Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-18-2020, 10:31 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 64,104

Judge overturns Oregon Governor's Covid-19 restrictions


Prodded by a group of churches, a county judge has tossed restrictions laid down by Governor Brown, saying that she needed the approval of the Oregon legislature first.
Quote:
Baker County Circuit Judge Matthew Shirtcliff made the ruling Monday in a lawsuit brought by churches that had sued saying the social-distancing directives were unconstitutional.
The suit had also argued that emergency powers only last for a month and after that Brown would have needed legislative approval. The judge agreed.
Brown said she would immediately appeal the ruling to the state Supreme Court to try to keep the emergency orders in effect.
This is disturbing to me.
  #2  
Old 05-18-2020, 11:07 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 24,006
On hold by state Supreme Court.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ore...outputType=amp
  #3  
Old 05-18-2020, 11:15 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 64,104
Thank ghod.
  #4  
Old 05-18-2020, 11:45 PM
russian heel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,111
Another murderer-Judge.
  #5  
Old 05-19-2020, 04:23 AM
dtilque is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: My own private Nogero
Posts: 7,811
It should be noted that the restrictions in Oregon have started to be relaxed for most of the state as of last Friday. (A few of the rural counties have not had a single coronavirus case.) They're still in effect for 5 of the 36 counties, though, including the three that make up the Portland metro area. But even for them, retail establishments can reopen if they are not in a mall and follow social distancing guidelines for both customers and workers.

Bicycle shops, by the way, never had to close, but this being Oregon, I'm sure they're considered 'essential'. Unfortunately, barber shops are still closed in the Portland area, and I really need a haircut.
  #6  
Old 05-19-2020, 06:37 AM
Folacin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: North of the River
Posts: 3,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtilque View Post
Bicycle shops, by the way, never had to close, but this being Oregon, I'm sure they're considered 'essential'. Unfortunately, barber shops are still closed in the Portland area, and I really need a haircut.
Were car dealers and repair shops open (they were in Missouri)? Same thing in an area where a lot of people presumably commute on their bikes.
  #7  
Old 05-19-2020, 08:03 AM
Iggy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 5,495
The Oregon state constitution in Article X-A provides for (see page 38 at pdf link) the Governor's authority to declare a Catastrophic Disaster. Governor Kate Brown did so on February 7, 2020.

However the same Article X-A provides that such a declaration " shall cease to be operative not later than 30 days following the date the Governor invoked the provisions."

To extend the provisions requires that "Prior to expiration of the 30-day limit established in subsection (1) of this section, the Legislative Assembly may extend the operation of sections 1 to 5 of this Article beyond the 30-day limit upon the approval of three-fifths of the members of each house who are able to attend a session."

Further, "an extension described in subsection (2) of this section shall take the form of a bill. A bill that extends the operation of sections 1 to 5 of this Article shall establish a date upon which the provisions of sections 1 to 5 of this Article shall cease to be operative. A bill described in this subsection shall be presented to the Governor for action"

And finally "The Governor may not invoke the provisions of sections 1 to 5 of this Article more than one time with respect to the same catastrophic disaster."


TLDR version:
  1. The Governor can declare a disaster.
  2. That declaration expires after 30 days.
  3. The state legislature must pass a bill to extend a declaration.
  4. The legislature's extension is in the form of a bill that must be passed and sent to the Governor.
  5. The Governor cannot repeatedly declare a disaster in regards to the same event.


The Governor's declaration has expired. Unless and until the legislature acts the courts should rule accordingly.

Of note, the state Constitution explicitly provides that legislators who cannot physically attend a session due to a disaster may participate electronically.

The Governor of Oregon is a Democrat. The state House and state Senate are under Democratic control. What is the hold up?
  #8  
Old 05-19-2020, 09:17 AM
JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Distanced
Posts: 16,476
Yeah, reading the State Constitution does gives me the impression that the written law IS that you can't declare an open-ended Catastrophic Disaster emergency, you get a month and then the legislature gets to approve what will be the terms of any further extension. Seems it's not that crystal clear however, if the State Supreme Court wants to say "everyone hold your horses, let us look at it more closely before making a final call". Is the state claiming that the orders in place are not subject to the state of catastrophe limits? Or just that the challenge was procedurally incorrect?

