8 ms·

Presumably all of the normal reasons except for tourism. Imagine you just got a new job a thousand miles away. Imagine you're a 25-year-old who lost their job a

Presumably all of the normal reasons except for tourism. Imagine you just got a new job a thousand miles away. Imagine you're a 25-year-old who lost their job and need to fly cross country to stay with family. Imagine you're a regional inspector for a food production company and you need to get from Minneapolis to Cincinnati. Imagine your grandma is dying a few states over and you want to be by her side. It shouldn't be hard to imagine a vast number of different reasons that a person might want to fly during this pandemic.

chrisseaton 6y ago
I didn’t realise you were allowed to travel to do things like see a relative even if they’re dying, but I guess all countries are doing this differently.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  It's frightening to me to think that people assume it would be OK/normal for a government to have the power to allow travel. (I don't mean this as a personal attack on Chris.)
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    > it would be OK/normal I don't think anyone thinks it's OK or normal. Does the US have no absolutely mechanism at all for restricting travel if there is an emergency? What would they do if there was an invasion or a pandemic where there was a much higher proportion of people dying?
    - 0xffff2 6y ago
      >Does the US have no absolutely mechanism at all for restricting travel if there is an emergency? What would they do if there was an invasion or a pandemic where there was a much higher proportion of people dying? I'm not a lawyer, but I really don't think it does. As mentioned in a sibling comment, flights might be grounded, but that doesn't stop you from getting in your car and driving. Freedom of movement is enshrined both in the constitution and in the culture to a very high degree.
    - leetcrew 6y ago
      all flights were grounded for two days after 9/11. not sure if there's a strictly legal mechanism or if no one protested at the time.
      - gambiting 6y ago
        I guess not being able to travel and not being allowed to travel are two separate things.
    - jdblair 6y ago
      Yes, that's correct. There is no mechanism to restrict all internal travel, no federal power to stop people from traveling between states. The FAA can ground flights and stop trains. The various state police forces can set up road blocks at borders.
      - ghaff 6y ago
        >The various state police forces can set up road blocks at borders. They can (and did to at least some degree early on in the current situation) but it's probably unconstitutional. Of course, in an emergency for a limited time, police and military can go ahead and do things knowing they have the force and it will probably take a while before the courts can tell them to knock it off. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unit...
    - matz1 6y ago
      >Does the US have no absolutely mechanism at all for restricting travel if there is an emergency? I certainly hope so. I wouldn't support such mechanism. Yes, like anything, I understand there would be trade off.
    - jandrewrogers 6y ago
      This is correct, there is no legal mechanism to restrict travel as it is a constitutionally protected right, like free speech. In fact, the US Supreme Court has ruled that it is illegal for the government to enact de facto restrictions on common means of travel via regulatory powers e.g. closing all the roads. Restrictions on use of means of travel are allowable for narrow, limited purposes, like when the FAA grounds aircraft due to imminent safety issues pertaining to their operation (e.g. 9/11 or design defects). Like with all fundamentally recognized rights in the US, there are no exceptions for broad emergencies, and the Supreme Court has consistently upheld this view in modern history. Abrogation of fundamental rights can only be done in very narrowly targeted ways and generally comes with a due process requirement.
