8 ms·

This is truly great news, as we've need some controlled studies. However, _mandates_, literally threatening people with police violence, bodily or financial ha

This is truly great news, as we've need some controlled studies. However, _mandates_, literally threatening people with police violence, bodily or financial harm, is not the correct way forward. I think the best solution is improved mandates for airflow. It's a lot easier to improve airflow in a building than it is to police and enforce a mask mandate.

douglasisshiny 5y ago
>However, _mandates_, literally threatening people with police violence, bodily or financial harm, is not the correct way forward. Maybe I'm missing something, but is this actually a thing? Who in the mainstream proposing police violence, bodily or financial harm? The worst I've heard (in the U.S.) is that a business may not allow you to enter if you're not wearing a mask, which is well within their right and reasonable.
- logicalmonster 5y ago
  > Who in the mainstream proposing police violence, bodily or financial harm? People with some flavor of libertarian viewpoint have often explained how every piece of legislation is ultimately backed up by physical force from police officers. Ultimately, if you violate any government policy: whether it is taxation, opening up an illegal lemonade stand, or trying to attend a restaurant that has a vaccine mandate imposed on it, it is ultimately physical force that backs this up if compliance is refused. As far as financial harm: see the government strongly encouraging corporations to mandate vaccines or other similar policies.
- learc83 5y ago
  Libertarians like to make this argument about any government enforcement action. If the government tells you that you can't play loud music after 10pm and you do it anyway, eventually someone will issue you a citation. If you refuse to pay that, eventually you'll get a court summons. If you fail to appear, eventually a police officer may arrest you. If you resist, they will use force to make you comply. It's a bit hyperbolic, but it is a standard libertarian/objectivist "gotcha".
  - betwixthewires 5y ago
    It's a pretty solid gotcha.
    - learc83 5y ago
      It's a terrible gotcha. It's only effective on people who already agree with you. Imagine a town council meeting where someone is proposing a $25 fine for crapping on the sidewalk. And a libertarian pops and screaming "You're saying you want to use violence up to and including murder to keep our sidewalks clean!" Again technically there is a hypothetical chain of causality from sidewalk crapping fine to bodily harm/murder, but no one other than another hardcore libertarian is going to be convinced by that argument.
      - ta07643887 5y ago
        Absolute nonsense. It’s merely walking through the chain of events and realizing that all dictates are backed by force. The fact that people “don’t agree” means they’re morons. It is fact.
      - betwixthewires 5y ago
        Well it's not saying "nothing should be enforced ever because all enforcement is backed by violence", it is just acknowledging the reality of it and then determining if a particular rule justifies that, and then farther down, if a rule enforced by violence is unjust, determining whether the enforcing party is an enemy or not. Generally libertarians only allow for rules against behaviors that violate the rights of others because of this, and I think that's about right.
      - RHSeeger 5y ago
        > You're saying you want to use violence up to and including murder to keep our sidewalks clean! Because that's what you _are_ saying. Laws are enforced by the police, and they are able to be enforced by the police because the police are legally able to use force. I do not understand what other view there is to take on the issue. In my mind, it's not an opinion, it's a fact.
- rhn_mk1 5y ago
  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53934952 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53934952 > A minimum €50 (£45) fine will be slapped on anyone breaking rules on face coverings - in shops, public transport or elsewhere
- kragen 5y ago
  This is officially government policy in the PRC, as well as many other places.
- ridaj 5y ago
  Mask mandates (public or private) means cops will forcibly remove you if, say, you're walking around in a mall without wearing one, so yes police violence and bodily harm is part of the threat. It also means that if your job or business requires you to work in places where a mask is required, but you don't want to wear a mask, you'll lose your job or business, causing financial harm. But it's not unusual. We have the same things for antisocial behaviors in general. If you like to take dumps in the middle of a mall, the police will forcibly remove you. If your job requires you not to take a dump on your desk but that's what you like to do, you will suffer job loss and financial harm from a no-pooping-on-the-desk mandates. The same can be said for seatbelt laws too. I don't think that's an issue with the mandate personally, that's what a mandate means.
- beervirus 5y ago
  Other countries will absolutely subject you to police intervention for failure to wear a mask.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  At the end of the day all government mandates come with an implied threat of violence, but that aside, since we are talking about Bangladesh in this thread, I know some people from there and the police regularly beat people in the street for violating covid mandates and they even broadcast the beatings on television as a deterrent.
- bsksi 5y ago
  In my country you are removed and fined if you are seen indoors or outdoors where you can't keep a distance without a mask. It's when I read comments like yours that I feel so jealous of the US. You don't even know what living where I am is like. For you it's like a place that couldn't possibly exist. :P
  - nivenkos 5y ago
    > It's when I read comments like yours that I feel so jealous of the US. And then the same Americans ban you from Reddit if you complain about the lockdowns or forced mask mandates.
    - RHSeeger 5y ago
