Myfitnesspal

Message Boards General Health, Fitness and Diet
You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Coronavirus prep

1414415417419420607

Replies

  • SuzySunshine99SuzySunshine99 Member Posts: 2,285 Member Member Posts: 2,285 Member
    This is from Baylor College of Medicine regarding creating a holiday "bubble" for your family. This wouldn't all be possible for a lot of people, but still, some good ideas in there:

    https://www.bcm.edu/coronavirus/for-the-baylor-community/from-dr-james-mcdeavitt/build-your-own-holiday-bubble
  • lynn_glenmontlynn_glenmont Member Posts: 8,760 Member Member Posts: 8,760 Member
    TonyB0588 wrote: »
    Question about COVID risk assessment...

    I have an opportunity to be an Election Judge on Tuesday. Indoors all day, and I would be wearing a mask, but masks can't be mandated for voters, and there can't be health checks/temperature screenings. Social distancing would be encouraged, but I imagine if you're helping someone with a voting machine, there's only so much you can do to stay 6 feet apart.

    I live in an area where mask-wearing is very common and expected everywhere, so I doubt there would be many (if any) un-masked people there to vote. I am not in a high-risk group, but I have family members (not in my household) who are. I guess I'm most worried about the length of time in an indoor space with potentially thousands of different people. Our COVID positivity rates have been spiking in the last few weeks.

    It's a dilemma for me, because I want very much to do what I can to help people vote. But, I'm also very nervous about the risks.

    I'll obviously have to make my own best decision on this, but just curious as to what you all would do.

    You said, "....... but masks can't be mandated for voters, and there can't be health checks/temperature screenings." Why not?? There's no public place I can enter now without a mask, and most of those places will also do temperature checks and hand sanitizer at the entrance.

    Because there is great legal peril in denying an elegible voter the right to vote for any reason. If a polling place refused entry to someone because they refused to wear a mask, there would be messy legal action taken. It's a voter suppression issue.

    All that polling places can do is highly encourage the wearing of masks, and as I said, I live in an area where mask-wearing is pretty universal. In fact, I think that most people would assume that they are mandatory while voting.

    Depends on where you live. There are kinds of rules and laws that create legitimate reasons for denying someone admission to a polling place, e.g., bringing in a stack of campaign literature and trying to hand it out. Many states deny you the right to vote if you have neglected to vote in X years. The legal peril lies in discriminating in voting procedures on the basis of race, color, previous condition of servitude, sex, or age (so long as the would-be voter is at least 18), or in imposing a poll tax.

    But it's a litigious country, and people will sue over anything:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/mask-voting-lawsuit-maryland/2020/10/28/653061c4-1934-11eb-82db-60b15c874105_story.html

    (behind a paywall if you're not a subscriber, I think; sorry -- basically, a father and adult son entered a polling place without masks, were told they either had to put on masks or leave, but that they could vote outside; father refused to leave; police were called and arrested him for trespassing, later adding a charge for violating governor's order to wear masks indoors in public places; he is now suing)
  • SModa61SModa61 Member Posts: 1,703 Member Member Posts: 1,703 Member
    TonyB0588 wrote: »
    Question about COVID risk assessment...

    I have an opportunity to be an Election Judge on Tuesday. Indoors all day, and I would be wearing a mask, but masks can't be mandated for voters, and there can't be health checks/temperature screenings. Social distancing would be encouraged, but I imagine if you're helping someone with a voting machine, there's only so much you can do to stay 6 feet apart.

    I live in an area where mask-wearing is very common and expected everywhere, so I doubt there would be many (if any) un-masked people there to vote. I am not in a high-risk group, but I have family members (not in my household) who are. I guess I'm most worried about the length of time in an indoor space with potentially thousands of different people. Our COVID positivity rates have been spiking in the last few weeks.

    It's a dilemma for me, because I want very much to do what I can to help people vote. But, I'm also very nervous about the risks.

    I'll obviously have to make my own best decision on this, but just curious as to what you all would do.

