Breaking news: Montgomery Co revises mask order, crushing the hopes of the mask police

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Phew, I just took my second felony-level run with my mask around my neck, only pulling it on when within 20 feet of people. I thought I might never see my family again, dreading the mask police van running me down and throwing me in jail. As I was running by all the people eating and laughing on the streetery in Bethesda Row, I realized that I could run in there and quickly order a beer, thus escaping Gayles and his mask gestapo... but I’d have to be quick.

Did you see me wave at you? I was surprised how busy it was!

It really was a great evening for a brisk evening run. Granted, I did forget my mask at home, it proved not to be an issue.

Careful. As I type this, a covid-karen somewhere in MoCo is probably one more glass of box wine away from running over you with her RR for being unmasked while alone outside.

I was planning to go kayaking tomorrow, but if one of them saw me out in the river without a face diaper, they’d probably call the Coast Guard.

[Anonymous]

So I notice they re-re-clarified the order last night to this:

"The new face covering guidelines outlined in the Health Directive are designed to help protect residents and reduce the spread of COVID-19. Residents are strongly urged to wear a mask whenever they are in public places and may encounter others. Whether you are out walking or jogging, wearing a mask when you are likely to be within six feet of someone, even if it is solely in passing, is required."

It seems they would like you to wear one anytime you leave your yard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't clarified. The _directive_ was always written that way.

The _press release_ was poorly written to indicate masks required a tall time. The directive is what counts.

Basically MoCo gov't messed up in their press release. The usual incompetence.

Is it the same case in DC? I see people wearing masks EVERYWHERE in DC, but IIRC, the mayor's order only required masks when it wasn't possible to social distance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I notice they re-re-clarified the order last night to this:

"The new face covering guidelines outlined in the Health Directive are designed to help protect residents and reduce the spread of COVID-19. Residents are strongly urged to wear a mask whenever they are in public places and may encounter others. Whether you are out walking or jogging, wearing a mask when you are likely to be within six feet of someone, even if it is solely in passing, is required."

It seems they would like you to wear one anytime you leave your yard.

Pretty soon they will try to mandate them in our own yards too (eyeroll).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I notice they re-re-clarified the order last night to this:

"The new face covering guidelines outlined in the Health Directive are designed to help protect residents and reduce the spread of COVID-19. Residents are strongly urged to wear a mask whenever they are in public places and may encounter others. Whether you are out walking or jogging, wearing a mask when you are likely to be within six feet of someone, even if it is solely in passing, is required."

It seems they would like you to wear one anytime you leave your yard.

Pretty soon they will try to mandate them in our own yards too (eyeroll).

They should also be required while driving in your car, alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how many of the Covid Karens are going to be pulling out tape measures to scream and yell about “six feet, six feet!” as they prowl the streets, ready pounce on anyone they deem to be breaking their interpretation of an incredibly poorly written mandate.... I bet they made excellent hall monitors back in grade school.

And stopwatches.

And their iPhones on video so they can post the video on Facebook to shame and cancel them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I notice they re-re-clarified the order last night to this:

"The new face covering guidelines outlined in the Health Directive are designed to help protect residents and reduce the spread of COVID-19. Residents are strongly urged to wear a mask whenever they are in public places and may encounter others. Whether you are out walking or jogging, wearing a mask when you are likely to be within six feet of someone, even if it is solely in passing, is required."

It seems they would like you to wear one anytime you leave your yard.

The problem with the re-re-clarification is that it is in complete contradiction with the actual order, which states as follows:

Persons leaving their residences shall wear a face covering when they are likely to come into contact with another person, such as being within six feet of another person for more than a fleeting time. ([emphasis added]

I’m going by what the order says, not by the public affairs moronic interpretation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I notice they re-re-clarified the order last night to this:

"The new face covering guidelines outlined in the Health Directive are designed to help protect residents and reduce the spread of COVID-19. Residents are strongly urged to wear a mask whenever they are in public places and may encounter others. Whether you are out walking or jogging, wearing a mask when you are likely to be within six feet of someone, even if it is solely in passing, is required."

It seems they would like you to wear one anytime you leave your yard.

The problem with the re-re-clarification is that it is in complete contradiction with the actual order, which states as follows:

Persons leaving their residences shall wear a face covering when they are likely to come into contact with another person, such as being within six feet of another person for more than a fleeting time. ([emphasis added]

I’m going by what the order says, not by the public affairs moronic interpretation.

I talked to the county about this. The statement in the press release about requiring a mask when passing others on the sidewalk was intended to be interpreted as a strong recommendation, rather a legal mandate under the health order. I personally don't think "required" was the appropriate word to use, but I do understand they're trying to write orders and provide guidance for two very different kinds of situations: an empty trail/sidewalk upcounty, and a crowded sidewalk in Bethesda or Silver Spring.