Last edited by JRDelirious; 05-19-2020 at 09:20 AM.
  #9  
Old 05-19-2020, 09:42 AM
Iggy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 5,495
The applicable sections of the state constitution were added with voter approval in 2016. The Governor is relying on a 1950s era state statute. Me thinks this will not bode well for Governor Brown.

The state Supreme Court is probably wanting to ensure all the i's are dotted and t's are crossed on this one. The stay gives them time to read the lower court's ruling and reflect on it.

I should add, not only is the state legislature in Democratic control, the Democratic party has the requisite 3/5 majority in each house required to extend an emergency declaration. Just get it done already.
  #10  
Old 05-19-2020, 12:32 PM
dtilque is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: My own private Nogero
Posts: 7,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Folacin View Post
Were car dealers and repair shops open (they were in Missouri)? Same thing in an area where a lot of people presumably commute on their bikes.
I think so. I don't own a car, so it's not an issue for me. But my roommate just bought a new car, so they're open now.
  #11  
Old 05-19-2020, 12:50 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 45,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by russian heel View Post
Another murderer-Judge.
Moderator Warning

russian heel, political jabs are not permitted in this forum. This is an official warning. Do not do this again.

Colibri
QZ Moderator
  #12  
Old 05-19-2020, 05:23 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy View Post
The Governor of Oregon is a Democrat. The state House and state Senate are under Democratic control. What is the hold up?
What makes you think there's a hold up?

As for the Supreme Court, I don't see where there is any wiggle room. the law seems pretty clear.
  #13  
Old 05-19-2020, 05:59 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Oh, there's a hold up. (NPR)

Quote:
The 2020 Oregon legislative session is effectively over.

Lawmakers set out with a hefty policy agenda for the 35-day session: bills to prepare the state for an earthquake, changes to the way wildfires are fought, efforts to address the state’s housing crisis and an ambitious climate change policy.

None of that happened.

Instead, Republicans in both the House and Senate left the Capitol last week to protest a cap-and-trade bill. This week, on Thursday, after the two sides spent days trying to end an impasse, legislative leaders unexpectedly adjourned the session three days before the constitutional deadline.
This was done in early March. You think they wouldn't pull this shit again?
  #14  
Old 05-19-2020, 06:43 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Oh, there's a hold up. (NPR)



This was done in early March. You think they wouldn't pull this shit again?
That falls under the "never let a crisis go to waste" doctrine. We're in the middle of a pandemic therefore push through environmental laws.
  #15  
Old 05-19-2020, 06:43 PM
JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Distanced
Posts: 16,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy View Post
I should add, not only is the state legislature in Democratic control, the Democratic party has the requisite 3/5 majority in each house required to extend an emergency declaration. Just get it done already.
However...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Oh, there's a hold up. (NPR)

This was done in early March. You think they wouldn't pull this shit again?
...according to that report you need a two-thirds (67%, vs. 60%) attendance for a quorum. Now, I may not be a constititional lawyer, but I have worked with politicians and legislatures for over two decades and IMO that is a baffling requirement. Supermajorities to override vetoes, convict in impeachments, amend constitutions, close debates, discharge bills, extend emergencies ? Sure. But to even MEET the Houses?
  #16  
Old 05-19-2020, 06:57 PM
TroutMan's Avatar
TroutMan is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 5,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRDelirious View Post
However......according to that report you need a two-thirds (67%, vs. 60%) attendance for a quorum. Now, I may not be a constititional lawyer, but I have worked with politicians and legislatures for over two decades and IMO that is a baffling requirement. Supermajorities to override vetoes, convict in impeachments, amend constitutions, close debates, discharge bills, extend emergencies ? Sure. But to even MEET the Houses?
Adding another wrinkle, you don't always need the full 2/3 of each house during a declared emergency.

Quote:
...when members of the Legislative Assembly are unable to compel the attendance of two-thirds of the members of each house because the catastrophic disaster has made it impossible to locate members or impossible for them to attend, two-thirds of the members of each house who are able to attend shall constitute a quorum to do business.
(bolding mine) So depending on how the bolded part is interpreted, maybe the Republicans wouldn't be able to shut it down by staying away. Does a court put more emphasis on "unable to compel the attendance" and not worry as much about the reasons someone might stay away?
  #17  
Old 05-19-2020, 07:09 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
That falls under the "never let a crisis go to waste" doctrine. We're in the middle of a pandemic therefore push through environmental laws.
You didn't read that article too closely, did you? It was written on March 5th. The legislature was trying to deal with its already-set agenda. The regular legislative period is already over for 2020.

