Coronavirus prep
Replies
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?4 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
This was kinda my question too...you'd basically have to institute a police state and declare Marshall Law.3 -
My comment about New Zealand being an island and that making things easier was only partially tongue-in-cheek. It is true that geography offers an advantage to places like New Zealand or Taiwan or Japan that a place like the us or the EU just doesn't have.
On the issue of enforceability of certain measures, my work involves talking to a lot of First Responders all over the country. Including police. I can tell you there's a general undercurrent of not wanting to enforce these kinds of things. Even some agencies explicitly saying that they are not going to enforce X Y or Z mandate. So enforceability really is an issue when the enforcers don't want to enforce things.5 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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.
That may be true in the US, I don't know all the rules there. However in some countries outside the US there are laws on private gatherings, and the post you quoted mentions 'other countries' so perhaps this was meant.1 -
Being an Island is not helping the UK. We are expecting to go into another lock down. We were put on notice this morning for a Monday announcement by the media, by midday ish we were advised we were to have the Prime Minister address at 4-00 pm, then it was 5-00 now its sometime........................
I should have said, the address is for England and the English put on notice. Those in Northern areas, Manchester/Lancashire, Liverpool, Bradford and best part of Yorkshire and the North East have been in local lockdowns/restrictions for area specific durations in some its months.
Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales have made earlier changes and done things their own ways. Making considered announcements without undue leeks.3 -
Since many of you are planning to get together with family and friends during the holidays, I though that this health information would be helpful. Be safe!
Household spread of Covid-19 is common and quick, a new CDC study finds
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/30/health/household-spread-covid-19-wellness/index.html3 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
Very similar to activities in a club or a bar or restaurant. We've had a few prosecutions for exceeding the allowed numbers in clubs, lack of distancing in bars, and failure to enforce mask-wearing in restaurants.
No one is going to go around knocking on doors to check every house, but if there are 10 cars parked at my property, something is worth investigating.
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense.3 -
paperpudding wrote: »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.
I guess we tend to not own as many guns as some countries, mostly it's only people with big cattle properties or people in gun clubs otherwise it is pretty rare so the law isn't so worried about telling us the law and most sensible people here do listen to what we are advised. We've only had 6 deaths since this all started in my state.1 -
Zero new cases again today too. Normally that way other than when a cargo ship shows up with sick people or someone flies in from overseas but they are in very nice hotels which they have to pay for by the way for two weeks and tested then are let out to go home.
7 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
Very similar to activities in a club or a bar or restaurant. We've had a few prosecutions for exceeding the allowed numbers in clubs, lack of distancing in bars, and failure to enforce mask-wearing in restaurants.
No one is going to go around knocking on doors to check every house, but if there are 10 cars parked at my property, something is worth investigating.
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense.
More or less, yes, the concept exists.
USA/Michigan, governor tried to do pretty much that, got sued by the Legislature (controlled by opposing political party); state supreme court ruled she'd exceeded her authority; US President Twitter-scolded her for over-reaching and repeatedly criticized her at his rallies; group of a dozen or so dudes plotted to kidnap her, put her on trial and possibly execute her for treason (or leave her on a boat in the middle of Lake Michigan, depending on which conspirator's plan won out), but were found out when they tried to acquire explosives to blow up a bridge as a distraction - some of them are now out on bail after being charged.
The above is not a political opinion. It's a set of facts, fairly neutrally stated. I don't have to make stuff up.17 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
Very similar to activities in a club or a bar or restaurant. We've had a few prosecutions for exceeding the allowed numbers in clubs, lack of distancing in bars, and failure to enforce mask-wearing in restaurants.
No one is going to go around knocking on doors to check every house, but if there are 10 cars parked at my property, something is worth investigating.
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense.
More or less, yes, the concept exists.
USA/Michigan, governor tried to do pretty much that, got sued by the Legislature (controlled by opposing political party); state supreme court ruled she'd exceeded her authority; US President Twitter-scolded her for over-reaching and repeatedly criticized her at his rallies; group of a dozen or so dudes plotted to kidnap her, put her on trial and possibly execute her for treason (or leave her on a boat in the middle of Lake Michigan, depending on which conspirator's plan won out), but were found out when they tried to acquire explosives to blow up a bridge as a distraction - some of them are now out on bail after being charged.
The above is not a political opinion. It's a set of facts, fairly neutrally stated. I don't have to make stuff up.
