Coronavirus: When Would You Turn The Country Back On?

[JerryLove]

However the FBI was never designee nor should it be to police law biding citizens between states.

What does that even mean?

What does "policing law-abiding citizens" look like? Can you offer some examples?

 

[3db]

First off CNN yuck.. 2nd. Everyone in America has this idea in their head that the FED is all powerful and can do anything. They cannot, they don't have the tech, tools, manpower or authority. The states have more power then most realize. Now when it comes to cross states that has always been a hard one. That is up to the FED hence why the FBI was born. However the FBI was never designee nor should it be to police law biding citizens between states.


So the answer, they are the problem of the Gov of what ever state they are in.

Trump and associates were talking into a microphone at the press briefing room. I dont care if iwas CBC, BBC, or that other station, that claims to report the news, FOX. I didnt listen to post commentary. As a Canadian, I can make up my own mind and dont feel the need to be "led". Still the question was unanswered.

It will be interesting for sue because Canada basically told Trump off saying we are not opening our borders to the US.

 

[panteragstk]

What does that even mean?

What does "policing law-abiding citizens" look like? Can you offer some examples?

Pretty much that (IIRC) the FBI was created for crimes that went across state lines. If certain states open, but their population isn't allowed to cross state lines, is that something the FBI should handle if they choose to? They aren't "technically" doing anything illegal with the exception that their gov told them not to do it. It isn't a law their breaking, but an order.

So, should they be doing that? How would we stop people from ignoring an order to stay in their state?

 

[clamatowas]

What does that even mean?

What does "policing law-abiding citizens" look like? Can you offer some examples?

The FBI is one of the few agencies with the legal authorization to work across state borders.

Canada just like America has the legal right and duty to secure/police entry into their borders.

If the question is how will America handle policing their own citizens from crossing state or federal borders? The answer is, they won't because they cannot. They simply don't have the legal right to do so. America isn't Socialist Canada. That's why you have seen the people rise up and block off state Capitol buildings with their cars and even in one case. Arm themselves to the teeth and stand in front of it. They did this because the Governor's clearly overstepped their legal authority. After all this is over I'm sure the civil rights lawyers are going to have a heyday.

If you want examples, you have internet access. Look at some of these states that have been arresting people for having single family BBQ, people driving alone in their and cars many other examples.

Even now Google sharing all tracked history of every person using their services on a cell phone....

I understand some these may have a positive impact on a virus that has killed less people globally in the last year as accidents in a month... However there are many like me that believe the levels of rights violations going on are beyond extreme and beyond dangerous.


That's what it looks like when the Gov starts to feel their can freely police law-abiding citizens.

 

[highfigh]

First off CNN yuck.. 2nd. Everyone in America has this idea in their head that the FED is all powerful and can do anything. They cannot, they don't have the tech, tools, manpower or authority. The states have more power then most realize. Now when it comes to cross states that has always been a hard one. That is up to the FED hence why the FBI was born. However the FBI was never designee nor should it be to police law biding citizens between states.


So the answer, they are the problem of the Gov of what ever state they are in.

Personnel wouldn't be a problem but some parts of the Constitution would need to be bypassed.

 

[JerryLove]

Pretty much that (IIRC) the FBI was created for crimes that went across state lines. If certain states open, but their population isn't allowed to cross state lines, is that something the FBI should handle if they choose to? They aren't "technically" doing anything illegal with the exception that their gov told them not to do it. It isn't a law their breaking, but an order.

I suspect they are, in fact, technically doing something illegal.

That's what words like "allowed" and "order" mean.

If it were a "recommendation" or "discouraged", then no.

States are sovereign and restricted only by rights denied them by the US Constitution (of which there are few); and even those routinely "don't count".

 

[JerryLove]

If you want examples, you have internet access. Look at some of these states that have been arresting people for having single family BBQ, people driving alone in their and cars many other examples.

[...]

That's what it looks like when the Gov starts to feel their can freely police law-abiding citizens.

So they were arrested.
Which means they were charged.
With a crime.
Which, if they committed it, means they are not law-abiding.