Governor Brown issued her emergency declaration and stay-at-home orders on March 8th. The legislature may have had to call a special emergency session to hear any proceeding pertaining to the pandemic -- and the article is evidence of what Republicans may have done to stop whatever the Governor was trying to accomplish. I'm sorry you're unable to connect those dots.

TroutMan, yours is an interesting question. Trouble is, by the time these questions are settled by the courts, the emergency is already underway and the time to act slips past.

I have confidence that if Dems can find a way around the obstructive behavior, they will. Mostly it comes down to November. Let's make it count.
  #18  
Old 05-19-2020, 07:28 PM
TroutMan's Avatar
TroutMan is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 5,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
TroutMan, yours is an interesting question. Trouble is, by the time these questions are settled by the courts, the emergency is already underway and the time to act slips past.
Yeah, I honestly don't know how it would play out. Does the speaker say "the missing members aren't here because of the emergency, therefore I declare a quorum," and it would be up to the courts to put a stop to it? Because like you say, by the time the courts make a ruling, the emergency order has been de facto extended. But if the speaker doesn't have the power to declare a quorum, then a delay would result in the expiration of the order.

Quote:
I have confidence that if Dems can find a way around the obstructive behavior, they will. Mostly it comes down to November. Let's make it count.
Dems already have a super majority, and honestly, they've gerrymandered the state as much as they can. I don't think getting rid of enough Republicans to reach 2/3 majority is realistic. Ideally, it would be nice if the Republican voters decided to boot the incumbents who can't be bothered to do their job and bring in some Republicans with integrity, but you and I both know the likelihood of that.
  #19  
Old 05-19-2020, 07:47 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
You didn't read that article too closely, did you? It was written on March 5th. The legislature was trying to deal with its already-set agenda. The regular legislative period is already over for 2020.

Governor Brown issued her emergency declaration and stay-at-home orders on March 8th. The legislature may have had to call a special emergency session to hear any proceeding pertaining to the pandemic -- and the article is evidence of what Republicans may have done to stop whatever the Governor was trying to accomplish. I'm sorry you're unable to connect those dots.
the dots are an economic poison pill in the face of a pandemic.
  #20  
Old 05-19-2020, 08:21 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
the dots are an economic poison pill in the face of a pandemic.
You seem to be laboring under the false notion of a binary choice that by simply lifting the stay-at-home orders, the economy will come roaring back to life. I assure you, this is not the case. Until people feel safe, they are not going to rejoin regular society in the way you hope.

Address the public health concerns, and the economy will take care of itself.
  #21  
Old 05-19-2020, 08:27 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
Yeah, I honestly don't know how it would play out. Does the speaker say "the missing members aren't here because of the emergency, therefore I declare a quorum," and it would be up to the courts to put a stop to it? Because like you say, by the time the courts make a ruling, the emergency order has been de facto extended. But if the speaker doesn't have the power to declare a quorum, then a delay would result in the expiration of the order.

Dems already have a super majority, and honestly, they've gerrymandered the state as much as they can. I don't think getting rid of enough Republicans to reach 2/3 majority is realistic. Ideally, it would be nice if the Republican voters decided to boot the incumbents who can't be bothered to do their job and bring in some Republicans with integrity, but you and I both know the likelihood of that.
The appeal to the State Supreme Court may have accomplished, at least temporarily, what Governor Brown needs.

Last edited by Aspenglow; 05-19-2020 at 08:27 PM.
  #22  
Old 05-19-2020, 09:37 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
You seem to be laboring under the false notion of a binary choice that by simply lifting the stay-at-home orders, the economy will come roaring back to life. I assure you, this is not the case. Until people feel safe, they are not going to rejoin regular society in the way you hope.

Address the public health concerns, and the economy will take care of itself.
I was referring to the cap and trade laws that were proposed. Now is not the time for them.