      1. The people that are in charge of making such decisions (scientists, politicians, etc) said you should (and in some cases must) wear a mask. They said that doing so is more for the protections of others, but it also helps the wearer. 2. The impact of wearing a mask, with the exception of a small subset of people, is negligible. At most, it's very slightly uncomfortable. Given those two things, choosing _not_ to wear a mask makes you a bad person in the eyes of most people; and rightfully so. You are unwilling to put forth a minimal effort to help protect those around you. And yes, if everyone sees you as a bad person because of your chosen actions, then you can expect to shun/comdemn/avoid you. That's how society works across the world. Now that this study has come out, with actual numbers, hopefully the recommendations will change; or at least it will spur some research to try to confirm the lack of protection provided by cloth masks. Recommendations were made based on existing information. New information is added and recommendations/actions are taken based on that. That's how science is _supposed_ to work.
      - nivenkos 5y ago
        I don't want to get in to a philosophical argument, but here in Sweden pretty much no-one wears masks anywhere.
- nivenkos 5y ago
  Have you not heard of the lockdowns here in Europe? In Spain we were forced inside for 2 months, and then forced to wear masks at all times in public - indoors and outdoors. The police got a free pass to beat and arrest people with the excuse of masks or curfew: https://elpais.com/espana/2021-03-28/la-policia-investiga-a-dos-agentes-por-la-violenta-detencion-de-una-mujer-sin-mascarilla-en-benidorm.html https://elpais.com/espana/2021-03-28/la-policia-investiga-a-... I got banned from some subreddits just for posting that, because it's become such a political issue in the US.
  - bsksi 5y ago
    And don't forget that all of this was ruled illegal a year later. All fines reimbursed, but who gives us back the time that was stolen from us?
  - Dma54rhs 5y ago
    I don't think there's a country wearing masks in Europe as much as Spain did (visited many times during the last 1.5 yrs) but it doesn't translate well with infection numbers compared to other EU countries that had lax or non existant rules regarding masks.
- tomjen3 5y ago
  >Who in the mainstream proposing police violence, bodily or financial harm? This is what you do whenever you propose a fine. Ultimately fines are paid because otherwise men with guns will threaten you if you don't hand over the money. We spruce it up with layers and layers, but at the end of it if it comes down to it, it is enforced by men with guns.
- rubyist5eva 5y ago
  This is the popular sentiment on most Canadian subreddits: https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/pgr2sl/it_is_past_time_to_start_treating_the_anti_crowd/ https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/pgr2sl/it_is_pas... Anecdotally, I was personally assaulted for not wearing a mask because I took it off after needing to use my ventolin to prevent an asthma attack in a mall. I only need to remove it for about 2-3 minutes at a time the odd time I feel an attack coming on, which only really happens when the weather is really aggrivating me during the hottest summer months where I am. That was enough time for some lunatic to come suckerpunch me in the back of the head and run away. I've seen people yelling and screaming at others, store employees putting their hands on elderly people not wearing masks and pushing them around. Mobs of masked people surrounding and intimidating individuals who were not masked in places they were not required to be. There were reports of police breaking into homes and physically removing people that were visiting over Christmas. I could go on and on...
- 908B64B197 5y ago
  Someone sent it to me a little while ago. Enjoy. https://youtu.be/5ByEppIvsDc https://youtu.be/5ByEppIvsDc
- hncurious 5y ago
  It's gone beyond proposal to actually happening in some places. There are some scary examples coming out of Australia. https://youtu.be/XOKPtYdDh20?t=232 https://youtu.be/XOKPtYdDh20?t=232 https://twitter.com/Lukewearechange/status/1433065778803265539 https://twitter.com/Lukewearechange/status/14330657788032655...
nielsbot 5y ago
Why not? It's harm reduction. You're required to wear a seat belt and have car insurance. Cigarette manufacturers are required to put warning labels on their products. Wearing a mask is annoying and unfashionable but not that annoying. Plus, when COVID numbers drop, mask mandates are again lifted.
kongin 5y ago
Ban open offices. The simplest solution that solve so many problems.
mullen 5y ago
This is naive. There is a significant portion of the population that are not going to cooperated with health safety protocols unless there is a real chance of them going to jail or getting a fine. We're talking wearing a mask and saving lives.
- dboreham 5y ago
  Based on my experience living in a "red state" in the USA, it really doesn't take that level of sanction. People almost universally wore masks in grocery stores here when: a) it was a state mandate/law and b) the asshole state politicians kept their mouths shut about it. Prior to the state mandate there was a patchwork of business and local health dept mandates that were far less well observed. Then subsequently (when the governor changed from Dem to GOP) the politicians realized they could score points with the "not gona do it" crowd by criticizing mask wearing and we went back to nobody wearing masks. And finally, delta variant seems to have scared a significant cohort into voluntary mask wearing.
- djrogers 5y ago
  > We're talking wearing a mask and saving lives This study doesn’t show that - it shows a slower rate of transmission, but without vaccination, the long term infection rate will ultimately be the same.
- logicalmonster 5y ago
  Let's conduct a thought-experiment. Would most people be cooperating with the health and safety protocols if there was an outbreak of Ebola?
- exabrial 5y ago
  > We're talking wearing a mask and saving lives. What if they don't want your input in their lives?
barbazoo 5y ago
I don't get this mindset at all. Temporarily masking up at pretty much zero impact to the user vs. upgrading all building's HVAC system.
- merpnderp 5y ago
  But upgrading HVAC systems is far more effective.
  - barbazoo 5y ago
    Sure but is it realistic, especially in the short term?
    - merpnderp 5y ago
      It's been nearly two years and COVID is likely not going away.
- djrogers 5y ago
  Temporarily? In what was is any of this temporary if COVID is going to be endemic? At some point we need a way forward, and that really shouldn’t require masks in all public settings. BTW - masks completely destroy my beard, so they’re not ‘zero impact’ by any means. ;-)
  - barbazoo 5y ago
    I have a beard myself, how could I have forgotten about that. You're right, long term, improving ventilation is how to reduce exposure, in the meantime though, I don't think it's too much to ask to mask up.
    - postalrat 5y ago
      It's been 2 years. How many more do I need to wait?

