actually have to carry a weapon to protect ourselves. .

Pfffffffffft. Who is feeding you that line of BS? Your leader?

"The downward trend stopped in 2013 and, since then, it has gone up 42%. Between 2013 and 2017, 16 of Canada's Census metropolitan areas saw increases in their rate of firearm-related violent crime, including 7 of the 10 largest. ... Each year since 2009, about six in ten firearm-related violent crimes involved handguns."

Enough with the b ull****************. Criminals don't care about laws. "Criminal" The word was coined for a reason.

Maybe this needs a new thread.

[pilut2]

Originally Posted by Starter986

Pfffffffffft. Who is feeding you that line of BS? Your leader?

"The downward trend stopped in 2013 and, since then, it has gone up 42%. Between 2013 and 2017, 16 of Canada's Census metropolitan areas saw increases in their rate of firearm-related violent crime, including 7 of the 10 largest. ... Each year since 2009, about six in ten firearm-related violent crimes involved handguns."

Trend maybe up- but Canada still as approximately 1/6 of firearm related deaths per capita as US. I know very few people who own guns, and those who do, have shotguns and rifles for hunting only- not for personal protection. The bad guys will always have guns, but they are still few and far enough between that the good guys don't need to carry.