I know how hard so many in the USA are working right now. I have friends there working to do many peoples jobs so they are stressed through the roof and it's because of the pandemic. I get why some are not coping. I wish this would all go away but I always have hope. They will sort out the vaccine soon. Totally believe it.2 -
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense. [/quote]
This is what I found on line. My impression, and based on all the discord that these actions bring on, if they apply to personal liberties, is that they are not very effective or really followed. The only one that I know that works is when a state declares a state of emergency due to acts of God or fires. Meaning that the state needs $$$ and federal help.
https://www.the-sun.com/news/535328/what-is-a-state-of-emergency-in-the-us-and-what-happens-when-one-is-declared/
The link below shows the state of emergency in all the 50 states. All declarations are still active. But if you follow the news, you will notice that people don't care and the government do not impose them.
https://www.nga.org/state-covid-19-emergency-orders/2 -
My comment about New Zealand being an island and that making things easier was only partially tongue-in-cheek. It is true that geography offers an advantage to places like New Zealand or Taiwan or Japan that a place like the us or the EU just doesn't have.
On the issue of enforceability of certain measures, my work involves talking to a lot of First Responders all over the country. Including police. I can tell you there's a general undercurrent of not wanting to enforce these kinds of things. Even some agencies explicitly saying that they are not going to enforce X Y or Z mandate. So enforceability really is an issue when the enforcers don't want to enforce things.
So what about all the landlocked or at least border sharing countries that have managed it well? Mongolia, smack bang between mainland China and Russia, is crushing it. Hell, mainland China pulled it together, too (guess there is an advantage to being a Communist country, too). Any country can shut its borders. Any country can impose strict lockdown measures. Though again, it's too damn late for that now. I know lots of people in the US, EU, UK etc have and are trying really hard and doing their bit. It's really sad that enough aren't.9 -
paperpudding wrote: »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.
I guess we tend to not own as many guns as some countries, mostly it's only people with big cattle properties or people in gun clubs otherwise it is pretty rare so the law isn't so worried about telling us the law and most sensible people here do listen to what we are advised. We've only had 6 deaths since this all started in my state.
yes exactly.
Here in Australia these things were not voluntary guidelines, they were enforcable laws.
and sure, police didnt randomly knock on a door and count if you had 11 people rather than 10 - but they certainly would of investigated obviously large gatherings.
and they can and did check people who were in mandatory self isolation were self isolating.
when the state borders were closed, my friend got an exemption to visit NSW on compassionate grounds - when he returned to SA he had to do 14 days self isolation.
Police came to his house at random times to check he was indeed there and nobody else was with him.
I think we managed all that without being a police state under marshall law.
South Australia - total deaths: 4
No community transmission for months now.
11 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
Very similar to activities in a club or a bar or restaurant. We've had a few prosecutions for exceeding the allowed numbers in clubs, lack of distancing in bars, and failure to enforce mask-wearing in restaurants.
No one is going to go around knocking on doors to check every house, but if there are 10 cars parked at my property, something is worth investigating.
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense.
More or less, yes, the concept exists.
USA/Michigan, governor tried to do pretty much that, got sued by the Legislature (controlled by opposing political party); state supreme court ruled she'd exceeded her authority; US President Twitter-scolded her for over-reaching and repeatedly criticized her at his rallies; group of a dozen or so dudes plotted to kidnap her, put her on trial and possibly execute her for treason (or leave her on a boat in the middle of Lake Michigan, depending on which conspirator's plan won out), but were found out when they tried to acquire explosives to blow up a bridge as a distraction - some of them are now out on bail after being charged.
The above is not a political opinion. It's a set of facts, fairly neutrally stated. I don't have to make stuff up.
yes thats the other thing - In Australia and New Zealand, Covid did not become a political football - the opposition did not undermine the government or their own medical advisors and people not following the laws (there were a few small protests here too, it must be said) were not backed by any political party and certainly no political leaders or oppositions undermined the Covid laws by holding in person rallies.
and like your post, above is not a political or subjective opinion - is just facts on what happened in Aus and NZ.
My subjective opinion (but not supporting any side of politics) is that above ensued much better population compliance than when doing so or not doing so is framed as a political statement.
11 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
Very similar to activities in a club or a bar or restaurant. We've had a few prosecutions for exceeding the allowed numbers in clubs, lack of distancing in bars, and failure to enforce mask-wearing in restaurants.
No one is going to go around knocking on doors to check every house, but if there are 10 cars parked at my property, something is worth investigating.
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense.