As for the people in Oregon, they will act in their own best interest regardless of whether a law expires. Those who are most vulnerable will shelter in place and wear masks out in public long after the rules are relaxed. Others who are not at physical risk will do what they can do avoid financial ruin. So yes, it's not a binary situation.
  #23  
Old 05-19-2020, 11:16 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
I was referring to the cap and trade laws that were proposed. Now is not the time for them.
Of course you latched onto that, because it suits your narrative. As the article mentioned, there were over 100 other items of legislation that were scrapped because Republicans spit the dummy. It is the citizens of Oregon who were losers for that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
As for the people in Oregon, they will act in their own best interest regardless of whether a law expires. Those who are most vulnerable will shelter in place and wear masks out in public long after the rules are relaxed. Others who are not at physical risk will do what they can do avoid financial ruin. So yes, it's not a binary situation.
Wearing a mask does not protect the wearer. It protects others who are sharing air with the wearer. People who don't wear a mask are basically advertising to those around them they couldn't care less whether his/her fellow citizens catch COVID-19.

I think you'll soon understand this fact within, oh, two to three weeks.
  #24  
Old 05-20-2020, 12:03 AM
Monty's Avatar
Monty is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 24,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
As for the people in Oregon, they will act in their own best interest regardless of whether a law expires. Those who are most vulnerable will shelter in place and wear masks out in public long after the rules are relaxed. Others who are not at physical risk will do what they can do avoid financial ruin. So yes, it's not a binary situation.

You actually believe this. And so do a lot of other people. The problem is that you and they are absolutely and fundamentally wrong. There are people who simply do not think they are at risk, nor that they are spreading the disease.
  #25  
Old 05-20-2020, 01:51 AM
UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 17,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
Adding another wrinkle, you don't always need the full 2/3 of each house during a declared emergency.


(bolding mine) So depending on how the bolded part is interpreted, maybe the Republicans wouldn't be able to shut it down by staying away. Does a court put more emphasis on "unable to compel the attendance" and not worry as much about the reasons someone might stay away?
That would be a pretty broad reading. What has happened that would make it "impossible" to locate members of the legislature or otherwise make it "impossible" for them to attend?

If the word used was "difficult" or "impractical" or "improvident" then I could see that argument, but "impossible" is pretty strong medicine.
  #26  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:28 AM
TroutMan's Avatar
TroutMan is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 5,398
No doubt it's a stretch. My point isn't that it would be likely to succeed, but I certainly think there are people who would be willing to attempt that stretch.
  #27  
Old 05-20-2020, 01:22 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Of course you latched onto that, because it suits your narrative. As the article mentioned, there were over 100 other items of legislation that were scrapped because Republicans spit the dummy. It is the citizens of Oregon who were losers for that.
having industry throttled with cap and trade during an emergency is a massively bad idea. It's not even debatable. All they had to do was remove it from the vote.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Wearing a mask does not protect the wearer. It protects others who are sharing air with the wearer.
if it's an N-95 mask it protects both unless it's an n-95 with a valve in it.
  #28  
Old 05-20-2020, 01:29 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty View Post
You actually believe this. And so do a lot of other people. The problem is that you and they are absolutely and fundamentally wrong. There are people who simply do not think they are at risk, nor that they are spreading the disease.
Yes, I actually believe that people who are at risk know who they are and can continue to shelter in place and use N-95 msks until the virus runs it's course.

You on the other hand don't appear to have an end-game of any kind. This virus is going to be around a long time. It's been 9 weeks and the country can't afford whatever fantasy is playing out in your head. We have the numbers down and we're going back to work in a controlled manner. If there are outbreaks in certain areas then those areas can be addressed and not the whole country.
  #29  
Old 05-20-2020, 01:57 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
having industry throttled with cap and trade during an emergency is a massively bad idea. It's not even debatable. All they had to do was remove it from the vote.
Incorrect. The Governor will simply proceed with unilateral Executive action on climate concerns. They've stopped nothing except legislation that would have served many more Oregonians than just those opposed to cap and trade.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
if it's an N-95 mask it protects both unless it's an n-95 with a valve in it.
You be sure to let me know when those become widely available to the public at large.
  #30  
Old 05-20-2020, 02:26 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Incorrect. The Governor will simply proceed with unilateral Executive action on climate concerns. They've stopped nothing except legislation that would have served many more Oregonians than just those opposed to cap and trade.
uh huh. The governor is going to screw industry in the the middle of a financial crisis. Sounds like a plan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
You be sure to let me know when those become widely available to the public at large.
You can buy them right now on the internet. Haven't checked local stores.
  #31  
Old 05-20-2020, 03:01 PM
UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 17,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
No doubt it's a stretch. My point isn't that it would be likely to succeed, but I certainly think there are people who would be willing to attempt that stretch.
It seems to me to be a pretty reasonable enactment for emergency powers. The Gov gets to call an emergency for 30 days. That's plenty of time for the legislature to come back and have the people's representatives decide whether to extend it. If it is truly impossible to meet (say a nuclear war) then that is waived.

If some members of the legislature are refusing to attend, then the sergeant at arms can compel their attendance. If they flee to another state and extradition warrants are in the works, then it is now "impossible" to find them in the prescribed statutory time I would concede.

Frankly, I think that is much better than allowing one person to keep a perpetual state of emergency active.
  #32  
Old 05-20-2020, 03:04 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 64,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
If some members of the legislature are refusing to attend, then the sergeant at arms can compel their attendance.
For example? In theory that sounds nice, but it just isn't going to happen if the Republicans decide not to show up.
  #33  
Old 05-20-2020, 03:09 PM
UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 17,454
To follow up, what in these laws in Oregon or any other state prevents a governor from saying that there is a "state of emergency" because of a drug epidemic or a drunk driving epidemic or (to get even more political) a gun epidemic or abortion epidemic?

It seems like if you get the right whore experts to testi-lie in court you can justify any of these things.
  #34  
Old 05-20-2020, 03:11 PM
UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 17,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
For example? In theory that sounds nice, but it just isn't going to happen if the Republicans decide not to show up.
The power is pretty clear. Go to their house and arrest them and drag them to the floor of the legislature. If there is no political will to do that, then that doesn't create an impossibility.
  #35  
Old 05-20-2020, 04:32 PM
slash2k is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Yes, I actually believe that people who are at risk know who they are and can continue to shelter in place and use N-95 msks until the virus runs it's course.
Two points:

1. EVERYBODY is at risk. Some are at greater risk, some at lesser, but nobody is at zero risk.

2. People have an unfortunate tendency to believe that bad stuff happens to other people, especially the wrong sort of other people. There are still plenty of Americans who think that God will protect them, or that this is a disease only of crowded cities, or that only "urban" people (that's code for poor and non-white) are at risk, or that this whole pandemic is a fake crisis, or any number of other misguided beliefs. Until the disease hits squarely in their community or their family, they won't believe they are at risk, and they won't take precautions for themselves or for the people around them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
You can buy them right now on the internet. Haven't checked local stores.
The internet is awash in counterfeit N95 masks or masks of dubious quality; most known-reliable sources I'm familiar with are out-of-stock indefinitely. Locally, the only place I know that has them in stock is a medical supply that is selling them at $10/each, which makes them prohibitively costly if they cannot be reused (and home sterilization methods can be shaky: alcohols sprays seriously degrade filter efficiency, e.g.). Even hospitals and other medical facilities are still experiencing intermittent shortages and difficulties, so no, they're not readily available yet to most ordinary people.

Last edited by slash2k; 05-20-2020 at 04:33 PM. Reason: hit submit too soon
  #36  
Old 05-20-2020, 08:04 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by slash2k View Post
Two points:

1. EVERYBODY is at risk. Some are at greater risk, some at lesser, but nobody is at zero risk.
So? That applies to every disease. The vast majority survive this virus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slash2k View Post
2. People have an unfortunate tendency to believe that bad stuff happens to other people, especially the wrong sort of other people. There are still plenty of Americans who think that God will protect them, or that this is a disease only of crowded cities, or that only "urban" people (that's code for poor and non-white) are at risk, .
this is a racist rant and serves no purpose other than to feed a bigoted mindset.

People have patiently waited over 2 months to maintain control of medical assets. This has been attained and they need to go back to work. It's not an option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slash2k View Post
The internet is awash in counterfeit N95 masks or masks of dubious quality; most known-reliable sources I'm familiar with are out-of-stock indefinitely.
Nothing is out of stock indefinitely and your cite is from a newspaper that in noway validates the on-going supply chain. The US military has contracted 39 million n-95 masks domestically over the next 3 months and we're importing another 166 million.
  #37  
Old 05-20-2020, 08:57 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
uh huh. The governor is going to screw industry in the the middle of a financial crisis. Sounds like a plan.
You're entitled to your opinion, of course. Everyone has one. But that's all you've expressed.