    You said, "....... but masks can't be mandated for voters, and there can't be health checks/temperature screenings." Why not?? There's no public place I can enter now without a mask, and most of those places will also do temperature checks and hand sanitizer at the entrance.

    Because there is great legal peril in denying an elegible voter the right to vote for any reason. If a polling place refused entry to someone because they refused to wear a mask, there would be messy legal action taken. It's a voter suppression issue.

    All that polling places can do is highly encourage the wearing of masks, and as I said, I live in an area where mask-wearing is pretty universal. In fact, I think that most people would assume that they are mandatory while voting.

    I heard a semi-funny story from early voting. The town/city/county did require masks and someone showed up wearing a mask promoting a particular candidate. Person comes in and the location is in a quandary. Forse the person to take off the political mask, or allow them to keep it on for the mask mandate. I do not recall how it got resolved. The other similar story was the woman wearing a political t-shirt who then voted topless after being required to take it off. It's a crazy world!
    edited October 2020
  • cwolfman13cwolfman13 Member Posts: 39,279 Member Member Posts: 39,279 Member
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha

    88ogbro67wco.png

    Sorry had to Google since I thought it was internet BS.

    So what is done if someone waves a middle finger at one or all of the guidelines?

    Nothing. It's not enforceable. They're just hoping that people will see the guidelines and be more thoughtful and cautious this season. Maybe try to adhere somewhat to it. Better than putting out no guidance at all and people just think it's business as usual.
    How do you think that? Scofflaw?

    Not enforceable law...there is no legislation and no statute. There is nothing for law enforcement to remotely hang their hat on by trying to enforce any of those things. They are guidelines and the best that can be hoped for is voluntary compliance. The government can't regulate whether or not you have family or friends over to your personal property in any number outside of noise ordinances and such...but even then, law enforcement would be walking a very fine line.

    I've talked to some law enforcement as we have county sheriffs doing security at my office...they can't do anything...it's none of their business whether someone has granny and auntie and their cousins over to their own personal property for a BBQ...they don't have a legal leg to stand on trying to do that.
  • lemurcat2lemurcat2 Member Posts: 7,299 Member Member Posts: 7,299 Member
    Piece on Illinois' mask mandate and voting (basically what SuzySunshine said).

    https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2020/8/5/21356321/masks-voters-election-day-coronavirus-covid-illinois-chicago
    edited October 2020
  • AnnPT77AnnPT77 Member, Premium Posts: 20,293 Member Member, Premium Posts: 20,293 Member
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    I definitely prefer them when it's cold to when it's hot. Was just thinking that yesterday.

    The extra glasses-fog in the cold is very real, though.

    We are required to wear masks inside the (rowing) boathouse, or when other people are close by outside. In practice, we usually wear them while carrying boats/oars down to the dock, and take them off once settled in the boat. (Even in a multi-person boat, we're several feet apart - possibly not 6', but several, and it's high air flow. My smart medical fellow-rowers think it's not very high risk. 🤷‍♀️)

    But the point is: I've found that not only do I fog up terribly on these cold mornings, but so much so that there are big water droplets on the inside of my glasses lenses that won't evaporate in any reasonable timespan. I need to take the glasses off and wipe them, before I can see well enough to row (I steer). That's new, with the masks.
  • L1zardQueenL1zardQueen Member Posts: 8,718 Member Member Posts: 8,718 Member
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha

    88ogbro67wco.png

    Sorry had to Google since I thought it was internet BS.

    So what is done if someone waves a middle finger at one or all of the guidelines?

    Nothing. It's not enforceable. They're just hoping that people will see the guidelines and be more thoughtful and cautious this season. Maybe try to adhere somewhat to it. Better than putting out no guidance at all and people just think it's business as usual.
    How do you think that? Scofflaw?

    Not enforceable law...there is no legislation and no statute. There is nothing for law enforcement to remotely hang their hat on by trying to enforce any of those things. They are guidelines and the best that can be hoped for is voluntary compliance. The government can't regulate whether or not you have family or friends over to your personal property in any number outside of noise ordinances and such...but even then, law enforcement would be walking a very fine line.