More or less, yes, the concept exists.
USA/Michigan, governor tried to do pretty much that, got sued by the Legislature (controlled by opposing political party); state supreme court ruled she'd exceeded her authority; US President Twitter-scolded her for over-reaching and repeatedly criticized her at his rallies; group of a dozen or so dudes plotted to kidnap her, put her on trial and possibly execute her for treason (or leave her on a boat in the middle of Lake Michigan, depending on which conspirator's plan won out), but were found out when they tried to acquire explosives to blow up a bridge as a distraction - some of them are now out on bail after being charged.
The above is not a political opinion. It's a set of facts, fairly neutrally stated. I don't have to make stuff up.
Yes, I understand what you mean by "not a political opinion". I'm not going to express an opinion either.0 -
paperpudding wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »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.
I guess we tend to not own as many guns as some countries, mostly it's only people with big cattle properties or people in gun clubs otherwise it is pretty rare so the law isn't so worried about telling us the law and most sensible people here do listen to what we are advised. We've only had 6 deaths since this all started in my state.
yes exactly.
Here in Australia these things were not voluntary guidelines, they were enforcable laws.
and sure, police didnt randomly knock on a door and count if you had 11 people rather than 10 - but they certainly would of investigated obviously large gatherings.
and they can and did check people who were in mandatory self isolation were self isolating.
when the state borders were closed, my friend got an exemption to visit NSW on compassionate grounds - when he returned to SA he had to do 14 days self isolation.
Police came to his house at random times to check he was indeed there and nobody else was with him.
I think we managed all that without being a police state under marshall law.
South Australia - total deaths: 4
No community transmission for months now.
My city has never had community transmission. Brisbane has though but that is far away. I'm terrified of it so check every day. Every shop has hand sanitiser as you enter and wipes for shopping trollies. I see many not using it but hell yes I will every time. No real need for masks though so it's rare to see. If we have an outbreak I'm ready though.3 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
Very similar to activities in a club or a bar or restaurant. We've had a few prosecutions for exceeding the allowed numbers in clubs, lack of distancing in bars, and failure to enforce mask-wearing in restaurants.
No one is going to go around knocking on doors to check every house, but if there are 10 cars parked at my property, something is worth investigating.
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense.
More or less, yes, the concept exists.
USA/Michigan, governor tried to do pretty much that, got sued by the Legislature (controlled by opposing political party); state supreme court ruled she'd exceeded her authority; US President Twitter-scolded her for over-reaching and repeatedly criticized her at his rallies; group of a dozen or so dudes plotted to kidnap her, put her on trial and possibly execute her for treason (or leave her on a boat in the middle of Lake Michigan, depending on which conspirator's plan won out), but were found out when they tried to acquire explosives to blow up a bridge as a distraction - some of them are now out on bail after being charged.
The above is not a political opinion. It's a set of facts, fairly neutrally stated. I don't have to make stuff up.
Yes, I understand what you mean by "not a political opinion". I'm not going to express an opinion either.
My political opinion is that things here, now, are totally f'n surreal, nuts, improbable, dysfunctional, in a huge variety of ways. I don't have to make stuff up, and anyway I don't have a sufficiently expansive imagination that I could out-do what reality is actually delivering here day to day. 🙄😬
That's still not a *partisan* political opinion, as far as I know. I have those, but we're supposed to avoid discussing them in the MFP forums. (And I avoid discussing them in real life, mostly, too, because generally Nothing Good results.)20 -
mockchoc my own town (pop 23,000) has never had community transmission either - we had total of 6 cases ,all returnees from overseas, back in April
To their credit, those 6 people (3 separate couples from unrelated overseas trips) self isolated properly, all were mild cases and recovered at home and it went no further.
I am 350 km west of Adelaide.
2 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
Very similar to activities in a club or a bar or restaurant. We've had a few prosecutions for exceeding the allowed numbers in clubs, lack of distancing in bars, and failure to enforce mask-wearing in restaurants.
No one is going to go around knocking on doors to check every house, but if there are 10 cars parked at my property, something is worth investigating.
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense.
More or less, yes, the concept exists.
USA/Michigan, governor tried to do pretty much that, got sued by the Legislature (controlled by opposing political party); state supreme court ruled she'd exceeded her authority; US President Twitter-scolded her for over-reaching and repeatedly criticized her at his rallies; group of a dozen or so dudes plotted to kidnap her, put her on trial and possibly execute her for treason (or leave her on a boat in the middle of Lake Michigan, depending on which conspirator's plan won out), but were found out when they tried to acquire explosives to blow up a bridge as a distraction - some of them are now out on bail after being charged.
