COVID-19

[I-90 W]

17 minutes ago, LTS said:

What is the purpose of closing the bar?  Of limiting seating?  Do these measures have as appreciable an impact as wearing a mask?  Not even remotely. They impose limitations that further degrade the quality of life.  I am using those two examples because they are the latest rules to be implemented.  Let's not act like they are the only stupid rules that have been put in place by governments all over that have no real impact on "safety".

We want people to wear masks. So, make them wear masks.

So we close the bars at midnight... because the virus is only effective after midnight. What purpose does it serve?  It allows bars to remain open so at least there can be some income earned?  Servers can still work?  Sure.  They can if the bars are open until 2am or 4am.  NYS got rid of happy hours, specialty drink pricing, etc.  It did this because it encouraged people to binge drink, which was dangerous.  So, now NYS thinks that reducing the hours will somehow reduce the alcohol consumption.  Whereas before when someone got out of work at 11pm they might have until 2am to enjoy alcohol they now have an hour... do we not think they will cram in the drinking?

You need to ask yourself.  What is the POINT of the rules?  What is the government attempting to accomplish?  Arguments are that the mask wearing and hygiene are highly effective in limiting the transmission of the virus and yet no rules are actually put in place to force that to happen. Instead, rules are put in place so those who DO ABIDE by the mask wearing and hygiene are forced back into their homes. Rules are put in place to limit the freedoms of those who are responsible because of those who are not.

Those who do not want to wear masks will still NOT be wearing masks while hanging out at a house party at 3am drinking their face off.  

Sorry for not fully clarifying my statement.  I was using that in context of large gatherings where groups of people are not wearing masks (especially the Sturgis Rally).  I realize the purpose of them.  I appreciate you pointing out that I did not explain things well in my response late last night and doing so with civility.

You should have stuck with your first instinct of not saying anything. But clearly you needed to get it out there.

It's long fall from that mountain of superiority you put yourself on. You keep using your jump to conclusions mat and you'll eventually jump right off the end and fall off the cliff.  I'll save my LOL for that moment. Glad you were entertained though.

Take a look above at how it could have been handled... 

You say that you are okay with the government imposing $50,000 dollar fines on people for not wearing masks and then in the same breath whine about bars being shut down at midnight, the inconsistency is mind boggling. But that’s the thing about cheering on heavy handed executive orders; only a matter of time til it inconveniences YOU.

Yes it is amusing that your line in the sand is an early last call. 

Edited November 10, 2020 by I-90 W

[SwampD]

Nothing degrades quality of life like death.

Closing bars early limits exposure. Have you ever seen people in a bar from 12 to 2? It looks much different than from 10 to 12.

And yes, the eating thing was stupid.

[That Aud Smell]

18 minutes ago, LTS said:

Sorry for not fully clarifying my statement.  I was using that in context of large gatherings where groups of people are not wearing masks (especially the Sturgis Rally).  I realize the purpose of them.  I appreciate you pointing out that I did not explain things well in my response late last night and doing so with civility.

No need to apologize, and shame on me if and when I fail to be civil.

The matter of essentially regulating the hospitality industry  out of existence is one that vexes me greatly. I see both (all?) sides of that issue. I think the answer has to include a large government stimulus for restaurants, bars.

[Eleven]

54 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

So big government imposing a $50,000 fine on working people is cool but closing bars is a step too far? 

I'd rather have one idiot who refuses to wear a mask be punished by being fined $50K than have the entire society suffer by having another shutdown---and it's not just bars and restaurants, either.

[North Buffalo]

N95s if worn properly protect you, surgical masks reduce some exposure but not fully.  Rural spreading events in bars happening because drunks getting in peoples face slurry words and sloppy convos happen and worse without masks. Later and more people more likely the exposure.  

[I-90 W]

4 minutes ago, Eleven said:

I'd rather have one idiot who refuses to wear a mask be punished by being fined $50K than have the entire society suffer by having another shutdown---and it's not just bars and restaurants, either.

But what if someone simply forgets to put one on by accident? I have gotten out of my car, walked up to the front entrance of a store, and then quickly realized I forgot.

What if on my return back to the vehicle to retrieve my mask a LEO sees me; I shouldn’t be financially crushed and my family suffer immensely for that. This is what I take issue with. We either care about our fellow man or we do not.