I think they figure they can write stronger interpretive guidance because they don't intend to enforce it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I notice they re-re-clarified the order last night to this:

"The new face covering guidelines outlined in the Health Directive are designed to help protect residents and reduce the spread of COVID-19. Residents are strongly urged to wear a mask whenever they are in public places and may encounter others. Whether you are out walking or jogging, wearing a mask when you are likely to be within six feet of someone, even if it is solely in passing, is required."

It seems they would like you to wear one anytime you leave your yard.

The problem with the re-re-clarification is that it is in complete contradiction with the actual order, which states as follows:

Persons leaving their residences shall wear a face covering when they are likely to come into contact with another person, such as being within six feet of another person for more than a fleeting time. ([emphasis added]

I’m going by what the order says, not by the public affairs moronic interpretation.

I talked to the county about this. The statement in the press release about requiring a mask when passing others on the sidewalk was intended to be interpreted as a strong recommendation, rather a legal mandate under the health order. I personally don't think "required" was the appropriate word to use, but I do understand they're trying to write orders and provide guidance for two very different kinds of situations: an empty trail/sidewalk upcounty, and a crowded sidewalk in Bethesda or Silver Spring.

I think they figure they can write stronger interpretive guidance because they don't intend to enforce it.

I think it would be best to ignore the county until they figure out what their own orders (or is it guidance or recommendations) mean. It is pretty ridiculous that government employees cannot write clearly...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I notice they re-re-clarified the order last night to this:

"The new face covering guidelines outlined in the Health Directive are designed to help protect residents and reduce the spread of COVID-19. Residents are strongly urged to wear a mask whenever they are in public places and may encounter others. Whether you are out walking or jogging, wearing a mask when you are likely to be within six feet of someone, even if it is solely in passing, is required."

It seems they would like you to wear one anytime you leave your yard.

The problem with the re-re-clarification is that it is in complete contradiction with the actual order, which states as follows:

Persons leaving their residences shall wear a face covering when they are likely to come into contact with another person, such as being within six feet of another person for more than a fleeting time. ([emphasis added]

I’m going by what the order says, not by the public affairs moronic interpretation.

I talked to the county about this. The statement in the press release about requiring a mask when passing others on the sidewalk was intended to be interpreted as a strong recommendation, rather a legal mandate under the health order. I personally don't think "required" was the appropriate word to use, but I do understand they're trying to write orders and provide guidance for two very different kinds of situations: an empty trail/sidewalk upcounty, and a crowded sidewalk in Bethesda or Silver Spring.

I think they figure they can write stronger interpretive guidance because they don't intend to enforce it.

Thank you. Your comment makes complete sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I notice they re-re-clarified the order last night to this:

"The new face covering guidelines outlined in the Health Directive are designed to help protect residents and reduce the spread of COVID-19. Residents are strongly urged to wear a mask whenever they are in public places and may encounter others. Whether you are out walking or jogging, wearing a mask when you are likely to be within six feet of someone, even if it is solely in passing, is required."

It seems they would like you to wear one anytime you leave your yard.

The problem with the re-re-clarification is that it is in complete contradiction with the actual order, which states as follows:

Persons leaving their residences shall wear a face covering when they are likely to come into contact with another person, such as being within six feet of another person for more than a fleeting time. ([emphasis added]

I’m going by what the order says, not by the public affairs moronic interpretation.

I talked to the county about this. The statement in the press release about requiring a mask when passing others on the sidewalk was intended to be interpreted as a strong recommendation, rather a legal mandate under the health order. I personally don't think "required" was the appropriate word to use, but I do understand they're trying to write orders and provide guidance for two very different kinds of situations: an empty trail/sidewalk upcounty, and a crowded sidewalk in Bethesda or Silver Spring.

I think they figure they can write stronger interpretive guidance because they don't intend to enforce it.

I am pretty sure English is expressive enough that you could make this clear. You did after all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I notice they re-re-clarified the order last night to this:

"The new face covering guidelines outlined in the Health Directive are designed to help protect residents and reduce the spread of COVID-19. Residents are strongly urged to wear a mask whenever they are in public places and may encounter others. Whether you are out walking or jogging, wearing a mask when you are likely to be within six feet of someone, even if it is solely in passing, is required."

It seems they would like you to wear one anytime you leave your yard.

The problem with the re-re-clarification is that it is in complete contradiction with the actual order, which states as follows:

Persons leaving their residences shall wear a face covering when they are likely to come into contact with another person, such as being within six feet of another person for more than a fleeting time. ([emphasis added]

I’m going by what the order says, not by the public affairs moronic interpretation.

I talked to the county about this. The statement in the press release about requiring a mask when passing others on the sidewalk was intended to be interpreted as a strong recommendation, rather a legal mandate under the health order. I personally don't think "required" was the appropriate word to use, but I do understand they're trying to write orders and provide guidance for two very different kinds of situations: an empty trail/sidewalk upcounty, and a crowded sidewalk in Bethesda or Silver Spring.