douglasisshiny 5y ago

>However, _mandates_, literally threatening people with police violence, bodily or financial harm, is not the correct way forward. Maybe I'm missing something, but is this actually a thing? Who in the mainstream proposing police violence, bodily or financial harm? The worst I've heard (in the U.S.) is that a business may not allow you to enter if you're not wearing a mask, which is well within their right and reasonable.

logicalmonster 5y ago
> Who in the mainstream proposing police violence, bodily or financial harm? People with some flavor of libertarian viewpoint have often explained how every piece of legislation is ultimately backed up by physical force from police officers. Ultimately, if you violate any government policy: whether it is taxation, opening up an illegal lemonade stand, or trying to attend a restaurant that has a vaccine mandate imposed on it, it is ultimately physical force that backs this up if compliance is refused. As far as financial harm: see the government strongly encouraging corporations to mandate vaccines or other similar policies.
learc83 5y ago
Libertarians like to make this argument about any government enforcement action. If the government tells you that you can't play loud music after 10pm and you do it anyway, eventually someone will issue you a citation. If you refuse to pay that, eventually you'll get a court summons. If you fail to appear, eventually a police officer may arrest you. If you resist, they will use force to make you comply. It's a bit hyperbolic, but it is a standard libertarian/objectivist "gotcha".
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  It's a pretty solid gotcha.
  - learc83 5y ago
    It's a terrible gotcha. It's only effective on people who already agree with you. Imagine a town council meeting where someone is proposing a $25 fine for crapping on the sidewalk. And a libertarian pops and screaming "You're saying you want to use violence up to and including murder to keep our sidewalks clean!" Again technically there is a hypothetical chain of causality from sidewalk crapping fine to bodily harm/murder, but no one other than another hardcore libertarian is going to be convinced by that argument.
    - ta07643887 5y ago
      Absolute nonsense. It’s merely walking through the chain of events and realizing that all dictates are backed by force. The fact that people “don’t agree” means they’re morons. It is fact.
    - betwixthewires 5y ago
      Well it's not saying "nothing should be enforced ever because all enforcement is backed by violence", it is just acknowledging the reality of it and then determining if a particular rule justifies that, and then farther down, if a rule enforced by violence is unjust, determining whether the enforcing party is an enemy or not. Generally libertarians only allow for rules against behaviors that violate the rights of others because of this, and I think that's about right.
    - RHSeeger 5y ago
      > You're saying you want to use violence up to and including murder to keep our sidewalks clean! Because that's what you _are_ saying. Laws are enforced by the police, and they are able to be enforced by the police because the police are legally able to use force. I do not understand what other view there is to take on the issue. In my mind, it's not an opinion, it's a fact.
rhn_mk1 5y ago
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53934952 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53934952 > A minimum €50 (£45) fine will be slapped on anyone breaking rules on face coverings - in shops, public transport or elsewhere
kragen 5y ago
This is officially government policy in the PRC, as well as many other places.
ridaj 5y ago
Mask mandates (public or private) means cops will forcibly remove you if, say, you're walking around in a mall without wearing one, so yes police violence and bodily harm is part of the threat. It also means that if your job or business requires you to work in places where a mask is required, but you don't want to wear a mask, you'll lose your job or business, causing financial harm. But it's not unusual. We have the same things for antisocial behaviors in general. If you like to take dumps in the middle of a mall, the police will forcibly remove you. If your job requires you not to take a dump on your desk but that's what you like to do, you will suffer job loss and financial harm from a no-pooping-on-the-desk mandates. The same can be said for seatbelt laws too. I don't think that's an issue with the mandate personally, that's what a mandate means.
beervirus 5y ago
Other countries will absolutely subject you to police intervention for failure to wear a mask.
betwixthewires 5y ago
At the end of the day all government mandates come with an implied threat of violence, but that aside, since we are talking about Bangladesh in this thread, I know some people from there and the police regularly beat people in the street for violating covid mandates and they even broadcast the beatings on television as a deterrent.
