[QUOTE=5-4-Fighting]
Except that, until I’ve had a test that says I have any kind of TB, that “COULD HAVE” doesn’t come into play, and the status of my health is, therefore, not part of *this * discussion.
[/quote]
Why not? You COULD HAVE TurboTB and pose a great threat to other people. Why aren’t you wearing a mask?
Since you don’t have an answer, I’ll answer the question for you. The answer is that you’re not wearing a mask because the risk to others is really small.
Simple, see?
[QUOTE=Zabali_Clawbane]
By that logic, where’s YOUR mask?
[/quote]
Exactly. I’m not wearing a mask because the risk to others is really small.
[QUOTE=brazil84]
Why? Many cases of TB go undiagnosed.
Is it ever ok to impose a minimal risk on others if there is a great benefit to one’s own position?
[/QUOTE]
Many cases of many things go undiagnosed and until they are, we can’t even began to discuss bad choices these people might make, for whatever reason, until these particular people know the status of their health.
So, to talk about greater benefit of one due to a minimal risk to others, which in this case refers to Andy Speaker, knowing he had TB and could possibly become contagious or develop turb-TB, is irrelevant and, dare I say it, a strawman.
[QUOTE=brazil84]
Why not? You COULD HAVE TurboTB and pose a great threat to other people. Why aren’t you wearing a mask?
Since you don’t have an answer, I’ll answer the question for you. The answer is that you’re not wearing a mask because the risk to others is really small.
Simple, see?
[/QUOTE]
Something is simple here alright.
[QUOTE=5-4-Fighting]
Something is simple here alright.
[/QUOTE]
You mean like DNFTT?
[QUOTE=5-4-Fighting]
Many cases of many things go undiagnosed and until they are, we can’t even began to discuss bad choices these people might make, for whatever reason, until these particular people know the status of their health.
So, to talk about greater benefit of one due to a minimal risk to others, which in this case refers to Andy Speaker, knowing he had TB and could possibly become contagious or develop turb-TB, is irrelevant and, dare I say it, a strawman.
[/QUOTE]
The key word is “possibly.” A lot of things are “possible.” If you drive your car to the store, it is “possible” that your brakes may fail and you may run over a pedestrian and kill them.
[QUOTE=brazil84]
<snip>Still waitin’ for that title and section number.
[/QUOTE]
How about the fact that the border agent who let him in is fired? That is tacit proof that regulations were broken. Jodi, would you be able to locate the more precise laws as regards to sneaking into the country via car, to avoid being stopped at the airport? I know there are laws in place, because of the cases in which terrorists snuck into the country via Canada or Mexico in order not to run afoul of the “no fly” list and be arrested.
I thought the question was whether Speaker broke the law, not whether any government agents broke the law.
[QUOTE=brazil84]
I thought the question was whether Speaker broke the law, not whether any government agents broke the law.
[/QUOTE]
Read the part of my post you snipped out.
[QUOTE=Zabali_Clawbane]
Read the part of my post you snipped out.
[/QUOTE]
I did. It looks like you are focusing on a border guard’s malfeasance, as opposed to Speaker’s supposed lawbreaking.
[QUOTE=brazil84]
The key word is “possibly.” A lot of things are “possible.” If you drive your car to the store, it is “possible” that your brakes may fail and you may run over a pedestrian and kill them.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, but for TB Andy, it was A LOT MORE POSSIBLE than someone who hasn’t been diagnosed with TB. Rather like driving to the store in a car that has brakes that have never been repaired/replaced.
ETA: You do not see, that laws must be in place (especially now) because of various unsavory people, like terrorists and murderers who have snuck into the country via porous borders? Of course there are laws in place saying it isn’t legal to do an end run around the “no fly list” in that way!
[QUOTE=brazil84]
Planes are designed to go where the controls tell them to go. If the pilot decides he wants to fly the plane into a building, there’s a pretty good chance he will succeed in crashing the plane.
Cite:
[/QUOTE]
Need some additional straw for that man you are building? :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Rick]
Need some additional straw for that man you are building? :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
How have I mis-stated anyone’s argument?
[QUOTE=Tuckerfan]
You mean like DNFTT?
[/QUOTE]
TINT,* Tuckerfan.
[QUOTE=Zabali_Clawbane]
Yes, but for TB Andy, it was A LOT MORE POSSIBLE than someone who hasn’t been diagnosed with TB. Rather like driving to the store in a car that has brakes that have never been repaired/replaced.
[/quote]
How much more possible? And how much risk is reasonable to impose on other people?
Just give me a title and section number of the law that made it illegal for him to fly to Canada. Show me the law, and I’ll agree he’s a lawbreaker.
[QUOTE=brazil84]
<snip>Just give me a title and section number of the law that made it illegal for him to fly to Canada. Show me the law, and I’ll agree he’s a lawbreaker.
[/QUOTE]
He flew to Canada, KNOWING that if he flew to the USA he’d be stopped at the gate and taken to quarentine. He entered the country by car, as terrorists and at least one murderer have in the past, banking on the idea that he’d be waved through. The borders have been tightened, and coming into the country in another way to avoid being detained is illegal. As for laws regarding entering a country knowing you have an infectious (however small the chance) disease, those vary by country. Ask a Canadian for the specifics on their law.
[QUOTE=Zabali_Clawbane]
He flew to Canada, KNOWING that if he flew to the USA he’d be stopped at the gate and taken to quarentine. He entered the country by car, as terrorists and at least one murderer have in the past, banking on the idea that he’d be waved through. The borders have been tightened, and coming into the country in another way to avoid being detained is illegal. **
[/quote]
Which Title and which Section make what he did illegal?
How about one like this:
§ 120.25 Reckless endangerment in the first degree.
A person is guilty of reckless endangerment in the first degree when,
under circumstances evincing a depraved indifference to human life, he
recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to
another person.
Reckless endangerment in the first degree is a class D felony.
from this case:
http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I06_0097.htm
I think this may be state law, but there might be some federal statute that addresses similar issues.
Reckless endangerment: A person commits the crime of reckless endangerment if the person recklessly engages in conduct which creates a substantial risk of serious physical injury to another person. “Reckless” conduct is conduct that exhibits a culpable disregard of foreseeable consequences to others from the act or omission involved. The accused need not intentionally cause a resulting harm or know that his conduct is substantially certain to cause that result. The ultimate question is whether, under all the circumstances, the accused’s conduct was of that heedless nature that made it actually or imminently dangerous to the rights or safety of others.
Endangerment can range from a misdemeanor to a felony.
Also note, that these laws don’t give you the right to endanger others just because you think you might die. Motivation is not mentioned. Saving your own skin is not an excuse.
[QUOTE=Shoshana]
Of course, he could have TB and HIV, a nasty combination.
[/quote]
“Your wife is quite ill, but we are not sure if it is AIDS or Alzheimer’s.”
“So, what should I do?”
"Drive her out about three miles out of town, and drop her off.
If she makes it home, don’t fuck her!"
Regards,
Shodan