5 ms·

I don't see why this would be a problem. Just arrest anyone you find violating the orders. If I walked down to the local beach I would be arrested. I don't see

I don't see why this would be a problem. Just arrest anyone you find violating the orders. If I walked down to the local beach I would be arrested. I don't see why you would treat luxury goods retailers differently.

thephyber 6y ago
Arrests just concentrate people in jails and cost the city/county money. Instead, cite them for the $1000 violation. Frequently.
creddit 6y ago
You would not be arrested. At most you would be cited. It’s also on public lands where there is existing precedent for fining for something along the lines of trespassing. This is instead on private property and probably protected under free assembly.
- jedberg 6y ago
  > and probably protected under free assembly. The free assembly clause is specifically to allow you to assemble in protest against your government. It would be a bit of a stretch to call going to work a protest against your government.
  - creddit 6y ago
    It’s been interpreted much more broadly than that to expand to freedom of association which has been applied to labor rights for many decades. In this case, if it were to go toward the interpretation as protest, it might actually not be that unreasonable. Musk in many ways views it as protest afaict. All this said, IANAL.
  - tick_tock_tick 6y ago
    When the government is forbidding it I don't see how that could be anything but a protest.
geofft 6y ago
Arresting the factory workers (who quite legitimately want to be paid, and will have a tougher time getting unemployment if they refuse to work) seems to not really be the just answer here - it's not their decision.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
thoraway1010 6y ago
Beaches are not closed where I am, and there is almost no risk at the beach. I'm much more worried about the 80 people in my complex and the shared laundry, elevators, stairs, door handles etc. Does logic / science no longer apply in public health?
- 2019-nCoV 6y ago
  Beaches are not essential. Your shared laundry, elevators, stairs and door handles, are. This is the reasoning behind leaving grocery stores open (people have to eat) while the remainder of the economy stays closed. So yes, logic does apply.
  - thoraway1010 6y ago
    What a pathetic govt then. I've taken almost every precaution (I was way ahead and have masks, hand sanitizer, touchless soap, open doors with disposable tissue and more) but you cannot keep small children under 3 cooped up all day - it's disgusting. Seriously - I have always been a law and order person - but seeing acres and acres wide open space, that is totally uncrowded at all times (even weekends before covid) now off limits because of some bogus risk evaluation is ridiculous. And no - I do not go grocery shopping AT ALL in two months. I ordered online very early, leave the food outside for 3 days after delivery, wash packages etc. The govt has absolutely lost its mind with this horrendous logic. The reality - we have to believe there is some basis in the closure of things (clearly clubs / bars / social gatherings make sense) or people are going to stop putting up with 100% stupidity. Shutting down huge outdoor spaces within walking distances of folks houses is the dumbest thing I've heard. Now we are all crowded on sidewalks. And no - I cannot go and get tested even if I'm willing to pay because I can't certify I have the severity level of systems needed and a doctors order, and oh, the FDA and CDC blocked everyone from doing tests for a long time. Let me give govt some suggestions. Allow people to pay, out of pocket, with no doctors order for testing if they want to. Do free testing for folks who have a doctors order and meet your severe symptoms criteria. Where is the contact tracing? Focus the lockdown on high risk activities - not shutting down beaches. You are seriously going to lose the trust of folks with this stupidity.
- 6y ago
tim58 6y ago
1. There's too many people violating local orders across the United States to arrest them all. 2. Putting them in jail is actually worse for their health than almost any other activity. 3. IANAL but I doubt many of the local orders would hold up in a higher court.
brendanmcd 6y ago
It's an important question whether we want to live in a world where government has power to close access to beaches, and everything else.
- CydeWeys 6y ago
  Given that a government is a monopoly on the legal use of force, governments (all of them) tautologically have this power. Whether they would choose to use it in any given situation is a different matter.
- khrbrt 6y ago
  An any other forum I'd reply to this with a gif of the mayor from Jaws.
- azinman2 6y ago
  Personally I do if it collectively puts us all in danger. The non-compliance as a society extends the pain for all. China showed forced compliance allowed it to largely go away in a short period of time.
  - z9e 6y ago
    Assuming you can trust their numbers.
    - azinman2 6y ago
      Even if you can't, our many layers of gov (local, state, fed) have issued stay-at-home guidelines for a reason. Violation of them just causes more cases, which extends the issuance. Now we're having to deal with a demand to return to open up, which will of course come with increases cases. The total numbers would be far lower with compliance to the original ordinances. I see across the street from me many people in a park daily despite signs everywhere saying 'Closed due to COVID.' The selfishness is maddening.
gnicholas 6y ago
You wouldn't treat a retailer differently based on the goods being luxury. But this is manufacturing, not retail. Also, they're not asking to be allowed to continue manufacturing because they sell high-end goods, but rather because the goods they sell are automobiles, which are (as a category) considered necessary.
- wdb 6y ago
  I don't consider Tesla automobiles necessary, if they are manufacturing buses, trains etc. I can understand but luxury cars? Yes, I consider a $50k Model 3 luxury
  - gnicholas 6y ago
    Sure, if you were designing a world, Tesla-level automobiles would not be "necessary". But we are existing in a world in which people have put down deposits on vehicles and have been expecting to get them. They can't easily go out and test drive other vehicles (it is possible, but you can't be in a vehicles simultaneous with salesperson, which makes it hard to learn about the vehicle), so it's not clear what they're supposed to do here.
et-al 6y ago
It's problematic because it penalizes workers who are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If the factory opens up and they don't go to work, they lose their job. If they go to work in your scenario, they get arrested. Management should be held responsible--not the workers.
colechristensen 6y ago
This is the problem, the orders likely are in large parts unenforceable and in violation of state and federal laws and constitutions. I don't want to live in a police state where local authorities can arbitrarily wield such broad powers. People cheer for fascism when it aligns with their own ideas. You can think that shutting most things down is a good idea and that it's a good idea for your government not to have that power at the same time. Not too many people do though.
- tdhz77 6y ago
  Not according to federal courts who were even recently appointed by trump...
- dijit 6y ago
  > People cheer for fascism when it aligns with their own ideas. You have to be aware that people are going to pick on this line. If you think locking down during exceptional circumstances to save lives (and the economy) is Fascism then I have bridge to sell you.
  - benmw333 6y ago
    "Exceptional circumstances" to "save lives."
    - dijit 6y ago
      Why is that in quotes? Globally, politicians are not out to get you, frankly my prime minister was dead set against locking down (for economic reasons) but when the forecasts came in he relented very viscerally. You have to understand on some level that nearly every government (with the notable exception of Sweden) has reacted similarly to this pandemic. The Economic impact of the increased deaths of this magnitude (and second factors such as normally preventable deaths which are not handled due to an over-capacity health system) would cause such economic upheaval that society might break down. From the most self-serving politician to the most charitable; one thing they will agree on is to maintain the status quo in some form and that is put at risk if we reach 1918 levels of deaths (or higher). I highly recommend the Dark Winter study by Johns Hopkins[0], it's exceptionally well researched and goes into detail about how fragile we've built the world to be. For example: "Just-in-time" is the latest incarnation of capitalist efficiency that leaves very little capacity to function if there is a large disruption. The test largely focused on an intentional outbreak of smallpox, but they wrote extensively about variable mortality and the r-naught value and how the effects work when you slide those scales. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Dark_Winter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Dark_Winter

thephyber 6y ago

Arrests just concentrate people in jails and cost the city/county money. Instead, cite them for the $1000 violation. Frequently.

creddit 6y ago

You would not be arrested. At most you would be cited. It’s also on public lands where there is existing precedent for fining for something along the lines of trespassing. This is instead on private property and probably protected under free assembly.

jedberg 6y ago
> and probably protected under free assembly. The free assembly clause is specifically to allow you to assemble in protest against your government. It would be a bit of a stretch to call going to work a protest against your government.
- creddit 6y ago
  It’s been interpreted much more broadly than that to expand to freedom of association which has been applied to labor rights for many decades. In this case, if it were to go toward the interpretation as protest, it might actually not be that unreasonable. Musk in many ways views it as protest afaict. All this said, IANAL.
- tick_tock_tick 6y ago
  When the government is forbidding it I don't see how that could be anything but a protest.

geofft 6y ago

Arresting the factory workers (who quite legitimately want to be paid, and will have a tougher time getting unemployment if they refuse to work) seems to not really be the just answer here - it's not their decision.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

thoraway1010 6y ago

Beaches are not closed where I am, and there is almost no risk at the beach. I'm much more worried about the 80 people in my complex and the shared laundry, elevators, stairs, door handles etc. Does logic / science no longer apply in public health?

2019-nCoV 6y ago
Beaches are not essential. Your shared laundry, elevators, stairs and door handles, are. This is the reasoning behind leaving grocery stores open (people have to eat) while the remainder of the economy stays closed. So yes, logic does apply.
- thoraway1010 6y ago
  What a pathetic govt then. I've taken almost every precaution (I was way ahead and have masks, hand sanitizer, touchless soap, open doors with disposable tissue and more) but you cannot keep small children under 3 cooped up all day - it's disgusting. Seriously - I have always been a law and order person - but seeing acres and acres wide open space, that is totally uncrowded at all times (even weekends before covid) now off limits because of some bogus risk evaluation is ridiculous. And no - I do not go grocery shopping AT ALL in two months. I ordered online very early, leave the food outside for 3 days after delivery, wash packages etc. The govt has absolutely lost its mind with this horrendous logic. The reality - we have to believe there is some basis in the closure of things (clearly clubs / bars / social gatherings make sense) or people are going to stop putting up with 100% stupidity. Shutting down huge outdoor spaces within walking distances of folks houses is the dumbest thing I've heard. Now we are all crowded on sidewalks. And no - I cannot go and get tested even if I'm willing to pay because I can't certify I have the severity level of systems needed and a doctors order, and oh, the FDA and CDC blocked everyone from doing tests for a long time. Let me give govt some suggestions. Allow people to pay, out of pocket, with no doctors order for testing if they want to. Do free testing for folks who have a doctors order and meet your severe symptoms criteria. Where is the contact tracing? Focus the lockdown on high risk activities - not shutting down beaches. You are seriously going to lose the trust of folks with this stupidity.
6y ago