bsksi 5y ago
In my country you are removed and fined if you are seen indoors or outdoors where you can't keep a distance without a mask. It's when I read comments like yours that I feel so jealous of the US. You don't even know what living where I am is like. For you it's like a place that couldn't possibly exist. :P
- nivenkos 5y ago
  > It's when I read comments like yours that I feel so jealous of the US. And then the same Americans ban you from Reddit if you complain about the lockdowns or forced mask mandates.
  - RHSeeger 5y ago
    1. The people that are in charge of making such decisions (scientists, politicians, etc) said you should (and in some cases must) wear a mask. They said that doing so is more for the protections of others, but it also helps the wearer. 2. The impact of wearing a mask, with the exception of a small subset of people, is negligible. At most, it's very slightly uncomfortable. Given those two things, choosing _not_ to wear a mask makes you a bad person in the eyes of most people; and rightfully so. You are unwilling to put forth a minimal effort to help protect those around you. And yes, if everyone sees you as a bad person because of your chosen actions, then you can expect to shun/comdemn/avoid you. That's how society works across the world. Now that this study has come out, with actual numbers, hopefully the recommendations will change; or at least it will spur some research to try to confirm the lack of protection provided by cloth masks. Recommendations were made based on existing information. New information is added and recommendations/actions are taken based on that. That's how science is _supposed_ to work.
    - nivenkos 5y ago
      I don't want to get in to a philosophical argument, but here in Sweden pretty much no-one wears masks anywhere.
nivenkos 5y ago
Have you not heard of the lockdowns here in Europe? In Spain we were forced inside for 2 months, and then forced to wear masks at all times in public - indoors and outdoors. The police got a free pass to beat and arrest people with the excuse of masks or curfew: https://elpais.com/espana/2021-03-28/la-policia-investiga-a-dos-agentes-por-la-violenta-detencion-de-una-mujer-sin-mascarilla-en-benidorm.html https://elpais.com/espana/2021-03-28/la-policia-investiga-a-... I got banned from some subreddits just for posting that, because it's become such a political issue in the US.
- bsksi 5y ago
  And don't forget that all of this was ruled illegal a year later. All fines reimbursed, but who gives us back the time that was stolen from us?
- Dma54rhs 5y ago
  I don't think there's a country wearing masks in Europe as much as Spain did (visited many times during the last 1.5 yrs) but it doesn't translate well with infection numbers compared to other EU countries that had lax or non existant rules regarding masks.
tomjen3 5y ago
>Who in the mainstream proposing police violence, bodily or financial harm? This is what you do whenever you propose a fine. Ultimately fines are paid because otherwise men with guns will threaten you if you don't hand over the money. We spruce it up with layers and layers, but at the end of it if it comes down to it, it is enforced by men with guns.
rubyist5eva 5y ago
This is the popular sentiment on most Canadian subreddits: https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/pgr2sl/it_is_past_time_to_start_treating_the_anti_crowd/ https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/pgr2sl/it_is_pas... Anecdotally, I was personally assaulted for not wearing a mask because I took it off after needing to use my ventolin to prevent an asthma attack in a mall. I only need to remove it for about 2-3 minutes at a time the odd time I feel an attack coming on, which only really happens when the weather is really aggrivating me during the hottest summer months where I am. That was enough time for some lunatic to come suckerpunch me in the back of the head and run away. I've seen people yelling and screaming at others, store employees putting their hands on elderly people not wearing masks and pushing them around. Mobs of masked people surrounding and intimidating individuals who were not masked in places they were not required to be. There were reports of police breaking into homes and physically removing people that were visiting over Christmas. I could go on and on...
908B64B197 5y ago
Someone sent it to me a little while ago. Enjoy. https://youtu.be/5ByEppIvsDc https://youtu.be/5ByEppIvsDc
hncurious 5y ago
It's gone beyond proposal to actually happening in some places. There are some scary examples coming out of Australia. https://youtu.be/XOKPtYdDh20?t=232 https://youtu.be/XOKPtYdDh20?t=232 https://twitter.com/Lukewearechange/status/1433065778803265539 https://twitter.com/Lukewearechange/status/14330657788032655...

