Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-22-2020, 01:27 PM
 
Location: San Diego
18,739 posts, read 7,606,770 times
Reputation: 15005

Advertisements

Doesn't this CHP edict violate the First Amendment....


Of course it does.

Suppose the disease of the day were a fast-spreading Ebola (80%+ mortality) instead of the fast-spreading coronavirus we have today (1% mortality or less). And edicts like that one were still issued. That would violate the Constitution just as much.

But the Constitution is not a Death Pact. It was written when there was nothing government could do about pandemics like this (Bubonic Plague in 1340AD , 1665AD etc.), so there is no provision for the Fed Govt to take action. Thus it was left to "the states and the people" to handle.

But if a fast-spreading Ebola infected as many people in the US as covid-19 has, should we still stick to what the Constitution says ("Congress shall make no law respecting... the right to peaceably assemble..."), and disobey a State govt order requiring 6-foot distance, no large crowds etc.? When it would be a fact that if people keep associating normally as they have for decades, this year tens of millions would die from Ebola?

If New York City locks down but New Jersey and Connecticut don't, the disease will keep spreading. But if ALL states locked down except for essential services at the same time, the spread of the disease would be greatly reduced, giving doctors time to come up with treatments of even vaccines.

And the only way to make sure all states locked down at the same time and to the same degree, is a nationwide Federal command. Yes, an unconstitutional one.

Suggestions?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-22-2020, 01:34 PM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,869 posts, read 26,503,175 times
Reputation: 25771
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbythegreat View Post
People are afraid, thus they support an authoritarian police state.
And some just support a totalitarian police state-afraid or not. The left has been embracing totalitarianism for decades now. Quite a change from the "old days" when hippies ragged about "the man" and government dictates. Now they demand them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:40 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top