They end up hanging themselves.
(no message)
(no message)
You just can't legally enforce that an entire state remains inside their house for months on end because there is a virus with less than half a percent mortality rate. You just can't do that.
Let's pretend that their motivations are pure: I'm Governor Whitmer and I don't want anyone dying from this virus, so I'm locking every business, school, state park, and body of water down from the public. If you argue she has the right to do that, then there is a minimal distinction between that and outlawing cars, tobacco, fast food, and high-fructose corn syrup, all of which pose significant safety risks to the general public each year.
It's great for doctors to be on the air telling people to wear masks, minimize travel, avoid crowds, and for the elderly to stay isolated for now. It is NOT great for politicians to strip people of their freedoms to make choices for themselves.
I accept that the 15-day lockdown was necessary, given the data that we had at the time in mid-March. I also can live with the uncertainty that dragged that 2 weeks out to a month. We're now 6 weeks later with these restrictions for most states. At this point, what is the end game? What do you gain from carefully opening up in a month that is different from right now? Infections are going to rise once states begin to open up whether you do it today or whether you do it in August. So if you aren't going to keep a lockdown going until you have a vaccine in 12-18 months (and fully collapse society), you are facing the exact same scenario at whatever point you open up beforehand. So, what reasonable basis is there for doing what Virginia and Michigan are doing?
(no message)
...as far as the law goes. Governors have wide latitude when it comes to restricting freedom during public health emergencies.
A better question is whether there is a scientific basis, not a legal one, for some of these measures.
I say this as a person who chooses to abide by all of the guidelines issued. I choose to put the safety of others over my freedom. I don't do it because I am required to do it by a despotic state. Are there limits on freedoms? Sure. But, they are much more limited than people are pretending at this point. It is a hard balancing act, to be sure. But the authorities are not acting by law for the most part; they are acting under temporary tolerance and acquiescence of the people. They just need to be sure to gauge that tolerance, and not abuse it, or the results will be worse than the virus, for everyone.
(no message)
The shutdown is not really about government authority or government police power or removal of our freedoms. Not when we consent.
It only works if the people consent to the exercise of authority which we do during exigent circumstances because we accept the government intrusion as being in our best interests. When we no longer consent to the intrusion, the government authority or “police power” becomes unenforceable.
Even in everyday life, we consent to government intrusions. Notwithstanding court decision, we accept warrantless searches of our persons and belongings when we enter an airport or a ballgame. We consent because we appreciate the greater safety concerns. But, there are boundaries. If security officers started rifling through our wallets on orders of the government, the people wouldn’t allow it.
In America, the power is always with the people when it comes to our freedoms. The government (on all levels) may intrude at times on our freedoms, but in reality, it is only with our consent.
(no message)
There is no reasonable medical rationale for Whitmer's or Newsome's actions in the low risk areas of their states. None. jakers post in this thread and the follow up state it quite well.
The curve has been flattened. once done, we have achieved it's benefit. Doing it further not only fails to help us further (exposure is inevitable, and the hospitals will not be overwhelmed now), but it hurts us with developing herd immunity and also devastates our economy and delays the management of other less critical medical issues which can worsen into a bigger problem than COVID.
What exactly is the scientific reason for what many states are doing? Infections will rise once things open up, whether that is today or July. So what is the reason for staying shut down indefinitely? It's not like there is a vaccine ready to go this summer that is worth holding out for.
The Left think that somehow, they are going to avoid getting exposed if they hide in their houses. This is a result of the panic and misinformation that the msm has spread to their liberal viewers.
At least you now recognize the danger of overwhelming hospitals.
But treatments and vaccines are still beyond your ability to comprehend.
No doubt that re-opening moves in one direction, although hopefully not at “Black Friday” shopping speed.
Once the boat is placed back in the river, the boat will go with the flow, but does not turn back to its starting point.
The “police power” of the government (on any level) is really a fiction. Rather, the “power” and “authority” is really vested in the consent and cooperation of the people. During exigent circumstances, people defer to the urgency of the moment.
In the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombings, did anyone really sweat warrantless searches of their property as police hunted for the perpetrators?
So far, the vast majority of the people have consented to the Governors’ orders because most people reasonably fear the deadly wrath of the virus and therefore, view the acts of “police power” as credible and prudent.
It is not really a question of whether the Governors’ orders are lawful or unlawful. The question is whether people deem the orders to be in their self interest?
The shutdown has a shelf life. We are approaching the expiration date. But, people remain cautious as they remain frightened enough at present to abide by the marching orders of their governors and health officials.
(no message)
his roll models.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)