I think they figure they can write stronger interpretive guidance because they don't intend to enforce it.

I am pretty sure English is expressive enough that you could make this clear. You did after all.

People struggle with nuance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh -still not clear, which means people won't wear masks when they should. Like walking on crowded sidewalk - maybe passing is fleeting, but walking behind someone who isn't wearing their mask may be risky. And what about waiting at the light where people are standing still. Do those count as fleeting?

Right. If those things scare you, stay home.

Why should I stay home so that you can stroll Bethesda Avenue without a mask?

Who knew there were so many covidiots in MoCo - I guess that explains our high infection rates. Even hospitals are getting closer to capacity now. But yes, you should still have a right not to wear a mask in public.

The counterargument to this is obvious.

Not really. You are required to wear clothes outside. You are required to have a drivers license to drive a car. What shouldn't you be required to wear a mask in public during a pandemic for everyone's safety?

Remember we are returning to normal society now - your Trumpy behavior is no longer okay.

We could argue about whether you should or shouldn't be required to wear a mask in various situations, but the simple fact is that it's not required by this health order or the local executive order in many situations when you're outside.

If that makes you uncomfortable, then it's up to you to modify your behavior to make yourself feel better. That might mean staying home.

+1000

It would be one thing if covid were spread in passing someone outside (even much less than 6ft) but there is zero evidence that it does.

So if it brings you mental anguish to see or pass by unmasked people, either modify own your behavior or stay home. The risk of covid in a brief pass is zero.

Honestly I don’t care what you do. But don’t glare at me if I wear my mask to protect myself (and as a byproduct comply with the order).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh -still not clear, which means people won't wear masks when they should. Like walking on crowded sidewalk - maybe passing is fleeting, but walking behind someone who isn't wearing their mask may be risky. And what about waiting at the light where people are standing still. Do those count as fleeting?

Right. If those things scare you, stay home.

Why should I stay home so that you can stroll Bethesda Avenue without a mask?

Who knew there were so many covidiots in MoCo - I guess that explains our high infection rates. Even hospitals are getting closer to capacity now. But yes, you should still have a right not to wear a mask in public.

The counterargument to this is obvious.

Not really. You are required to wear clothes outside. You are required to have a drivers license to drive a car. What shouldn't you be required to wear a mask in public during a pandemic for everyone's safety?

Remember we are returning to normal society now - your Trumpy behavior is no longer okay.

We could argue about whether you should or shouldn't be required to wear a mask in various situations, but the simple fact is that it's not required by this health order or the local executive order in many situations when you're outside.

If that makes you uncomfortable, then it's up to you to modify your behavior to make yourself feel better. That might mean staying home.

+1000

It would be one thing if covid were spread in passing someone outside (even much less than 6ft) but there is zero evidence that it does.

So if it brings you mental anguish to see or pass by unmasked people, either modify own your behavior or stay home. The risk of covid in a brief pass is zero.

Honestly I don’t care what you do. But don’t glare at me if I wear my mask to protect myself (and as a byproduct comply with the order).

As long as you're not wearing a face shield in a car, I don't care what you do.

Well, knowing what I know about glasses fogging up, I'm not thrilled seeing drivers wearing masks. At least, if they're wearing glasses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh -still not clear, which means people won't wear masks when they should. Like walking on crowded sidewalk - maybe passing is fleeting, but walking behind someone who isn't wearing their mask may be risky. And what about waiting at the light where people are standing still. Do those count as fleeting?

Right. If those things scare you, stay home.

Why should I stay home so that you can stroll Bethesda Avenue without a mask?

Who knew there were so many covidiots in MoCo - I guess that explains our high infection rates. Even hospitals are getting closer to capacity now. But yes, you should still have a right not to wear a mask in public.

The counterargument to this is obvious.

Not really. You are required to wear clothes outside. You are required to have a drivers license to drive a car. What shouldn't you be required to wear a mask in public during a pandemic for everyone's safety?

Remember we are returning to normal society now - your Trumpy behavior is no longer okay.

We could argue about whether you should or shouldn't be required to wear a mask in various situations, but the simple fact is that it's not required by this health order or the local executive order in many situations when you're outside.

If that makes you uncomfortable, then it's up to you to modify your behavior to make yourself feel better. That might mean staying home.

+1000

It would be one thing if covid were spread in passing someone outside (even much less than 6ft) but there is zero evidence that it does.

So if it brings you mental anguish to see or pass by unmasked people, either modify own your behavior or stay home. The risk of covid in a brief pass is zero.

Honestly I don’t care what you do. But don’t glare at me if I wear my mask to protect myself (and as a byproduct comply with the order).

As long as you're not wearing a face shield in a car, I don't care what you do.

Well, knowing what I know about glasses fogging up, I'm not thrilled seeing drivers wearing masks. At least, if they're wearing glasses.

Agreed, it’s super scary. Cyclists too- one almost ran over my son because they clearly could not see out of their foggy glasses.