We just witnessed the Biggest Drop in History

SanMiguel said:
Have you looked at the curve of the spread?
I get your point but this is not just another flu.
I mean if you're going to go that far then why bother with any vaccines at all. Let's just get measles and be fine with it
More...

it IS just another flu, or flu+, or flu on steroids...

but again, 3300 a day die from traffic accidents another 10000 get severly injured.... why are people still driving around.

PEOPLE ARE FCKING MORONS.
 
what are we talking about here, today 18 people fcking dead in the US.

big deal... you have more jackpot winners than that... or people hit by lightenings.

PEOPLE ARE MORONS.
 
gaussian said:
Yes carry on like normal. That worked for measles, smallpox, the spanish flu, SARS, and thousands of other highly infectious disease.

Those people with typhoid felt relaxed when the guy told them "relax the civil war killed more people!" Or those people who died in coal mines - "no big deal, lots more people died in WW1!" Imagine the clarity of mind the people suffering from black lung must've suddenly felt. How about the people who watched their loved ones literally melt into a puddle of blood because of Ebola Zaire? How relaxed they must've been knowing dengue was certainly more deadly by the numbers.

Do you understand how stupid this line of reasoning is. It doesn't even follow logic. It's affirming the disjunct. Let's walk through it:

Car crashes are bad, or coronavirus is bad. Therefore coronavirus is not bad.

Does this make any logical sense?? You're defining coronavirus as not bad because you can point to something that is bad, so therefore the other thing can't be as bad. Your justification is defeatist - "everyone dies". The kind of people that say these things are always the first to cower to mommy when it comes to get them.
More...
Thanks for joining me in pointing out the rank stupidity of the "but, but...flu..." line of thinking.

gaussian said:
https://law.stackexchange.com/quest...litary-be-used-as-a-police-force-domestically

It's not unconstitutional it's just "against the rules". Since it's not unconstitutional in a dire emergency it wouldn't be beyond the powers of the government to undo the posse comitatus act. Not likely, but to be totally correct posse comitatus is just a rule.

Congress would have to authorize it. But we have the national guard so that is very unlikely.
More...
Certainly it could be changed, I was just pointing out that it definitely didn't happen in Boston in 2013.

That said, I can tell you from sitting through a bunch of training where posse comitatus was brought up in very serious and reverent tones that there's little appetite in the military for a repeal and pretty much no training in the military for police duties outside the tiny military police force which as best I could tell was only good for catching people going 11 mph in a 10 mph zone on base. Plus the vast majority of the force would refuse to use deadly force on another American for something like enforcing a curfew and they don't have the equipment or training to do much in the way of non-deadly force.

National Guard is a unique animal. If they're called up by the federal government it's under Title 10 and they follow all the active duty rules, including posse comitatus. If they're called up by the governor of their state under Title 32 then PC doesn't generally apply to them. So bottom line is that under current law Trump couldn't call up the National Guard to enforce a curfew but a state governor could call up their state's National Guard to do so.

Let's just hope this remains an academic discussion!
 
Sig said:
That said, I can tell you from sitting through a bunch of training where posse comitatus was brought up in very serious and reverent tones that there's little appetite in the military for a repeal and pretty much no training in the military for police duties outside the tiny military police force which as best I could tell was only good for catching people going 11 mph in a 10 mph zone on base. Plus the vast majority of the force would refuse to use deadly force on another American for something like enforcing a curfew and they don't have the equipment or training to do much in the way of non-deadly force.
More...

Yeah, if I recall correctly MPs aren't actually deputized in their region and are solely responsible for enforcing the military code. Obviously if you stumble onto a military base the MPs will be happy to show you the exit, but they don't leave the base to enforce laws.

You're correct on the national guard. The boston bombing showed the militarized police who are using decommissioned military equipment as a force multiplier. They look strikingly like the military so it's understandable how a civilian could mistake them. However, I'd imagine in a martial law lockdown scenario it would be the state national guard augmenting the local police force, but that would be authorized by the state and not the president or congress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sig
gaussian said:
Yeah, if I recall correctly MPs aren't actually deputized in their region and are solely responsible for enforcing the military code. Obviously if you stumble onto a military base the MPs will be happy to show you the exit, but they don't leave the base to enforce laws.

You're correct on the national guard. The boston bombing showed the militarized police who are using decommissioned military equipment as a force multiplier. They look strikingly like the military so it's understandable how a civilian could mistake them. However, I'd imagine in a martial law lockdown scenario it would be the state national guard augmenting the local police force, but that would be authorized by the state and not the president or congress.
More...

They were using military grade equipment without the proper training.
 
ElCubano said:
They were using military grade equipment without the proper training.
More...
Giving military equipment to local PDs and even the FBI is a whole other discussion. They went crazy with it after 9/11 which was a mistake IMHO. There's a lot that goes into training and controls in the use of that equipment in the military which may or in most cases may not be there when the local PDs get ahold of them.
 
Amun Ra said:
Everybody dies eventually and just because there is a new flu going on doesn't mean the world has to stop.

Let me ask you. 1.25 million die in car crashes each year. Aren't you afraid for your family members to be on the road? Is it acceptable to let them die off, or should we stop driving cars?

I can literally do this example with anything that kills people every year. Eating junk food, swimming, drinking beer, ect.

If you personally want to be safe, then I say you should be free to box yourself in away from the world. Let the rest of us "take our chances" driving cars, swimming in the ocean, drinking soft drinks....and yeah, eating at crowded restaurants.
More...

+1.
Food for countering the Coronasteria:
Interview with a German virologist -highly credentialed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top