PSA: Fairfax County Parks, Pools and School Facility Status Recap

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all you people wanting to go out must have death wish this virus is very real indeed. Soccer is not worth your life or your child's life

You realize your child has greater chance of dying in car accident or lightning strike than covid? Would you stop them from driving or going out in the rain?

Next up will be forcing everyone to wear a mask in stores.

If they get away with that then we will all have to install the contact tracing app in order to work / travel / shop etc. and the government will be able to see everywhere you have ever been and everyone you have met.

In order to get away with this, you must all be terrified first.

Don't be terrified.

+1

You don't have to be terrified to wear a mask in stores. You just have to be considerate.

Think of the retail workers who know they have to come into contact with 100s of different people every day. Don't you think they would feel better and safer if everyone had a mask on? What if they, or someone in their household, is elderly, immunocompromised, has diabetes or is otherwise high risk? Is it really that big of a deal to ask you to put a mask on for the 20 minutes you need to spend in the store getting groceries?

The contract tracing is another story, because there are very real privacy concerns associated with giving the government the ability to completely track all of our movements and interpersonal interactions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all you people wanting to go out must have death wish this virus is very real indeed. Soccer is not worth your life or your child's life

You realize your child has greater chance of dying in car accident or lightning strike than covid? Would you stop them from driving or going out in the rain?

Why do you have to be so dense? Not all parents are worried that their kid is going to catch covid from playing soccer and DIE!!!! There are other serious complications that can occur in young kids. They can also become infected and spread it. Why are you only talking about DEATH! Imbecile!

[Anonymous]

You don't have to be terrified to wear a mask in stores. You just have to be considerate.

I understand your point here, and don't entirely disagree with the spirit of what you say. However I do not believe that
- there is good evidence that wearing masks even reduces the transmission rate, and absent such evidence this is a purely arbitrary action
- even were wearing masks to reduce the transmission rate, that it would also reduce the eventual death toll
- the government has any right to make this mandatory
- the method the government will use (bureaucrats spying on businesses and using fines to force the businesses to act as enforcers on their behalf) is a morally acceptable way to implement the measure

On top of that, I strongly suspect that those behind the implementation of this measure are not interested in the health of anyone, but rather simply enjoy telling others what to do.

Think of the retail workers who know they have to come into contact with 100s of different people every day. Don't you think they would feel better and safer if everyone had a mask on? What if they, or someone in their household, is elderly, immunocompromised, has diabetes or is otherwise high risk? Is it really that big of a deal to ask you to put a mask on for the 20 minutes you need to spend in the store getting groceries?

Some of them would likely feel safer (although it's a very different question as to whether they would actually be safer). Many of them are utterly fed up having to wear masks themselves.

But - to your point - if this were merely politely requested of me, then I would happily go along with it. But it is not a request, it is an order. And the amount of power our government functionaries now believe they are entitled to wield over us seems to me far more dangerous than the virus.

The contract tracing is another story, because there are very real privacy concerns associated with giving the government the ability to completely track all of our movements and interpersonal interactions.

I agree that contact tracing (and immunity passports, and forced vaccination) are far more problematic. But all of these, just like the mask wearing, will be sold to us as "helping the vulnerable", in just the same way as we are always told that the people we go to war with are "killing babies", or we are told that we cannot have privacy because of "terrorists and criminals".

In my view mask wearing is a trial balloon. Better to shoot down the balloon than face the subsequent artillery barrage.

[Anonymous]

When parks open for permits, will they open the restrooms?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You don't have to be terrified to wear a mask in stores. You just have to be considerate.

I understand your point here, and don't entirely disagree with the spirit of what you say. However I do not believe that
- there is good evidence that wearing masks even reduces the transmission rate, and absent such evidence this is a purely arbitrary action
- even were wearing masks to reduce the transmission rate, that it would also reduce the eventual death toll
- the government has any right to make this mandatory
- the method the government will use (bureaucrats spying on businesses and using fines to force the businesses to act as enforcers on their behalf) is a morally acceptable way to implement the measure

On top of that, I strongly suspect that those behind the implementation of this measure are not interested in the health of anyone, but rather simply enjoy telling others what to do.