tim58 6y ago

1. There's too many people violating local orders across the United States to arrest them all. 2. Putting them in jail is actually worse for their health than almost any other activity. 3. IANAL but I doubt many of the local orders would hold up in a higher court.

brendanmcd 6y ago

It's an important question whether we want to live in a world where government has power to close access to beaches, and everything else.

CydeWeys 6y ago
Given that a government is a monopoly on the legal use of force, governments (all of them) tautologically have this power. Whether they would choose to use it in any given situation is a different matter.
khrbrt 6y ago
An any other forum I'd reply to this with a gif of the mayor from Jaws.
azinman2 6y ago
Personally I do if it collectively puts us all in danger. The non-compliance as a society extends the pain for all. China showed forced compliance allowed it to largely go away in a short period of time.
- z9e 6y ago
  Assuming you can trust their numbers.
  - azinman2 6y ago
    Even if you can't, our many layers of gov (local, state, fed) have issued stay-at-home guidelines for a reason. Violation of them just causes more cases, which extends the issuance. Now we're having to deal with a demand to return to open up, which will of course come with increases cases. The total numbers would be far lower with compliance to the original ordinances. I see across the street from me many people in a park daily despite signs everywhere saying 'Closed due to COVID.' The selfishness is maddening.

gnicholas 6y ago

You wouldn't treat a retailer differently based on the goods being luxury. But this is manufacturing, not retail. Also, they're not asking to be allowed to continue manufacturing because they sell high-end goods, but rather because the goods they sell are automobiles, which are (as a category) considered necessary.

wdb 6y ago
I don't consider Tesla automobiles necessary, if they are manufacturing buses, trains etc. I can understand but luxury cars? Yes, I consider a $50k Model 3 luxury
- gnicholas 6y ago
  Sure, if you were designing a world, Tesla-level automobiles would not be "necessary". But we are existing in a world in which people have put down deposits on vehicles and have been expecting to get them. They can't easily go out and test drive other vehicles (it is possible, but you can't be in a vehicles simultaneous with salesperson, which makes it hard to learn about the vehicle), so it's not clear what they're supposed to do here.

et-al 6y ago

It's problematic because it penalizes workers who are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If the factory opens up and they don't go to work, they lose their job. If they go to work in your scenario, they get arrested. Management should be held responsible--not the workers.

colechristensen 6y ago

This is the problem, the orders likely are in large parts unenforceable and in violation of state and federal laws and constitutions. I don't want to live in a police state where local authorities can arbitrarily wield such broad powers. People cheer for fascism when it aligns with their own ideas. You can think that shutting most things down is a good idea and that it's a good idea for your government not to have that power at the same time. Not too many people do though.

tdhz77 6y ago
Not according to federal courts who were even recently appointed by trump...
dijit 6y ago
> People cheer for fascism when it aligns with their own ideas. You have to be aware that people are going to pick on this line. If you think locking down during exceptional circumstances to save lives (and the economy) is Fascism then I have bridge to sell you.
- benmw333 6y ago
  "Exceptional circumstances" to "save lives."
  - dijit 6y ago
    Why is that in quotes? Globally, politicians are not out to get you, frankly my prime minister was dead set against locking down (for economic reasons) but when the forecasts came in he relented very viscerally. You have to understand on some level that nearly every government (with the notable exception of Sweden) has reacted similarly to this pandemic. The Economic impact of the increased deaths of this magnitude (and second factors such as normally preventable deaths which are not handled due to an over-capacity health system) would cause such economic upheaval that society might break down. From the most self-serving politician to the most charitable; one thing they will agree on is to maintain the status quo in some form and that is put at risk if we reach 1918 levels of deaths (or higher). I highly recommend the Dark Winter study by Johns Hopkins[0], it's exceptionally well researched and goes into detail about how fragile we've built the world to be. For example: "Just-in-time" is the latest incarnation of capitalist efficiency that leaves very little capacity to function if there is a large disruption. The test largely focused on an intentional outbreak of smallpox, but they wrote extensively about variable mortality and the r-naught value and how the effects work when you slide those scales. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Dark_Winter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Dark_Winter