And before anyone objects that my scenario is an exuberant one; not wearing a mask would be a strict liability offense. “I forgot” would not remove oneself of culpability unless specifically written in the language of the law or executive order.  

[SwampD]

3 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

But what if someone simply forgets to put one on by accident? I have gotten out of my car, walked up to the front entrance of a store, and then quickly realized I forgot.

What if on my return back to the vehicle to retrieve my mask a LEO sees me; I shouldn’t be financially crushed and my family suffer immensely for that. This is what I take issue with. We either care about our fellow man or we do not.

And before anyone objects that my scenario is an exuberant one; not wearing a mask would be a strict liability offense. “I forgot” would not remove oneself of culpability unless specifically written in the language of the law or executive order.  

With a 50k fine looming, you most likely would not have forgotten your mask in the first place.😀

[Wyldnwoody44]

4 minutes ago, North Buffalo said:

N95s if worn properly protect you, surgical masks reduce some exposure but not fully.  Rural spreading events in bars happening because drunks getting in peoples face slurry words and sloppy convos happen and worse without masks. Later and more people more likely the exposure.  

Again, the virus is 30 microns in diameter, an N95 has 95 microns of space between weaves. 3 viruses could hold hands and walk right through that mask. This whole N95 thing is blown out of proportion, it's better than what else is out there, but still not as secure as the prevailing thought. On top of that, I'm seeing cheaply made KN95 masks from China everywhere, and just by looking at them, you can tell its false advertising. Many of the nurses at the hospital that have Covid currently, wore an N95 all day every day. 

[SwampD]

6 minutes ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

Again, the virus is 30 microns in diameter, an N95 has 95 microns of space between weaves. 3 viruses could hold hands and walk right through that mask. This whole N95 thing is blown out of proportion, it's better than what else is out there, but still not as secure as the prevailing thought. On top of that, I'm seeing cheaply made KN95 masks from China everywhere, and just by looking at them, you can tell its false advertising. Many of the nurses at the hospital that have Covid currently, wore an N95 all day every day. 

How many microns is the water droplet that the virus is floating in?

Honeywell says the 95 stands for being 95% effective and that they protect you from .3 microns or more? Seems like they would work then, no?

https://www.honeywell.com/en-us/newsroom/news/2020/03/n95-masks-explained

Edited November 10, 2020 by SwampD

[Eleven]

10 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

But what if someone simply forgets to put one on by accident? I have gotten out of my car, walked up to the front entrance of a store, and then quickly realized I forgot.

What if on my return back to the vehicle to retrieve my mask a LEO sees me; I shouldn’t be financially crushed and my family suffer immensely for that. This is what I take issue with. We either care about our fellow man or we do not.

And before anyone objects that my scenario is an exuberant one; not wearing a mask would be a strict liability offense. “I forgot” would not remove oneself of culpability unless specifically written in the language of the law or executive order.  

That's not the road you were headed down with the comment I responded to, and I think we both know that.  The discussion is about a preference for punishing the individual over having the whole society suffer; it isn't about who makes a mistake.

 

Edited November 10, 2020 by Eleven

[I-90 W]

9 minutes ago, Eleven said:

That's not the road you were headed down with the comment I responded to, and I think we both know that.  The discussion is about a preference for punishing the individual over having the whole society suffer; it isn't about who makes a mistake.

 

I’m approaching this from a pragmatic standpoint. The whole point that I’ve been trying to make is that it is ridiculous for someone to be okay with, and/or advocate for a $50,000 fine for not wearing a mask.

You want to make it a NYS violation? Fine, have the legislature do it through the legislative process. That would most likely be in the $300 range. 
 

Being okay with destroying someone over not wearing a mask is disgusting. FWIW, I am not anti mask either. 

Edited November 10, 2020 by I-90 W

[Stoner]

10 minutes ago, SwampD said:

How many microns is the water droplet that the virus is floating in?

Honeywell says the 95 stands for being 95% effective and that they protect you from .3 microns or more? Seems like they would work then, no?

https://www.honeywell.com/en-us/newsroom/news/2020/03/n95-masks-explained

Why are you bothering? Good job though.

[Stoner]

2 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

Masks are intended to protect other people, not oneself. I need everyone else to wear a mask if I want the protection that simple masks can afford.

This is the crux of it. People are innately selfish. It's the survival instinct. What's in it for me?

[Eleven]

3 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

I’m approaching this from a pragmatic standpoint. The whole point that I’ve been trying to make is that it is ridiculous for someone to be okay with, and/or advocate for a $50,000 fine for not wearing a mask.

You want to make it a NYS violation? Fine, have the legislature do it through the legislative process. That would most likely be in the $300 range. 
 

Being okay with destroying someone over not wearing a mask is disgusting. FWIW, I am not anti mask either. 

Frankly, I'd like to see the Legislature make it a misdemeanor for the willful refusal to wear a mask.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Eleven

[I-90 W]

5 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Frankly, I'd like to see the Legislature make it a misdemeanor.

Personally I think that’s too far, but okay. What type of culpability level do you think it should meet?

Strict liability (recklessness like a DWI) or intent (like perjury)?

Most crimes require both mens  rea and actus reus. Which brings me to my pragmatic post above; what if someone does it unintentionally?

Edited November 10, 2020 by I-90 W

[That Aud Smell]

5 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Frankly, I'd like to see the Legislature make it a misdemeanor for the willful refusal to wear a mask.

That gets tricky to police. How about citations for violations? No mens rea required. $35 for the first one, $70 for the next, $200 for a third, and so on.

2 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

Personally I think that’s too far, but okay. What type of culpability level do you think it should meet?

I'm lightly chuckling because you edited out the part where he offered a level of culpability in his post.

Anyway, I think the better course would be criminal violations, like speeding. It doesn't matter if your speedometer is broken, etc.

[I-90 W]

1 minute ago, That Aud Smell said:

That gets tricky to police. How about citations for violations? No mens rea required. $35 for the first one, $70 for the next, $200 for a third, and so on.

This is more level headed and reasonable in my opinion. I would support something like this. 

[That Aud Smell]

Just now, I-90 W said:

This is more level headed and reasonable in my opinion. I would support something like this. 

I tend to doubt, though, whether local justice courts and city courts would be able to handle the volume of cases coming before them.

[I-90 W]

2 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

That gets tricky to police. How about citations for violations? No mens rea required. $35 for the first one, $70 for the next, $200 for a third, and so on.

I'm lightly chuckling because you edited out the part where he offered a level of culpability in his post.

Anyway, I think the better course would be criminal violations, like speeding. It doesn't matter if your speedometer is broken, etc.

No I quoted him before he edited his post. I would never knowingly misrepresent someone’s position. 

[Curt]

9 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Frankly, I'd like to see the Legislature make it a misdemeanor for the willful refusal to wear a mask.

Willful refusal?  Yes

oops I forgot, let me go get it?  No

[Eleven]

5 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

That gets tricky to police. How about citations for violations? No mens rea required. $35 for the first one, $70 for the next, $200 for a third, and so on.

It's really not.  Start with the violation.  Then, when you find out that the person in question is organizing anti-mask rallies, thereby indicating that it was willful and not a mistake, it's pretty easy to charge them with the misdemeanor and let the judge sort it out.  Or when the person starts arguing about my right not to wear a mask, etc.

1 minute ago, I-90 W said:

No I quoted him before he edited his post. I would never knowingly misrepresent someone’s position. 

That's how I saw it.  My edit was just a hair too late.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Eleven

[Eleven]

3 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

I tend to doubt, though, whether local justice courts and city courts would be able to handle the volume of cases coming before them.

They'll be fine.

[I-90 W]

FWIW my wife and father in law are both immunocompromised and people who refuse to wear masks are are the worst IMO.

[That Aud Smell]

5 minutes ago, I-90 W said:

No I quoted him before he edited his post. I would never knowingly misrepresent someone’s position. 

Lol - all good, man. It just struck me as funny. I had not realized there was an edit.

2 minutes ago, Eleven said:

They'll be fine.

Hmm. I dunno. My thought is that the OCA could establish special parts in each judicial district. Mini-courts that do nothing but mask violations. Or maybe it could be accomplished through some sort of administrative agency?

[Eleven]

4 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Lol - all good, man. It just struck me as funny. I had not realized there was an edit.

Hmm. I dunno. My thought is that the OCA could establish special parts in each judicial district. Mini-courts that do nothing but mask violations. Or maybe it could be accomplished through some sort of administrative agency?

Just have one session (morning or afternoon) per week devoted to it, like they do for L/T.  Maybe they don't do that anymore?  It's been a long time since I was in a town court.  But the idea of Mask Court is fun, too.  Picture Doug Llewellyn standing outside...

Edited November 10, 2020 by Eleven