The above is not a political opinion. It's a set of facts, fairly neutrally stated. I don't have to make stuff up.
Yes, I understand what you mean by "not a political opinion". I'm not going to express an opinion either.
My political opinion is that things here, now, are totally f'n surreal, nuts, improbable, dysfunctional, in a huge variety of ways. I don't have to make stuff up, and anyway I don't have a sufficiently expansive imagination that I could out-do what reality is actually delivering here day to day. 🙄😬
That's still not a *partisan* political opinion, as far as I know. I have those, but we're supposed to avoid discussing them in the MFP forums. (And I avoid discussing them in real life, mostly, too, because generally Nothing Good results.)
Wish I could express mine lol. I won't. It's obvious already anyway.3 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
Very similar to activities in a club or a bar or restaurant. We've had a few prosecutions for exceeding the allowed numbers in clubs, lack of distancing in bars, and failure to enforce mask-wearing in restaurants.
No one is going to go around knocking on doors to check every house, but if there are 10 cars parked at my property, something is worth investigating.
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense.
More or less, yes, the concept exists.
USA/Michigan, governor tried to do pretty much that, got sued by the Legislature (controlled by opposing political party); state supreme court ruled she'd exceeded her authority; US President Twitter-scolded her for over-reaching and repeatedly criticized her at his rallies; group of a dozen or so dudes plotted to kidnap her, put her on trial and possibly execute her for treason (or leave her on a boat in the middle of Lake Michigan, depending on which conspirator's plan won out), but were found out when they tried to acquire explosives to blow up a bridge as a distraction - some of them are now out on bail after being charged.
The above is not a political opinion. It's a set of facts, fairly neutrally stated. I don't have to make stuff up.
Yes, I understand what you mean by "not a political opinion". I'm not going to express an opinion either.
My political opinion is that things here, now, are totally f'n surreal, nuts, improbable, dysfunctional, in a huge variety of ways. I don't have to make stuff up, and anyway I don't have a sufficiently expansive imagination that I could out-do what reality is actually delivering here day to day. 🙄😬
That's still not a *partisan* political opinion, as far as I know. I have those, but we're supposed to avoid discussing them in the MFP forums. (And I avoid discussing them in real life, mostly, too, because generally Nothing Good results.)
Also Anne. If you need anything know I'm happy to send you a care package anytime.2 -
paperpudding wrote: »mockchoc my own town (pop 23,000) has never had community transmission either - we had total of 6 cases ,all returnees from overseas, back in April
To their credit, those 6 people (3 separate couples from unrelated overseas trips) self isolated properly, all were mild cases and recovered at home and it went no further.
I am 350 km west of Adelaide.
So happy you are doing well paperpudding. I really hope we can open the boarders up more soon. I would love to go to Tasmania for Christmas. I have a friend down there I'd like to see. Our population is close to 180,000 here. Funny thing was the first case I remember showing up here was a politician. Bah. She should have stayed where she belonged. Could have been a disaster.0 -
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense.
This is what I found on line. My impression, and based on all the discord that these actions bring on, if they apply to personal liberties, is that they are not very effective or really followed. The only one that I know that works is when a state declares a state of emergency due to acts of God or fires. Meaning that the state needs $$$ and federal help.
https://www.the-sun.com/news/535328/what-is-a-state-of-emergency-in-the-us-and-what-happens-when-one-is-declared/
The link below shows the state of emergency in all the 50 states. All declarations are still active. But if you follow the news, you will notice that people don't care and the government do not impose them.
https://www.nga.org/state-covid-19-emergency-orders/[/quote]
This comment "people don't care and the government do not impose" may explain the wide difference between 9 million in one country, and just a few thousand or hundreds in other countries on this chart https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Here, the people care, so if I or another family member breaches the protocols, it will invoke the wrath of my neighbours, my work colleagues, a child's schoolmates, anybody who feels potentially at risk of infection by my action or inaction.4 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
There are laws for private gatherings regarding the serving of alcohol to minors, regarding noise levels, regarding occupancy numbers; there are probably laws regarding various dangerous activities that aren't occurring to me and that I've never had reason to consider. Most of those laws are probably relatively rarely enforced compared to violations because they occur in private but it doesn't mean that they're not laws or that they're unconstitutional.4 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
This was kinda my question too...you'd basically have to institute a police state and declare Marshall Law.