    I've talked to some law enforcement as we have county sheriffs doing security at my office...they can't do anything...it's none of their business whether someone has granny and auntie and their cousins over to their own personal property for a BBQ...they don't have a legal leg to stand on trying to do that.

    Agreed. It’s hard to get truthful information.
  • TonyB0588TonyB0588 Member Posts: 9,521 Member Member Posts: 9,521 Member
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha

    88ogbro67wco.png

    Sorry had to Google since I thought it was internet BS.

    So what is done if someone waves a middle finger at one or all of the guidelines?

    Nothing. It's not enforceable. They're just hoping that people will see the guidelines and be more thoughtful and cautious this season. Maybe try to adhere somewhat to it. Better than putting out no guidance at all and people just think it's business as usual.
    How do you think that? Scofflaw?

    Not enforceable law...there is no legislation and no statute. There is nothing for law enforcement to remotely hang their hat on by trying to enforce any of those things. They are guidelines and the best that can be hoped for is voluntary compliance. The government can't regulate whether or not you have family or friends over to your personal property in any number outside of noise ordinances and such...but even then, law enforcement would be walking a very fine line.

    I've talked to some law enforcement as we have county sheriffs doing security at my office...they can't do anything...it's none of their business whether someone has granny and auntie and their cousins over to their own personal property for a BBQ...they don't have a legal leg to stand on trying to do that.

    Different countries, different laws I guess. During the initial reopening after the lockdown earlier this year, we were told we couldn't have more than 3 persons come to the house who were not part of the same household. So it was okay to be a husband and wife with 8 children living there, which makes 10, but us as a family of 3 could only have a maximum of 3 visitors to our house which makes 6, although 6 is less than the big family of 10. And it was enforceable, just as the curfew before it was enforced.
  • paperpuddingpaperpudding Member Posts: 6,713 Member Member Posts: 6,713 Member
    Yes, agreed Tony.

    When we were in lockdown, measures like numbers at home for gatherings were indeed enforceable.

    None of this 'Only guidelines and we hope for voluntary co operation' stuff.
  • cwolfman13cwolfman13 Member Posts: 39,279 Member Member Posts: 39,279 Member
    TonyB0588 wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha

    88ogbro67wco.png

    Sorry had to Google since I thought it was internet BS.

    So what is done if someone waves a middle finger at one or all of the guidelines?

    Nothing. It's not enforceable. They're just hoping that people will see the guidelines and be more thoughtful and cautious this season. Maybe try to adhere somewhat to it. Better than putting out no guidance at all and people just think it's business as usual.
    How do you think that? Scofflaw?

    Not enforceable law...there is no legislation and no statute. There is nothing for law enforcement to remotely hang their hat on by trying to enforce any of those things. They are guidelines and the best that can be hoped for is voluntary compliance. The government can't regulate whether or not you have family or friends over to your personal property in any number outside of noise ordinances and such...but even then, law enforcement would be walking a very fine line.

    I've talked to some law enforcement as we have county sheriffs doing security at my office...they can't do anything...it's none of their business whether someone has granny and auntie and their cousins over to their own personal property for a BBQ...they don't have a legal leg to stand on trying to do that.

    Different countries, different laws I guess. During the initial reopening after the lockdown earlier this year, we were told we couldn't have more than 3 persons come to the house who were not part of the same household. So it was okay to be a husband and wife with 8 children living there, which makes 10, but us as a family of 3 could only have a maximum of 3 visitors to our house which makes 6, although 6 is less than the big family of 10. And it was enforceable, just as the curfew before it was enforced.

    I don't know of anywhere in the US where these things are actual laws...as in ordinances on the books. It wouldn't fly and would be a violation of the constitution and the bill of rights. Curfews and such are enforceable as are gatherings in public, etc...but not on your own personal, private property. Don't have enough police anyway to be going around checking houses to make sure no more than X number of people were there...and if they did, all hell would break loose.
Sign In or Register to comment.