In fact, the majority of citizens in Oregon support climate change action. Again, this is not a binary choice as you seem inclined to use in your posts. There are ways to address climate change concerns without "screwing industry," as you put it. But we're not discussing climate change remediation strategies in this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
You can buy them right now on the internet. Haven't checked local stores.
Unless you brought enough for the whole class, meaning every citizen in the United States who may be exposed to the breath of another citizen, as well as enough for those citizens to change those masks as often as necessary, this is an irrelevant and meaningless point.

You do not get to decide who lives and who dies. This is a public health emergency. The Governor is tasked with protecting the welfare of Oregon citizens -- all Oregon citizens -- both their health and their economic well being. Health comes first. She's already working to reopen industries that can be reopened safely. 'Safely' means no large gatherings of people indoors. Like in churches. She's doing her job, and the Oregon legislature should be ashamed if they are not willing to assist her. Ill informed, cow county circuit court judges who are agenda-driven and not cognizant of the science of pandemics should also be ashamed. Their ignorance endangers us all.

I suspect Governor Brown has already accomplished her goal of buying more time to do what must be done. You act like she is sitting on her hands. She's not, and your failure to recognize that is telling.

Personally, I have no problem with people gathering in their churches during a public health emergency that requires physical distancing, provided they are willing to stay in those churches and foresake public interaction for the entirety of a quarantine period.
  #38  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:20 PM
Monty's Avatar
Monty is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 24,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
this is a racist rant and serves no purpose other than to feed a bigoted mindset.

No, it was a rant about racism. Its purpose was to point out a bigoted mindset.
  #39  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:28 PM
TroutMan's Avatar
TroutMan is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 5,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Ill informed, cow county circuit court judges...
...who happen to be Facebook friends with the pastor leading the suit against the state. I guess we just have to trust there's no bias.
  #40  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:35 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
...who happen to be Facebook friends with the pastor leading the suit against the state. I guess we just have to trust there's no bias.
Didn't know that, but not surprised. A scummy bit of icing on the rotten, stinking cake.
  #41  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:35 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
You're entitled to your opinion, of course. Everyone has one. But that's all you've expressed.

In fact, the majority of citizens in Oregon support climate change action. Again, this is not a binary choice as you seem inclined to use in your posts. There are ways to address climate change concerns without "screwing industry," as you put it. But we're not discussing climate change remediation strategies in this thread.
how do they feel about financial ruin. Oregon has one of the lowest death rates in the country.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Unless you brought enough for the whole class, meaning every citizen in the United States who may be exposed to the breath of another citizen, as well as enough for those citizens to change those masks as often as necessary, this is an irrelevant and meaningless point.
what a load of nonsense. You would destroy the country waiting for something that will never, ever happen. Can you cite this is the Governor's plan?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
I suspect Governor Brown has already accomplished her goal of buying more time to do what must be done. You act like she is sitting on her hands. She's not, and your failure to recognize that is telling.
I act like I think she's already accomplished her goal of buying more time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Personally, I have no problem with people gathering in their churches during a public health emergency that requires physical distancing, provided they are willing to stay in those churches and foresake public interaction for the entirety of a quarantine period.
Personally I have no problem with people gathering at their place of employment after 2+ months of financial chaos. Again, Oregon has one of the lowest death rates in the country.
  #42  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:39 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty View Post
No, it was a rant about racism. Its purpose was to point out a bigoted mindset.
Bullshit.
  #43  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:47 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
how do they feel about financial ruin. Oregon has one of the lowest death rates in the country.
... because of our strict physical distancing and lockdown orders. You consistently overlook this in your posts. It seems beyond your comprehension to understand that it is the very thing you are chafing against that have produced these low numbers.

<snip>

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Personally I have no problem with people gathering at their place of employment after 2+ months of financial chaos. Again, Oregon has one of the lowest death rates in the country.
Again, because we locked down hard. People can go back to work as it becomes safe. Again, this is a public health crisis. Normal rules don't apply.

Governor Brown's plan (found with 30 seconds of Google).
  #44  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:58 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 45,612
Since the discussion is largely political, let's move this to Politics and Elections.