  - gambiting 6y ago
    I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. That all travel should be allowed by default, and the government should never deny you the right to travel? Because I'm sure that any reasonable person could name at least few situations when obviously the government does have and should have the power to limit the ability to travel within its own borders. Or are you arguing that it isn't in the government's power to "allow" travel, merely to restrict it in special cases? Well, then I'd like to point out that pretty much anywhere in the world if you want to travel, you need to ask your government for permission(obtain a passport or a form of internationally recognized ID).
  - orf 6y ago
    What point are you trying to make here - just letting others know your a libertarian, or that you’re terribly naïve? Or both? It is normal and pretty much always has been throughout human history, stretching back to hunter gatherer groups that wouldn’t let you just wander off and go traveling without them. I mean, ever heard of a passport or a Visa? And that power becomes particularly useful during a pandemic, a war or any one of a huge number of other relevant occasions.
    - blhack 6y ago
      >Ever heard of a passport Why are you being this combative? Do you think the person you are replying to has never heard or a passport? In case you simply don't live here, or are unfamiliar with the US: the freedom to travel in the united states is well established and well protected.
      - orf 6y ago
        The comment didn’t specify a specific government, it made a general statement. One that seems as absurd, and ultimately empty, as “I don’t see why anyone would find it normal for a government to collect taxes”. And the EU, Canada, Russia, India, Japan also have well established (and in some cases constitutional) freedom to travel laws.
        blhack 6y ago
        >One that seems as absurd, and ultimately empty, as “I don’t see why anyone would find it normal for a government to collect taxes”. Perhaps they expect a freedom to travel because: >And the EU, Canada, Russia, India, Japan also have well established (and Possibly constitutional) freedom to travel laws. I don't think any of these places have a constitutionally outlined law against paying taxes. And if they did, then I think that it would be reasonable for people to find it abnormal to pay them (since it would be illegal to do so).
    - Consultant32452 6y ago
      Within the US interstate travel is protected by the Constitution In my non-expert opinion the government could hypothetically ground all flights, and could restrict an individual with just cause, but to blanketly restrict interstate travel seems illegal on the face of it. Crossing national boundaries is a different kind of beast. FWIW we've seen some kinds of restrictions already knocked down as unconstitutional. https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/04/28/judge-slaps-down-illinois-governors-extended-lockdown-as-unconstitutional-914113 https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/04/28/judge-slaps-down-ill...
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    On the other hand, we've had global border control for decades, so it is in fact completely normal.
  - wolco 6y ago
    Do you remember 9/11 and the restrictions on airline travel? Why would you think you would have open access during Covid when you never ever had open access before?
tpmx 6y ago
Or imagine your job being is being a flight travel blogger, apparently.
wolco 6y ago
If most people reported in airports are 20 and 30 year olds most will not fit in the regional inspector category. Most places are not flying new hires in. Most are traveling for some sort of leisure or visitation. You shouldn't be able to fly commericial now period. If your inspector job requires a plane flight private planes should be used. Grandmas are dying in old aged homes now and people aren't allowed in, stay home you are not going to save her life by flying. Everyone put everything on hold so a few people can ruin the effort.