So what does "policing law abiding citizens" look like? What' you've described is arresting law-breaking citizens.

 

[clamatowas]

So they were arrested.
Which means they were charged.
With a crime.
Which, if they committed it, means they are not law-abiding.

So what does "policing law abiding citizens" look like? What' you've described is arresting law-breaking citizens.

That's not how it works. A politician can bass a unconstitutional law, a police officer can enforce that law.. But when it comes to court.. The constitution still is king, if the law is found to be unconstitutional in the court the law must be removed and the person will be payed restitution. This is why Civil rights attorneys exist and why recently they have been making BANK. Why after all this I'm sure they will have a lot of fun.


There are LOTS Of state sheriffs that come right out and said they WONT enforce these state imposed laws as they know they are not constitutional.


Being arrested when you committed no crime does not make you a "not law-abiding". First innocent till proven guilt.. 2nd you cannot be guilty of a law that violated your civil rights.


Anyone that says "parts of the Constitution would need to be bypassed." has no understanding of freedom. No understanding of what America is and why it was founded, no understanding of why millions of men over the past 200 years gave up their life, their hope of having a family and growing old.. The sacrifice to secure that dream for their posterity and others.. You would give it all up because for some reason you believe it can save you some discomfort or maybe a few thousand lifes today...

I have 0 respect for anyone so selfish and shortsighted.

 

[highfigh]

Anyone that says "parts of the Constitution would need to be bypassed." has no understanding of freedom. No understanding of what America is and why it was founded, no understanding of why millions of men over the past 200 years gave up their life, their hope of having a family and growing old.. The sacrifice to secure that dream for their posterity and others.. You would give it all up because for some reason you believe it can save you some discomfort or maybe a few thousand lifes today...

I have 0 respect for anyone so selfish and shortsighted.

I really don't care if you respect me- just don't jump to conclusions that are so wrong.

Look into the clause referring to using the military for law enforcement to see what I was referring to before telling me I don't understand the Constitution or what America is. The Posse Comitatus Act contains "the military may not be used for law enforcement, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress.". So far, that hasn't happened.

In a pandemic, should people travel from one place to another when that would increase the chance of infecting someone or being infected? Sure, if you want to keep this thing (which should never have happened) going. If you had a neighbor who was infected, would you insist on going to their house and being close enough to become infected, just because you want to, or would something tell you that it's a bad idea?

Any orders concerning this pandemic need to be temporary- if they (Congress or Trump) try to make any of them permanent, first, it would be challenged in court and then, by other means.

FYI- we aren't being governed or taxed by a ruler in another country, on a different continent, although it could be argued that inside of Congress and the White House, they're not far from that.

 

[clamatowas]

No military has been used in law reinforcement, even when Trump was asked that very question early on when he said he would be giving military aid to NYC they stated very clearly, they where there for medical support not police and that the local Gov would have authority on how to direct the resources under these guidelines.

This conversation as far as I could tell, is about how Local or Fed can or should control the movement of people within their borders.


I agree with the another country part even more so for congress.. These lifers who have been in power so long feel they are the Government seem to believe they operate on a different law then the rest of us.

 

[JerryLove]

That's not how it works. A politician can bass a unconstitutional law, a police officer can enforce that law..

You seem to be changing the subject.

How is someone who breaks a law a "law-abiding" citizen? What does "policing law-abiding citizens" look like?

Being arrested when you committed no crime does not make you a "not law-abiding".

So. You are asserting that arresting someone standing over a dead body with a bloody knife is an example of "policing law-abiding citizens" that the FBI should not be doing?

no understanding of why millions of men over the past 200 years gave up their life

Millions?

I really hope you aren't asserting that the US has lost millions of men (way to exclude women there) to "freedom". Cite please.

The sacrifice to secure that dream for their posterity and others.. You would give it all up because for some reason you believe it can save you some discomfort or maybe a few thousand lifes today...

I have 0 respect for anyone so selfish and shortsighted.

