5 ms·

Given the extreme conditions being imposed in certain states, it certainly is not being factored into these decisions uniformly by all governors. There are stat

Given the extreme conditions being imposed in certain states, it certainly is not being factored into these decisions uniformly by all governors. There are states that are using reason and common sense. But look at California for example. When you have Sheriffs in virtually every major county directly and publicly refusing to enforce your orders, perhaps you have gone too far [1]. [1] https://ktla.com/news/local-news/riverside-county-sheriff-slams-gov-newsom-vows-not-to-enforce-lockdown-order/ https://ktla.com/news/local-news/riverside-county-sheriff-sl...

Mauricebranagh 6y ago
That's a weakness of allowing elected police chiefs who may be doing this for political reasons and not considering their duty to protect the public.
- downandout 6y ago
  That’s pretty cynical. A more likely explanation might be that police agencies have limited resources, and and as a result have to prioritize their enforcement activities for actual crimes. There simply aren’t enough police, jails, or courts to arrest random people for leaving their homes with a mask on. Further, by advocating for aggressive enforcement, you are also advocating for the ultimate super spreader event: filling jails with people that don’t belong there, where the virus already runs rampant. Most of these people would be booked in, get the virus, and then bail out or be released by a judge a few days later. Then, they would take the virus out into the community and spread it further. These restrictions are a fun exercise in virtue signaling, but are impractical and actually enforcing them would increase the spread of the virus.
  - Mauricebranagh 6y ago
    Given the behaviour of US police forces that has come to light (or ben more exposed recently) - its a reasonable position.
lazyasciiart 6y ago
You disagree with their conclusions and are using that as proof that they are not including this data in their decision making. That's a poor argument, weakened even further by the various announcements and resources Newsom specifically has made about impacts on mental health and newly created helplines and recommendations - which make it clear that he is well aware of this effect.

Mauricebranagh 6y ago

That's a weakness of allowing elected police chiefs who may be doing this for political reasons and not considering their duty to protect the public.

downandout 6y ago
That’s pretty cynical. A more likely explanation might be that police agencies have limited resources, and and as a result have to prioritize their enforcement activities for actual crimes. There simply aren’t enough police, jails, or courts to arrest random people for leaving their homes with a mask on. Further, by advocating for aggressive enforcement, you are also advocating for the ultimate super spreader event: filling jails with people that don’t belong there, where the virus already runs rampant. Most of these people would be booked in, get the virus, and then bail out or be released by a judge a few days later. Then, they would take the virus out into the community and spread it further. These restrictions are a fun exercise in virtue signaling, but are impractical and actually enforcing them would increase the spread of the virus.
- Mauricebranagh 6y ago
  Given the behaviour of US police forces that has come to light (or ben more exposed recently) - its a reasonable position.

lazyasciiart 6y ago

You disagree with their conclusions and are using that as proof that they are not including this data in their decision making. That's a poor argument, weakened even further by the various announcements and resources Newsom specifically has made about impacts on mental health and newly created helplines and recommendations - which make it clear that he is well aware of this effect.