chrisseaton 6y ago

I didn’t realise you were allowed to travel to do things like see a relative even if they’re dying, but I guess all countries are doing this differently.

sokoloff 6y ago
It's frightening to me to think that people assume it would be OK/normal for a government to have the power to allow travel. (I don't mean this as a personal attack on Chris.)
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  > it would be OK/normal I don't think anyone thinks it's OK or normal. Does the US have no absolutely mechanism at all for restricting travel if there is an emergency? What would they do if there was an invasion or a pandemic where there was a much higher proportion of people dying?
  - 0xffff2 6y ago
    >Does the US have no absolutely mechanism at all for restricting travel if there is an emergency? What would they do if there was an invasion or a pandemic where there was a much higher proportion of people dying? I'm not a lawyer, but I really don't think it does. As mentioned in a sibling comment, flights might be grounded, but that doesn't stop you from getting in your car and driving. Freedom of movement is enshrined both in the constitution and in the culture to a very high degree.
  - leetcrew 6y ago
    all flights were grounded for two days after 9/11. not sure if there's a strictly legal mechanism or if no one protested at the time.
    - gambiting 6y ago
      I guess not being able to travel and not being allowed to travel are two separate things.
  - jdblair 6y ago
    Yes, that's correct. There is no mechanism to restrict all internal travel, no federal power to stop people from traveling between states. The FAA can ground flights and stop trains. The various state police forces can set up road blocks at borders.
    - ghaff 6y ago
      >The various state police forces can set up road blocks at borders. They can (and did to at least some degree early on in the current situation) but it's probably unconstitutional. Of course, in an emergency for a limited time, police and military can go ahead and do things knowing they have the force and it will probably take a while before the courts can tell them to knock it off. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_United_States_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unit...
  - matz1 6y ago
    >Does the US have no absolutely mechanism at all for restricting travel if there is an emergency? I certainly hope so. I wouldn't support such mechanism. Yes, like anything, I understand there would be trade off.
  - jandrewrogers 6y ago
    This is correct, there is no legal mechanism to restrict travel as it is a constitutionally protected right, like free speech. In fact, the US Supreme Court has ruled that it is illegal for the government to enact de facto restrictions on common means of travel via regulatory powers e.g. closing all the roads. Restrictions on use of means of travel are allowable for narrow, limited purposes, like when the FAA grounds aircraft due to imminent safety issues pertaining to their operation (e.g. 9/11 or design defects). Like with all fundamentally recognized rights in the US, there are no exceptions for broad emergencies, and the Supreme Court has consistently upheld this view in modern history. Abrogation of fundamental rights can only be done in very narrowly targeted ways and generally comes with a due process requirement.
- gambiting 6y ago
  I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. That all travel should be allowed by default, and the government should never deny you the right to travel? Because I'm sure that any reasonable person could name at least few situations when obviously the government does have and should have the power to limit the ability to travel within its own borders. Or are you arguing that it isn't in the government's power to "allow" travel, merely to restrict it in special cases? Well, then I'd like to point out that pretty much anywhere in the world if you want to travel, you need to ask your government for permission(obtain a passport or a form of internationally recognized ID).
- orf 6y ago
  What point are you trying to make here - just letting others know your a libertarian, or that you’re terribly naïve? Or both? It is normal and pretty much always has been throughout human history, stretching back to hunter gatherer groups that wouldn’t let you just wander off and go traveling without them. I mean, ever heard of a passport or a Visa? And that power becomes particularly useful during a pandemic, a war or any one of a huge number of other relevant occasions.
  - blhack 6y ago
    >Ever heard of a passport Why are you being this combative? Do you think the person you are replying to has never heard or a passport? In case you simply don't live here, or are unfamiliar with the US: the freedom to travel in the united states is well established and well protected.
    - orf 6y ago
      The comment didn’t specify a specific government, it made a general statement. One that seems as absurd, and ultimately empty, as “I don’t see why anyone would find it normal for a government to collect taxes”. And the EU, Canada, Russia, India, Japan also have well established (and in some cases constitutional) freedom to travel laws.
      - blhack 6y ago
        >One that seems as absurd, and ultimately empty, as “I don’t see why anyone would find it normal for a government to collect taxes”. Perhaps they expect a freedom to travel because: >And the EU, Canada, Russia, India, Japan also have well established (and Possibly constitutional) freedom to travel laws. I don't think any of these places have a constitutionally outlined law against paying taxes. And if they did, then I think that it would be reasonable for people to find it abnormal to pay them (since it would be illegal to do so).
  - Consultant32452 6y ago
    Within the US interstate travel is protected by the Constitution In my non-expert opinion the government could hypothetically ground all flights, and could restrict an individual with just cause, but to blanketly restrict interstate travel seems illegal on the face of it. Crossing national boundaries is a different kind of beast. FWIW we've seen some kinds of restrictions already knocked down as unconstitutional. https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/04/28/judge-slaps-down-illinois-governors-extended-lockdown-as-unconstitutional-914113 https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/04/28/judge-slaps-down-ill...
- maxerickson 6y ago
  On the other hand, we've had global border control for decades, so it is in fact completely normal.
- wolco 6y ago
  Do you remember 9/11 and the restrictions on airline travel? Why would you think you would have open access during Covid when you never ever had open access before?

tpmx 6y ago

Or imagine your job being is being a flight travel blogger, apparently.

wolco 6y ago

If most people reported in airports are 20 and 30 year olds most will not fit in the regional inspector category. Most places are not flying new hires in. Most are traveling for some sort of leisure or visitation. You shouldn't be able to fly commericial now period. If your inspector job requires a plane flight private planes should be used. Grandmas are dying in old aged homes now and people aren't allowed in, stay home you are not going to save her life by flying. Everyone put everything on hold so a few people can ruin the effort.