5 ms·

You can’t control something that requires people to cooperate if people refuse to cooperate.

jussij 6y ago
I don't doubt the problem is difficult and it has only been made more difficult by the fact what is a public health issue has somehow morphed into a party political issue. But I'm not sure just giving and not trying to do anything is the answer? That approach will only end badly.
Spooky23 6y ago
The state can compel cooperation. Non-compliance == fines. Repeated non-compliance == jail or forced quarantine. Hair salons that don't comply == revocation of license.
- kube-system 6y ago
  I am not sure the US actually can, given the current legal and political landscape. Masks are "mandatory" where I'm at, and I walked into a multi-billion dollar business the other day with a sign that literally said "if you are not wearing a mask we will respectfully assume it is due to a medical condition". "Mandatory" in the US effectively means "strongly suggested". There's literally zero effective way to enforce it.
  - Spooky23 6y ago
    Some states with incompetent governance allow nonsense like that. A local retailer was telling people that they wouldn't enforce mask use once you entered the building. Someone called the health department, and they were shut down within 3 hours.
    - kube-system 6y ago
      Yes, but that is very different than the sign I posted above. Businesses generally do not have the authority nor capability to judge anyone's medical conditions.
      - ceejayoz 6y ago
        Businesses absolutely have the authority to say "no mask, no entry", just like they can set "no shoes, no shirt, no service" policies. The ADA requires reasonable accommodation, and has explicit exemptions to accommodations that pose a health threat to others. https://www.ada.gov/taman3.htm#III-3.8000 https://www.ada.gov/taman3.htm#III-3.8000 > III-3.8000 Direct threat. A public accommodation may exclude an individual with a disability from participation in an activity, if that individual's participation would result in a direct threat to the health or safety of others.
        kube-system 6y ago
        It is not clear that legally meets the definition of "direct threat". > On May 26, 2020, a woman with an alleged respiratory disability filed suit under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) against a supermarket chain in Pennsylvania after she was denied entry because she could not wear a face mask. > [...] Does the risk of spreading the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) qualify as a “direct threat”? Cases like this may start to provide an answer to that question. https://ogletree.com/insights/no-mask-no-service-supermarket-sued-for-disability-discrimination-over-strict-face-covering-policy/ https://ogletree.com/insights/no-mask-no-service-supermarket... The fact that lawyers can't quite agree on this, should be more than enough to evidence to show that it will also not be clear to the laypeople who are responsible for setting, following, and enforcing those policies within stores. I am sure my local news and anecdotal experiences are also not unique in showing that compliance has been spotty. This is the US; being uncooperative is basically our national past-time. Most people will avoid confrontation, and when confrontation does happen, it'll be rare that police get involved unless they escalate to violence.
        ceejayoz 6y ago
        If a court doesn't find "refuses to wear a mask during a global pandemic" to be a direct threat to the health of others, I'll eat my hat. Offering something like curbside pickup is, under the ADA, a "reasonable accommodation". People who genuinely can't wear a mask should request it.
CydeWeys 6y ago
People would prefer not to have to pay their taxes or drive the speed limit either, but the government has ways of forcing people to do so. At the end of the day it doesn't require willing cooperation, just enforcement.

I don't doubt the problem is difficult and it has only been made more difficult by the fact what is a public health issue has somehow morphed into a party political issue. But I'm not sure just giving and not trying to do anything is the answer? That approach will only end badly.

Spooky23 6y ago

The state can compel cooperation. Non-compliance == fines. Repeated non-compliance == jail or forced quarantine. Hair salons that don't comply == revocation of license.

kube-system 6y ago
I am not sure the US actually can, given the current legal and political landscape. Masks are "mandatory" where I'm at, and I walked into a multi-billion dollar business the other day with a sign that literally said "if you are not wearing a mask we will respectfully assume it is due to a medical condition". "Mandatory" in the US effectively means "strongly suggested". There's literally zero effective way to enforce it.
- Spooky23 6y ago
  Some states with incompetent governance allow nonsense like that. A local retailer was telling people that they wouldn't enforce mask use once you entered the building. Someone called the health department, and they were shut down within 3 hours.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    Yes, but that is very different than the sign I posted above. Businesses generally do not have the authority nor capability to judge anyone's medical conditions.
    - ceejayoz 6y ago
      Businesses absolutely have the authority to say "no mask, no entry", just like they can set "no shoes, no shirt, no service" policies. The ADA requires reasonable accommodation, and has explicit exemptions to accommodations that pose a health threat to others. https://www.ada.gov/taman3.htm#III-3.8000 https://www.ada.gov/taman3.htm#III-3.8000 > III-3.8000 Direct threat. A public accommodation may exclude an individual with a disability from participation in an activity, if that individual's participation would result in a direct threat to the health or safety of others.
      - kube-system 6y ago
        It is not clear that legally meets the definition of "direct threat". > On May 26, 2020, a woman with an alleged respiratory disability filed suit under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) against a supermarket chain in Pennsylvania after she was denied entry because she could not wear a face mask. > [...] Does the risk of spreading the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) qualify as a “direct threat”? Cases like this may start to provide an answer to that question. https://ogletree.com/insights/no-mask-no-service-supermarket-sued-for-disability-discrimination-over-strict-face-covering-policy/ https://ogletree.com/insights/no-mask-no-service-supermarket... The fact that lawyers can't quite agree on this, should be more than enough to evidence to show that it will also not be clear to the laypeople who are responsible for setting, following, and enforcing those policies within stores. I am sure my local news and anecdotal experiences are also not unique in showing that compliance has been spotty. This is the US; being uncooperative is basically our national past-time. Most people will avoid confrontation, and when confrontation does happen, it'll be rare that police get involved unless they escalate to violence.
        ceejayoz 6y ago
        If a court doesn't find "refuses to wear a mask during a global pandemic" to be a direct threat to the health of others, I'll eat my hat. Offering something like curbside pickup is, under the ADA, a "reasonable accommodation". People who genuinely can't wear a mask should request it.

CydeWeys 6y ago

People would prefer not to have to pay their taxes or drive the speed limit either, but the government has ways of forcing people to do so. At the end of the day it doesn't require willing cooperation, just enforcement.