Colibri
General Questions Moderator
  #45  
Old 05-20-2020, 10:07 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
... because of our strict physical distancing and lockdown orders. You consistently overlook this in your posts. It seems beyond your comprehension to understand that it is the very thing you are chafing against that have produced these low numbers.
No, I'm not chafing at anything. I agreed with you that the Governor got the numbers down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
.Again, because we locked down hard. People can go back to work as it becomes safe. Again, this is a public health crisis. Normal rules don't apply.
Then you agree with people who are challenging the Governor's plan going forward after doing an outstanding job.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Governor Brown's plan (found with 30 seconds of Google).
Great, now dig through your cite and show me the governor is waiting for enough N95 masks for everyone which you seemed to think was important. Otherwise, admit your insistence that we have enough for everyone was a pointless mental exercise.

Last edited by Magiver; 05-20-2020 at 10:08 PM.
  #46  
Old 05-20-2020, 10:10 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
<snip>

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Then you agree with people who are challenging the Governor's plan going forward after doing an outstanding job.
No. This makes no sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Great, now dig through your cite and show me the governor is waiting for enough N95 masks for everyone which you seemed to think was important. Otherwise, admit your insistence that we have enough for everyone was a pointless mental exercise.
Do your own homework, sport. You've offered no cite for anything you're contending whatsoever. Your games are transparent and tiresome.

Last edited by Aspenglow; 05-20-2020 at 10:10 PM.
  #47  
Old 05-20-2020, 10:21 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
No. This makes no sense.
It makes perfect sense if you look at the numbers. You said yourself the Governor did a good job and I agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Do your own homework, sport. You've offered no cite for anything you're contending whatsoever. Your games are transparent and tiresome.
You're the one that insists we all have masks. I called you on it. It's nonsense. We don't all need masks. I asked you to cite it was part of the Governor's plan knowing it's nonsense. It was to prove a point which sailed over your head.

Last edited by Magiver; 05-20-2020 at 10:22 PM.
  #48  
Old 05-20-2020, 10:33 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
It makes perfect sense if you look at the numbers. You said yourself the Governor did a good job and I agreed.

You're the one that insists we all have masks. I called you on it. It's nonsense. We don't all need masks. I asked you to cite it was part of the Governor's plan knowing it's nonsense. It was to prove a point which sailed over your head.
I've insisted nothing of the sort. With no acceptable citation whatsoever, you raised a point that N95 masks were widely available to the public. I simply pointed out that for masks to be effective -- which is the point you were trying to make -- there needed to be enough for everyone, including replacements.

Of course, you also wrongly believe that masks protect the wearer.

My point is that Governor Brown wants to extend the physical distancing rules and preclude large gatherings of people to avoid infection which -- as you readily agree -- is keeping the numbers in check. So this seems a reasonable ask on her part. I mean, since we can't offer endless replaceable N95 masks to everyone.

Yet you are opposed to her efforts to extend the physical distancing rules which are keeping us safe. Can you explain why?

Again, the subject of this thread is a religious group that feels they are entitled to jeopardize the health of us all so they can ignore physical distancing to worship. They are actively working to undermine the tool that by your own admission is keeping us safe.

Your arguments make no sense.

Last edited by Aspenglow; 05-20-2020 at 10:34 PM.
  #49  
Old 05-20-2020, 11:04 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 29,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post

Of course, you also wrongly believe that masks protect the wearer.
N-95 masks filter out the virus. You're literally suggesting that vulnerable people not wear them.
  #50  
Old 05-20-2020, 11:18 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
N-95 masks filter out the virus. You're literally suggesting that vulnerable people not wear them.
In reality, what most people have access to is not an endless supply of N95 masks. Hence the need to continue physical distancing.

Because I make a point does not mean I am "suggesting" anything. This is an obvious, disingenuous rhetorical mischief you repeatedly employ.

There is no logical nexus between the things you assert and the conclusions you draw. Reminds me of a favorite old riddle:

Q: When is an orange like an orange?

A: A bicycle, because a vest has no sleeves!

Pointless to try and make sense of it, so I won’t.

Again, this is not a thread about masks. You don't seem to have anything of value to offer to the actual discussion. I won't continue with your obvious hijack.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017