nielsbot 5y ago

Why not? It's harm reduction. You're required to wear a seat belt and have car insurance. Cigarette manufacturers are required to put warning labels on their products. Wearing a mask is annoying and unfashionable but not that annoying. Plus, when COVID numbers drop, mask mandates are again lifted.

kongin 5y ago

Ban open offices. The simplest solution that solve so many problems.

mullen 5y ago

This is naive. There is a significant portion of the population that are not going to cooperated with health safety protocols unless there is a real chance of them going to jail or getting a fine. We're talking wearing a mask and saving lives.

dboreham 5y ago
Based on my experience living in a "red state" in the USA, it really doesn't take that level of sanction. People almost universally wore masks in grocery stores here when: a) it was a state mandate/law and b) the asshole state politicians kept their mouths shut about it. Prior to the state mandate there was a patchwork of business and local health dept mandates that were far less well observed. Then subsequently (when the governor changed from Dem to GOP) the politicians realized they could score points with the "not gona do it" crowd by criticizing mask wearing and we went back to nobody wearing masks. And finally, delta variant seems to have scared a significant cohort into voluntary mask wearing.
djrogers 5y ago
> We're talking wearing a mask and saving lives This study doesn’t show that - it shows a slower rate of transmission, but without vaccination, the long term infection rate will ultimately be the same.
logicalmonster 5y ago
Let's conduct a thought-experiment. Would most people be cooperating with the health and safety protocols if there was an outbreak of Ebola?
exabrial 5y ago
> We're talking wearing a mask and saving lives. What if they don't want your input in their lives?

barbazoo 5y ago

I don't get this mindset at all. Temporarily masking up at pretty much zero impact to the user vs. upgrading all building's HVAC system.

merpnderp 5y ago
But upgrading HVAC systems is far more effective.
- barbazoo 5y ago
  Sure but is it realistic, especially in the short term?
  - merpnderp 5y ago
    It's been nearly two years and COVID is likely not going away.
djrogers 5y ago
Temporarily? In what was is any of this temporary if COVID is going to be endemic? At some point we need a way forward, and that really shouldn’t require masks in all public settings. BTW - masks completely destroy my beard, so they’re not ‘zero impact’ by any means. ;-)
- barbazoo 5y ago
  I have a beard myself, how could I have forgotten about that. You're right, long term, improving ventilation is how to reduce exposure, in the meantime though, I don't think it's too much to ask to mask up.
  - postalrat 5y ago
    It's been 2 years. How many more do I need to wait?