naptownskinsfan Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 17 minutes ago, bucsfan333 said: I mean. "No shoes, no shirt, no service" is a thing nobody argues about. I don't see why including wearing a mask is such a big deal. That is because individual businesses can implement their own dress code, whether it is as simple as that, or requiring a collared shirt and pants, or something more formal. No shirt, no shoes is a bit different from an executive order from a governor or the president. I get your point though in regards to it not being a big deal, nor should it be. Again, I'm arguing on whether or not executive orders are constitutional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucsfan333 Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 4 minutes ago, naptownskinsfan said: That is because individual businesses can implement their own dress code, whether it is as simple as that, or requiring a collared shirt and pants, or something more formal. No shirt, no shoes is a bit different from an executive order from a governor or the president. I get your point though in regards to it not being a big deal, nor should it be. Again, I'm arguing on whether or not executive orders are constitutional. It's a simple dress code. I get the idea that some may fear that it may open the door to other more strenuous or ridiculous rules in terms of what to wear. But it's a ******* mask. That prevents the unknowing spread of (essenially) the plague by about 70%. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 Newsome in CA is ordering some counties, including Los Angeles, to close bars and is recommending other counties follow suit. I thought that Newsome and the west coast states had this pretty well in hand. Do we know what variables changed on them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August4th Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 bars in my county have just been order to shut down.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candyman93 Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 Shutdowns are probably gonna happen again https://mobile.twitter.com/cnnbrk/status/1277332824140533761 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucsfan333 Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 3 hours ago, naptownskinsfan said: Doctors who I know through work and church are concerned over the long-term effects wearing masks will have on our immune systems, as well as constantly breathing in our own carbon dioxide. None of them are disagreeing with masks, in the short term, being a way for us to combat the virus and get us back to some sense of normal quicker. Face masks aren't plastic. Air can pass through them freely. So that's all nonsense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenos Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 56 minutes ago, naptownskinsfan said: Newsome in CA is ordering some counties, including Los Angeles, to close bars and is recommending other counties follow suit. I thought that Newsome and the west coast states had this pretty well in hand. Do we know what variables changed on them? It could be people from AZ heading over. Imperial County is getting hit hard. Likewise before the state mandate, only LA County and San Diego County had the mask mandate in SoCal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 4 hours ago, Xenos said: What do you mean by constitutional perspective? You get certain rights until it imposes on other’s rights. Not appropriately wearing a mask means that you are now a health risk to everyone else and not just yourself. Any law that is passed, whether by executive order or through congress, that challenges a freedom has to do so constitutionally. If it is something that impedes a constitutional freedom, there are various levels of tests, depending on how much of an intrusion it is. The most extreme challenge is to show a "compelling governmental interest." Public health stuff usually passes. The same law would apply to masks as to things like smoking bans. 4 hours ago, naptownskinsfan said: I mean, Google it. You will see face masks and whether or not they are constitutional or not, probably broken out along media lines and how they lean. Specifically, you have those who fall on the side of not wearing masks saying that executive orders are not laws. That's where I am coming from but again, I'm not an expert. If someone says this, they either A) don't know **** about constitutional law, or B) are just expressing an explicitly nonlegal opinion. For example, I think that controlled drug buys are inherently entrapment. But that's a personal opinion that doesn't jive with what the law is. A lawyer or legal scholar saying that executive orders aren't laws is like a doctor saying that vaccines cause autism. It's blatantly, unequivocally, not true. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 1 minute ago, Daniel said: Any law that is passed, whether by executive order or through congress, that challenges a freedom has to do so constitutionally. If it is something that impedes a constitutional freedom, there are various levels of tests, depending on how much of an intrusion it is. The most extreme challenge is to show a "compelling governmental interest." Public health stuff usually passes. The same law would apply to masks as to things like smoking bans. If someone says this, they either A) don't know **** about constitutional law, or B) are just expressing an explicitly nonlegal opinion. For example, I think that controlled drug buys are inherently entrapment. But that's a personal opinion that doesn't jive with what the law is. A lawyer or legal scholar saying that executive orders aren't laws is like a doctor saying that vaccines cause autism. It's blatantly, unequivocally, not true. Thanks, I appreciate the post. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywindO2 Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 Couldn't government basically require masks without passing any laws by ruling that businesses are liable for customers/employees getting catching Covid? You'd think businesses would start mandating and enforcing mask policy if that was the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenos Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 11 minutes ago, skywindO2 said: Couldn't government basically require masks without passing any laws by ruling that businesses are liable for customers/employees getting catching Covid? You'd think businesses would start mandating and enforcing mask policy if that was the case. Maybe certain businesses are also worried about losing customers over the masks requirements? 🤷♂️ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 Just now, Xenos said: Maybe certain businesses are also worried about losing customers over the masks requirements? 🤷♂️ I can buy that. My company mandated gloves due to outside pressure, so I am sure some of that pressure would happen in reverse. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 17 minutes ago, skywindO2 said: Couldn't government basically require masks without passing any laws by ruling that businesses are liable for customers/employees getting catching Covid? You'd think businesses would start mandating and enforcing mask policy if that was the case. Do you mean by passing a law? Because if you're talking about court rulings, then you mean a case being litigated where someone sues a business for it, appeals, that court issues a ruling, appeals again, that court issues a ruling, and then the loser appeals again, submitting to the SCOTUS, they take it, wait for their next session, hear oral arguments, wait, and then issue a ruling months later. Because that takes like two years. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucsfan333 Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 26 minutes ago, skywindO2 said: Couldn't government basically require masks without passing any laws by ruling that businesses are liable for customers/employees getting catching Covid? You'd think businesses would start mandating and enforcing mask policy if that was the case. But money though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullsandBroncos Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 2 hours ago, candyman93 said: Shutdowns are probably gonna happen again https://mobile.twitter.com/cnnbrk/status/1277332824140533761 Shut downs will happen again because Get a Cluesome wants to close down bars? I don't think the government can afford to have the economy shut down again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts