# Constitutionality of bans of \> 10 person gatherings

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutionality-of-bans-of-10-person-gatherings/849689>\
**Category:** The Quarantine Zone\
**Tags:** covid-quarantine\
**Created:** [March 17, 2020, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutionality-of-bans-of-10-person-gatherings/849689 "2020-03-17T23:17:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 50

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\
**Post date:** [March 22, 2020, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutionality-of-bans-of-10-person-gatherings/849689/50 "2020-03-22T23:14:56Z")

</div>

> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#):
>
> The difference is that while the number of automobile deaths are tragic (and [reducible](https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/motor-vehicle-safety/index.html)), the numbers are relatively stable and will not increase exponentially if restrictions are not imposed. It is a risk that we collectively accept because of the benefits of modern transportation, and various regulations and laws from mandatory safety features to DUI laws are applied in efforts to further reduce unnecessary deaths. Simply stopping all automotive travel for an indefinite period would have no impact upon the number of deaths when the country returned to operation. By contrast, the goal of travel restrictions, “shelter-in-place” orders, and isolation & quarantine protocols is to prevent the epidemic from peaking so abruptly that medical facilities and personnel are overwhelmed with the quantity of cases that could be saved if resources are available.
> 
> Do you really not understand the difference between a calculated risk like allowing motor vehicle operation and a temporary restriction to prevent an viral epidemic sweeping through the population, or do you just feel that your personal right to do whatever you want should trump the only effective response to this outbreak?
> 
> Stranger

Here we go again. We cannot question anything because if we do it means that we want people to die so we can go drink at the bar. That’s not what I am saying.

I am saying that an equal policy choice, advocated by others not me, have been to let this play out as for the vast majority of people the symptoms are minor and they quickly recover, and the flip side is the complete destruction of our economy. Who makes that decision in a constitutional democracy?

We don’t look to constitutional constraints? We don’t vote on it? We have one man making this massive policy choice all on his own, and again, in a way that has no parallel in history and no objective end to it? Can it go on for a year if it means that it saves only one single life? Can we vote on it then?

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutionality-of-bans-of-10-person-gatherings/849689)._