So you’re in favor of bring together in groups hundreds of thousands of mostly high risk individuals? Remeber the average age of judges, lawyers, baillifs, court staff, etc, plus their families. That decision effectively kills thousands, no exaggeration.
How do you decide who is deserving of seeing this court? This opens up (justified) lawsuits for those not chosen to go infront of the court.
Idk, what to do. I just know we should pick the least bad solution.
The topic of the thread is the erosion of our rights. We have a right to a trial by jury. A right is something that can’t be taken away without an amendment to the constitution.
I am in favor of it only if the risk of releasing the “innocent until proven guilty” defendant is seen as a larger risk. I am in no way saying we release everybody, or detain everybody. It is not black and white, but we must uphold rights.
Are you for taking away people’s constitutional rights without an amendment?
Yes, temporarily. Same way you gotta stay in jail over the weekend to wait for court to open on monday, you need to stay in jail till court opens after a pandemic. Jail capacity pending. The onus would be on the arresting officers who to actually bring in, and who to issue a warning or citation to.
This is an exceptional situation, and a national (worldwide) emergency.
Okay, I don’t want to engage in a slippery slope argument, but it is possible that corona goes on for far longer than May or June. What if we determine that we can’t meet for a year or two? Do we decide just to hold these people until then? What do we do if we just can’t come up with a date that it will be safe? Are these people just stuck in limbo? What if the world does not return to normal, and meeting in groups is no longer advisable?
I can concede that we could come up with a reasonable amount of time that we could hold someone before a forced decision. Over the weekend seems reasonable since courts are not open on the weekend. I see the courts as an essential service as we have to maintain rights. So I don’t agree with holding them until after the pandemic.
Some thoughts:
Should we suspend free speech because people might spread misinformation about COVID19?
Should we restrict which press agencies get to report on COVID19 because they may spread misinformation about the virus?
Should we stop the sale of firearms? Ammo?
Should we quarter members of the National Guard in the homes of virus outbreak hotspots?
Should we arrest people suspected of having COVID19 and force them to prove they don’t?
Should we monitor private communications to determine if people with COVID19 are leaving their house?
Should we stop providing trial by grand jury? Suspend Miranda Rights? Suspend a court appointed attorney (attorney are at risk)?
A number of politicians, both left and right, are pushing the idea that black American’s are disproportionately affected by COVID19 (data forthcoming apparently), perhaps we should suspend their civil rights particularly with the election coming up (lots of people at polling places)?
Certainly not the same thing but the courts being shut down has thrown a massive wrench in what I do. Can’t get any kids reintegrated with parents or adopted until this passes. I guess I shouldn’t say any kids as we can possibly get a few reintegrated during this but it’s a 1000 times harder. Adoption ain’t happening.
I didn’t know you worked/helped with adoption. That’s pretty awesome.
I haven’t been for a super long time. I was (and still do a bit) a school redesign person for the state of Kansas. My backgrounds education. I had a good friend in social work who got me more interested lately and now I’m a director for that. Finding kids permanency so essentially getting kids back with parents who have had them removed and/or getting them adopted or independent living.
It’s hard and frustrating and I see a ton of awful shit but man getting kids back home or in a new permanent home is an amazing feeling.
I bet. Good stuff.
I knew this whole thing had something to do with racism!
Edit: If you don’t support lockdowns, you love slavery! Playgrounds are for racists!
I think policies put in place currently are the least restrictive they could be while still having a large effect on slowing the virus. They seem to be working well, and do we don’t need to go further.
I can absolutely see the need for a variation of some of the measures you outlined with a more deadly virus that was highly transmissible and if less restrictive measures were not working.
The answer to all those questions is no.
Although it wouldn’t be the first time I’ve let a National guard guy in my house. But that’s because he’s a friend. And we were all drunk.
And at the time I may have been trying to sleep with his sister…
I agree with a condition. That an amendment to the constitution is passed to allow those things, otherwise it is a clear violation of those rights. Without an amendment we should be able to choose to follow the advise (most likely the wise thing to do), or reject it, but advice is all it should be, not an order.
How quick could an amendment be made in an emergency? Theoretically.
An amendment would also be permanent, and we’d want this to be temporary, right?
If 2/3 plus of the House, Senate, and White House agree it could theoretically happen very quickly.
The issue is that historically there hasn’t been much that 2/3 of all 3 parts have agreed on. In an emergency, that would likely change.
They can add conditions in an amendment like “in the case of a pandemic these rights are suspended”.
The issue is if they try to enact orders in conflict with the Constitution without amending it, the law would not be enforceable. Basically, their law wouldn’t have any “stick” so it would essentially just be a recommendation anyways.
As quickly as the necessary people could get together to approve it.
Probably not as quickly as an Executive Order could be made, or as quickly as something necessary and proper for interstate commerce could be passed down.
I agree.
Although you should be able to punch someone in the face for actions without consequences during these times. Just like rushing to make a vaccine when we know dumbasses won’t take it.
I’m convinced a lot of people are defying these things just to be jackasses. What all the doctors and nurses ask us not to be in crowds. Coronavirus party everyone! Probably from fucktards who stayed in all the time before this but want to be cool now.
That’s not racist.
It depends on who profits and by how much.
Just to be clear @Californiagrown too, that I’m just arguing from a legal / rights standpoint. I plan on following the restrictions, and think it is the moral thing to do.