So the person that wants to go out and infect and kill thousands or millions of Americans with their contagious disease because they don't want some discomfort or to feel like they are being bossed around? That's the unselfish person?

I'm not sure words mean what you think they mean.

 

[Danzilla31]

You seem to be changing the subject.

How is someone who breaks a law a "law-abiding" citizen? What does "policing law-abiding citizens" look like?


So. You are asserting that arresting someone standing over a dead body with a bloody knife is an example of "policing law-abiding citizens" that the FBI should not be doing?


Millions?

I really hope you aren't asserting that the US has lost millions of men (way to exclude women there) to "freedom". Cite please.


So the person that wants to go out and infect and kill thousands or millions of Americans with their contagious disease because they don't want some discomfort or to feel like they are being bossed around? That's the unselfish person?

I'm not sure words mean what you think they mean.

I get what he's trying to say we're just debating or as they say splitting small hairs

He's not talking about people willingly just going out infected just because they are bored or childishly insisting on there freedoms

He seems to be stating examples of families who have nobody else over having a bbq with just them to try to pass the time on lockdown and getting arrested

Or people getting pulled over for just driving to clear there head with no intention of stopping anywhere

We're not talking people who want to take a trip to the Bahamas or throwing a massive party in there house or stuff like that

The flipside of the coin in unusual circumstances here is where do you draw the line on where citizens are being law abiding or not there is a dangerous amount of latitude that can be enforced here is what I think he's trying to say

But this isn't the first time America and many other countries have taken extremes in latitude when driven by fear or harsh situations and trying circumstances I'm sure it won't be the last

Although as some of you have mentioned I think it is valid to ask him to link those sources those ARE pretty sobering situations if they are happening but with the mass media being so sensationalistic or fear driven today it's important to produce your sources or links so we can know or assertain there credibility

As far as interstate travel I'm learning but don't know enough to have an understanding of this I'm listening to you guys and trying to learn and research what I can from what you say. I have no valid or relevant takes on that subject as of now

 

[Paul DS]

The answer to returning to work is testing, testing, testing. Tests should be available for everyone, especially those not showing any symptoms.

 

[Danzilla31]

You seem to be changing the subject.

How is someone who breaks a law a "law-abiding" citizen? What does "policing law-abiding citizens" look like?


So. You are asserting that arresting someone standing over a dead body with a bloody knife is an example of "policing law-abiding citizens" that the FBI should not be doing?


Millions?

I really hope you aren't asserting that the US has lost millions of men (way to exclude women there) to "freedom". Cite please.


So the person that wants to go out and infect and kill thousands or millions of Americans with their contagious disease because they don't want some discomfort or to feel like they are being bossed around? That's the unselfish person?

I'm not sure words mean what you think they mean.

My question is I guarantee you it's spread farther then we may know so far testing will prove if my feeling is right or not

Just because we have so many asymptomatic carriers. There are quiet a number of individuals that carry this with no symptoms at all no visible cough fever any warning signs

I guess you could argue against people driving around due to this risk factor but still it's a pretty tough situation to determine what to do

One thing to remember is although we should be mindful of our state's and federal government overstepping there rights we should also realize they are trying to make very difficult situations and decisions in very trying times

There going to make mistakes too just like I'm sure we all are while trying to figure this out

This has become a situation where there are no win win scenarios it's going to cost us no matter what they decide and they are just as human as the rest of is it's more now unfortunately what's the least losing situation we can pick that gets us all through this with the least amount of damage to as many as possible. Not just the infected but also the healthy being impacted by the economy. There's no winning choices here there s just collateral damage minimizing decisions now we're too far down the rabbit hole for easy solutions

Hopefully we'll keep some empathy in mind and give them some reasonable room to try there best without flying off the handle

Although the more people stay out of work the more dangerous and unpredictable some will come. There's no getting around that we kind off lose some of that ability to process things rationally when our backs against the wall

Hopefully it won't get too bad we can only hope. But like some of you have posted we gotta keep hoping lose that amd were screwed no matter what we choose

 

[lovinthehd]

Just saw this article on testing/projections https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Santa-Clara-antibody-test-coronavirus-results-case-15208216.php

 

[Danzilla31]

The answer to returning to work is testing, testing, testing. Tests should be available for everyone, especially those not showing any symptoms.

The vaccine it's no getting around that those takes time

The test we could have done something about the tragedy is we didn't

But from what I can see they are still way behind the curve on this and it's going to take awhile to catch up.

So we're stuck with making difficult choices no matter what cus you can't keep everything locked down till the testing catches up its going to take too long and we won't have anything left this country will be hopelessly bankrupt

So there going to have to very carefully by stages open this economy up man I don't envy them right now especially having to do it without widespread testing

 

[Danzilla31]

Just saw this article on testing/projections https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Santa-Clara-antibody-test-coronavirus-results-case-15208216.php

That will be interesting to see if it gets peer reviewed and drastically changes the game if that is indeed what they find in other areas of the country indeed

It changes a lot and opens up a lot of doors on what they can do on a state and federal level a lot more options thanks Lovin for this good stuff

It's the one thing that has been really bugging me about this whole thing

Without random testing of the general population you can't get the right numbers for the data you need on just how dangerous it is which totally screws you up on making decisions cause your making them in the dark

But I can't blame the government and states for being cautious without that data what if it was much worse they have to kind off project for the worst just in case

But if this is true or holds up when its reviewed its a big deal appreciate the heads up

 

[lovinthehd]

That will be interesting to see if it gets peer reviewed and drastically changes the game if that is indeed what they find in other areas of the country indeed

It changes a lot and opens up a lot of doors on what they can do on a state and federal level a lot more options thanks Lovin for this good stuff

It's the one thing that has been really bugging me about this whole thing

Without random testing of the general population you can't get the right numbers for the data you need on just how dangerous it is which totally screws you up on making decisions cause your making them in the dark

But I can't blame the government and states for being cautious without that data what if it was much worse they have to kind off project for the worst just in case

But if this is true or holds up when its reviewed its a big deal appreciate the heads up

It's relatively anecdotal at this point but we'll see. Sure be nice if we concentrated our energies on this subject rather than a lot of the political nonsense going on....

 

[Pogre]

You seem to be changing the subject.

How is someone who breaks a law a "law-abiding" citizen? What does "policing law-abiding citizens" look like?


So. You are asserting that arresting someone standing over a dead body with a bloody knife is an example of "policing law-abiding citizens" that the FBI should not be doing?


Millions?

I really hope you aren't asserting that the US has lost millions of men (way to exclude women there) to "freedom". Cite please.


So the person that wants to go out and infect and kill thousands or millions of Americans with their contagious disease because they don't want some discomfort or to feel like they are being bossed around? That's the unselfish person?

I'm not sure words mean what you think they mean.

The part that caught my attention in his response, "cannot be guilty of a [crime] if [the law] violates your civil rights", I do agree with.

On the other hand, I do think opening things back up too soon will be more disastrous than some realize. It seems callous to me, to say "screw it, let 'em die. It's gonna happen anyway". Nobody knows that. I don't have an answer, but as I've gotten older I've found that erring on the side of caution has saved me more often than caused greater problems.

 

[JerryLove]

He's not talking about people willingly just going out infected just because they are bored or childishly insisting on there freedoms

He seems to be stating examples of families who have nobody else over having a bbq with just them to try to pass the time on lockdown and getting arrested

Can you cite an example of where a family who had no one else over was arrested for having a BBQ and where that arrest was related to COVID-19 responses?

Or people getting pulled over for just driving to clear there head with no intention of stopping anywhere

If you aren't black, you may not be used to being pulled over without cause. For some elements of the community, it's par for the course.

But I digress. If you want to change the rules for stopping someone to something similar to what's required for a search warrant; feel free. But that does not address anything COVID-19 related so seems unrelated to this discussion.

The flipside of the coin in unusual circumstances here is where do you draw the line on where citizens are being law abiding or not there is a dangerous amount of latitude that can be enforced here is what I think he's trying to say

People are law-abiding when they are not breaking any laws.