3 ms·

If I get sick and die, I get sick and die. People who are concerned about getting sick or dying, then, should take more caution (staying home, wearing PPE, etc)

If I get sick and die, I get sick and die. People who are concerned about getting sick or dying, then, should take more caution (staying home, wearing PPE, etc). That standard has always existed. Up until 2020, there was always the chance that you would catch some virus, bacterial infection, etc. The rebuttal that's always applied to this is that "so you don't care about people, then?" which is not the point. Personally, I can and should be legally able to take whatever precautions I think are necessary without any interference or looming punishment from the government. I'd much rather this sort of thing be policed socially amongst individuals as opposed to giving carte blanche to government to lock people up.

Spooky23 6y ago
Sounds great, as long as I can recover my losses resulting from your irresponsibility. Freedom isn’t free, dude. As executor of a COVID victim’s estate, if I can trace the infection to your idiocy, I want a lien on your house to meet the obligations of your victim.
- rglover 6y ago
  Can I recover my losses if the countermeasures destroy my business?
  - u801e 6y ago
    > Can I recover my losses if the countermeasures destroy my business? Do you place more importance on the health of your business over others' lives?
    - rglover 6y ago
      Yes, if the health of that business supports the health of my life, which for many is true (I'm fortunate to work online so am not directly affected). That line of argumentation is just emotional manipulation disguised as moral superiority. A lot of people will die or be placed in the crosshairs of death indirectly because of unemployment. The same can be said about the people who can't get treatment for non-COVID related illnesses due to hospital restrictions.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
u801e 6y ago
> I can and should be legally able to take whatever precautions I think are necessary A significant portion of the population isn't capable of making that judgment. > I'd much rather this sort of thing be policed socially amongst individuals There's a significant risk of becoming a victim of aggravated assault when you confront individuals or groups who insist on flaunting guidelines. Even if not, staying in close proximity to them while trying to get them to follow the guidelines increases your own risk of getting infected.
- rglover 6y ago
  > A significant portion of the population isn't capable of making that judgment. That may be, but that's the beauty of natural selection. If they can't do what they need to do to protect themselves, then their lineage will fail. Though it may inconvenience you, if you're smart enough to, you have the ability to move away from large groups of people (and take advantage of alternatives like grocery delivery, etc). > There's a significant risk of becoming a victim of aggravated assault when you confront individuals or groups who insist on flaunting guidelines. That's already happening and exacerbated by the media.
  - u801e 6y ago
    > If they can't do what they need to do to protect themselves, then their lineage will fail. They're not living in isolation from the rest of society. Their actions are affecting those who are trying to take precautions. This is analagous to the situation where a portion of the population is not vaccinated and herd immunity to certain viral diseases can no longer be maintained. >>> I'd much rather this sort of thing be policed socially amongst individuals >> There's a significant risk of becoming a victim of aggravated assault when you confront individuals or groups who insist on flaunting guidelines. > That's already happening So why do you prefer it to be policed by individuals rather than relying on law enforcement?
    - rglover 6y ago
      > So why do you prefer it to be policed by individuals rather than relying on law enforcement? Precedent. Once this is written in to law, it opens the flood gates to a whole lot worse.

Spooky23 6y ago

Sounds great, as long as I can recover my losses resulting from your irresponsibility. Freedom isn’t free, dude. As executor of a COVID victim’s estate, if I can trace the infection to your idiocy, I want a lien on your house to meet the obligations of your victim.

rglover 6y ago
Can I recover my losses if the countermeasures destroy my business?
- u801e 6y ago
  > Can I recover my losses if the countermeasures destroy my business? Do you place more importance on the health of your business over others' lives?
  - rglover 6y ago
    Yes, if the health of that business supports the health of my life, which for many is true (I'm fortunate to work online so am not directly affected). That line of argumentation is just emotional manipulation disguised as moral superiority. A lot of people will die or be placed in the crosshairs of death indirectly because of unemployment. The same can be said about the people who can't get treatment for non-COVID related illnesses due to hospital restrictions.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

u801e 6y ago

> I can and should be legally able to take whatever precautions I think are necessary A significant portion of the population isn't capable of making that judgment. > I'd much rather this sort of thing be policed socially amongst individuals There's a significant risk of becoming a victim of aggravated assault when you confront individuals or groups who insist on flaunting guidelines. Even if not, staying in close proximity to them while trying to get them to follow the guidelines increases your own risk of getting infected.

rglover 6y ago
> A significant portion of the population isn't capable of making that judgment. That may be, but that's the beauty of natural selection. If they can't do what they need to do to protect themselves, then their lineage will fail. Though it may inconvenience you, if you're smart enough to, you have the ability to move away from large groups of people (and take advantage of alternatives like grocery delivery, etc). > There's a significant risk of becoming a victim of aggravated assault when you confront individuals or groups who insist on flaunting guidelines. That's already happening and exacerbated by the media.
- u801e 6y ago
  > If they can't do what they need to do to protect themselves, then their lineage will fail. They're not living in isolation from the rest of society. Their actions are affecting those who are trying to take precautions. This is analagous to the situation where a portion of the population is not vaccinated and herd immunity to certain viral diseases can no longer be maintained. >>> I'd much rather this sort of thing be policed socially amongst individuals >> There's a significant risk of becoming a victim of aggravated assault when you confront individuals or groups who insist on flaunting guidelines. > That's already happening So why do you prefer it to be policed by individuals rather than relying on law enforcement?
  - rglover 6y ago
    > So why do you prefer it to be policed by individuals rather than relying on law enforcement? Precedent. Once this is written in to law, it opens the flood gates to a whole lot worse.