The vast majority of all speeding and running stop signs, etc., aren't ticketed and charge because we don't live in a police state. It doesn't mean they aren't subject to enforcement or that they shouldn't be.2 -
My comment about New Zealand being an island and that making things easier was only partially tongue-in-cheek. It is true that geography offers an advantage to places like New Zealand or Taiwan or Japan that a place like the us or the EU just doesn't have.
On the issue of enforceability of certain measures, my work involves talking to a lot of First Responders all over the country. Including police. I can tell you there's a general undercurrent of not wanting to enforce these kinds of things. Even some agencies explicitly saying that they are not going to enforce X Y or Z mandate. So enforceability really is an issue when the enforcers don't want to enforce things.
Didn't seem to help Britain in this case.1 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
Very similar to activities in a club or a bar or restaurant. We've had a few prosecutions for exceeding the allowed numbers in clubs, lack of distancing in bars, and failure to enforce mask-wearing in restaurants.
No one is going to go around knocking on doors to check every house, but if there are 10 cars parked at my property, something is worth investigating.
Does the concept of a "State of Emergency" exist in American law? A provision where emergency powers can be triggered to allow for the authorities to take certain enforcement actions that wouldn't be normal if the emergency didn't exist? Many countries around the world have declared the COVID19 crisis as an emergency in that sense.
Yes, it does, and President Trump declared a state of emergency regarding COVID-19 in March. The practical implications from that tend to relate mainly to providing emergency funds to states and localities. I believe the president's authority for directing commercial enterprises to focus manufacturing on health-related needs or to direct that the products be sold to the government come from a separate statue that don't require the state of emergency declaration, or maybe a different kind of emergency declaration.0 -
SuzySunshine99 wrote: »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
Thank you for this! I work for an EAP, and I'm looking into sharing this with our employees.0 -
paperpudding wrote: »mockchoc my own town (pop 23,000) has never had community transmission either - we had total of 6 cases ,all returnees from overseas, back in April
To their credit, those 6 people (3 separate couples from unrelated overseas trips) self isolated properly, all were mild cases and recovered at home and it went no further.
I am 350 km west of Adelaide.
So happy you are doing well paperpudding. I really hope we can open the boarders up more soon. I would love to go to Tasmania for Christmas. I have a friend down there I'd like to see. Our population is close to 180,000 here. Funny thing was the first case I remember showing up here was a politician. Bah. She should have stayed where she belonged. Could have been a disaster.
Yes I personally am doing well - Covid had no financial implications for me as both my husband and my own jobs continued throughout this - neither could be stopped and neither could be done from home.
I am not sure about Tasmania - but I believe all other states are now open,except to Victoria for obvious reasons, even WA which opened sooner than anticipated
0 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »
How do you think that? Scofflaw?Theoldguy1 wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Gotta love California. Our new guideline to get us through the holidays. Ha
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.
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'm in the US, curious how this enforced? I mean curfew I can understand if someone is out past the curfew time the police can stop. How are activities in private homes monitored?
Very similar to activities in a club or a bar or restaurant. We've had a few prosecutions for exceeding the allowed numbers in clubs, lack of distancing in bars, and failure to enforce mask-wearing in restaurants.
No one is going to go around knocking on doors to check every house, but if there are 10 cars parked at my property, something is worth investigating.
But that's typically not the case. One can go into bars and restaurants and see what they are doing. One typically has no sign of law-breaking at private homes even where there are strict rules like those in CA. For example, here (which is likely one of the more compliant areas of the US overall), there were at one point some huge house parties, advertised online and otherwise, and those got shut down. These are huge and easy to detect if people are watching for them. (Worth noting -- and as Ann said, this is just the facts, not a political opinion -- that when that happened it was reported on Fox as if the mayor was crazily trying to shut down people having a few guests over, ignoring what "house party" meant in these cases.)
But if someone has several people over for a holiday party, there's going to be no obvious sign unless a neighbor is spying on your and calls the cops. This is especially true if (as normal this time of year, given the weather), the gathering is inside. Where I live, people don't have driveways and you can't pull up in front of the house, so there's no "10 car in front of the house" giveaway. I had a 20 person holiday party in December of last year (obv don't plan to this year), and no one would have known as we weren't noisy. I have one guest spot, everyone else took public transit or car pooled. So rules about the size of holiday gatherings -- although I support them -- seem to me basically unenforceable.3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions