> There needs to be a national mandate and actual enforcement of mask wearing to stop the spread. That assumes that the masks are as effective as claimed, that

> There needs to be a national mandate and actual enforcement of mask wearing to stop the spread. That assumes that the masks are as effective as claimed, that mass enforcement is even feasible, and that the Federal govt. has the right to create such a mandate. I don't believe we have enough data to know the efficacy of masks, especially handmade masks out in the field. Mass enforcement of mask wearing, even if it was somehow cost affordable to task law enforcement with, would likely be met with heavy protest or open revolt in the United States by various civil rights groups. There's nothing wrong with being concerned about safety, especially these days. However, it's not so simple as 'pass a mask law', and if you really think about it ... there's a silver lining there. Do you want to be ruled by a government who can tell you what to wear, when to wear it, how to wear it — even if you dissent? Once there is a precedent for a national mask law, the Federal government can use that to push for further loss of freedoms for individuals and states. I'm not saying the mask law concept is intentionally being pushed to erode freedoms, rather, that it has the potential to do so. Businesses can already refuse service for any reason not protected by Federal/State law. That's plenty of grounds to kick out a non mask wearer. I don't see the need for additional laws, enforcement, or government spending. Let businesses and employees decide the level of risk they are willing to take.