Think of the retail workers who know they have to come into contact with 100s of different people every day. Don't you think they would feel better and safer if everyone had a mask on? What if they, or someone in their household, is elderly, immunocompromised, has diabetes or is otherwise high risk? Is it really that big of a deal to ask you to put a mask on for the 20 minutes you need to spend in the store getting groceries?

Some of them would likely feel safer (although it's a very different question as to whether they would actually be safer). Many of them are utterly fed up having to wear masks themselves.

But - to your point - if this were merely politely requested of me, then I would happily go along with it. But it is not a request, it is an order. And the amount of power our government functionaries now believe they are entitled to wield over us seems to me far more dangerous than the virus.

The contract tracing is another story, because there are very real privacy concerns associated with giving the government the ability to completely track all of our movements and interpersonal interactions.

I agree that contact tracing (and immunity passports, and forced vaccination) are far more problematic. But all of these, just like the mask wearing, will be sold to us as "helping the vulnerable", in just the same way as we are always told that the people we go to war with are "killing babies", or we are told that we cannot have privacy because of "terrorists and criminals".

In my view we mask wearing is a trial balloon. Better to shoot down the balloon than face the subsequent artillery barrage.

It’s an order enforced by the health dept. not the police, at least in VA. Meaning there will be little enforcement but the law makers get to say they took precautions in case someone brings legal action against them.

[Anonymous]

It’s an order enforced by the health dept. not the police, at least in VA. Meaning there will be little enforcement but the law makers get to say they took precautions in case someone brings legal action against them.

This is exactly what I was talking about, and will basically coopt businesses to enforce the law. The way this will work is that health inspectors will be randomly sent to inspect businesses and businesses deemed not to be enforcing the law will be fined. The result is that, instead of the police enforcing the law (and perhaps deciding not to, in obedience to their oath to uphold the constitution), businesses will zealously enforce the law through fear of being fined. This is a well understood government trick to force laws on people when they lack (or are feared to lack) popular support.

So there will in fact be far more enforcement than if the police attempted to enforce it directly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You don't have to be terrified to wear a mask in stores. You just have to be considerate.

I understand your point here, and don't entirely disagree with the spirit of what you say. However I do not believe that
- there is good evidence that wearing masks even reduces the transmission rate, and absent such evidence this is a purely arbitrary action
- even were wearing masks to reduce the transmission rate, that it would also reduce the eventual death toll
- the government has any right to make this mandatory
- the method the government will use (bureaucrats spying on businesses and using fines to force the businesses to act as enforcers on their behalf) is a morally acceptable way to implement the measure

On top of that, I strongly suspect that those behind the implementation of this measure are not interested in the health of anyone, but rather simply enjoy telling others what to do.

Think of the retail workers who know they have to come into contact with 100s of different people every day. Don't you think they would feel better and safer if everyone had a mask on? What if they, or someone in their household, is elderly, immunocompromised, has diabetes or is otherwise high risk? Is it really that big of a deal to ask you to put a mask on for the 20 minutes you need to spend in the store getting groceries?

Some of them would likely feel safer (although it's a very different question as to whether they would actually be safer). Many of them are utterly fed up having to wear masks themselves.

But - to your point - if this were merely politely requested of me, then I would happily go along with it. But it is not a request, it is an order. And the amount of power our government functionaries now believe they are entitled to wield over us seems to me far more dangerous than the virus.

The contract tracing is another story, because there are very real privacy concerns associated with giving the government the ability to completely track all of our movements and interpersonal interactions.

I agree that contact tracing (and immunity passports, and forced vaccination) are far more problematic. But all of these, just like the mask wearing, will be sold to us as "helping the vulnerable", in just the same way as we are always told that the people we go to war with are "killing babies", or we are told that we cannot have privacy because of "terrorists and criminals".

In my view mask wearing is a trial balloon. Better to shoot down the balloon than face the subsequent artillery barrage.

Great post