The ultimate COVID thread

[Ezekiel2517]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I write this having spent five years (in a former career) as a POST-certified police officer in a major metropolitan city's nationally accredited police department. What follows is based on my particular state's criminal code, my professional experience, and probably differs somewhat from state to state.

1. Arbery committed a felony by burglarizing the house under construction, even though he didn't take anything, as long as he entered with intent to take something. That we do not know. However I think the garage interior security video gives credence to that theory. I think his actions on that interior garage video are sufficient to meet the threshold for probable cause. Had Arbery gone into the house without permission out of, say, pure curiosity of the floorplan with no intent to steal anything, it would have been simple misdemeanor trespassing.

2. My state allows "citizens arrest" if two or more citizens participate. Citizens arrest only have merit in felony cases, not to misdemeanors. (In fact, trying to carry out a citizens arrest for something which turns out to be a misdemeanor can get the citizens in serious legal trouble of their own.).

3. The two McMichaels had standing to attempt a citizens arrest, and to defend themselves if they felt threatened with serious bodily harm WHICH THEY WOULD NEED TO SPECIFICALLY ARTICULATE IN DETAIL. (i.e., you can't shoot someone in the back if they're fleeing, you can't shoot someone standing unarmed 30 feet away from you). If indeed Arbery tried to (or did) grab one of the McMichaels' firearms, then McMichaels had standing to defend himself. One of the videos does show Arbery grabbing the McMichaels' shotgun.

This entire incident is sad, unfortunate, and shows poor judgment by all the actors. Should Arbery have gone into that house? No. Should McMichaels have tried to effect a citizens arrest? No: Arbery wasn't running down the street with a kidnapped child in tow, nor while a blood-soaked neighborhood resident screamed for help while pointing at Arbery as he ran. Yes I think Arbery's actions were suspicious, but by his actions he posed no immediate threat to "persons" just to "property." In my opinion, nothing more should have taken place other than calling 911 and letting the police do their job.

A commonly-expressed sentiment among police officers is the preference to be tried by 12 (jurors), versus being carried by six (pallbearers). Despite my above thesis (which may differ from GA criminal code) I think the McMichaels will rue the jury's decision.

Not really sure why you are applying your state's laws to this case. Georgia's laws are easily accessible to the public. I posted some relevant ones above.
-You have to actually steal something for it to be burglary in GA. Being a lookie-loo is not a crime and is not considered trespassing. Entering another person's property is not trespassing in GA, unless you can prove an unlawful purpose. Also, I don't get why ppl are assuming the shooter+pursuers actually witnessed Arbery doing what he was doing. Even that will have to be established by the defense.
-By GA law, there is no part of the McMichaels' "citizens arrest" that was lawful. Even if Arbery had committed burglary (which he did not under GA law), they chased him down using shotguns and used vehicles to create roadblocks and corner him in. These are all felonies.
-So, at no point was this "arrest" lawful. The video also makes it clear that Arbery was trying to evade the shooter. It also makes clear that the shooter pointed his gun at Arbery before any aggression by Arbery toward the shooter, which is aggravated assault in GA. The video shows that Arbery attacked in self-defense only after the gun was pointed at his face. He had nowhere to run at that point. Arbery also has a right to self-defense.
-Imo the video is so important bc it makes it obvious to anyone watching that this was nothing close to a lawful citizens arrest or self-defense. Everything about it, the precipitation, level of aggression, escalation, use of force, is just ridiculous. You know it's bad when Fox News is saying the McMichaels have no defense.

 

[Monty Python]

Not really sure why you are applying your state's laws to this case. Georgia's laws are easily accessible to the public. I posted some relevant ones above.
-You have to actually steal something for it to be burglary in GA. Being a lookie-loo is not a crime and is not considered trespassing. Entering another person's property is not trespassing in GA, unless you can prove an unlawful purpose. Also, I don't get why ppl are assuming the shooter+pursuers actually witnessed Arbery doing what he was doing. Even that will have to be established by the defense.
-By GA law, there is no part of the McMichaels' "citizens arrest" that was lawful. Even if Arbery had committed burglary (which he did not under GA law), they chased him down using shotguns and used vehicles to create roadblocks and corner him in. These are all felonies.
-So, at no point was this "arrest" lawful. The video also makes it clear that Arbery was trying to evade the shooter. It also makes clear that the shooter pointed his gun at Arbery before any aggression by Arbery toward the shooter, which is aggravated assault in GA. The video shows that Arbery attacked in self-defense only after the gun was pointed at his face. He had nowhere to run at that point. Arbery also has a right to self-defense.
-Imo the video is so important bc it makes it obvious to anyone watching that this was nothing close to a lawful citizens arrest or self-defense. Everything about it, the precipitation, level of aggression, escalation, use of force, is just ridiculous. You know it's bad when Fox News is saying the McMichaels have no defense.

Simply because I know them inside and out through formal education and courtroom experience. My original post was merely to provide, to anyone so interested, the technical, cold, and unemotional legal lens through which the criminal justice system would review this case’s details had it occurred in my state, and was written during a short break I had earlier (lacking time to research GA law). I fully anticipated and welcome the vigorous replies it generated because I enjoy good discussion on substantive issues affecting all of us, and because I too want to see justice served at the end of the day.

 

[vector2]

Simply because I know them inside and out through formal education and courtroom experience. My original post was merely to provide, to anyone so interested, the technical, cold, and unemotional legal lens through which the criminal justice system would review this case’s details had it occurred in my state, and was written during a short break I had earlier (lacking time to research GA law). I fully anticipated and welcome the vigorous replies it generated because I enjoy good discussion on substantive issues affecting all of us, and because I too want to see justice served at the end of the day.

Your entire “argument” is

1. Arbery snooped around a residential construction site for 2 minutes, didn’t take anything, then left

2. In your yet to be defined state, that is “felony burglary” because you know his intent because apparently your totally-not-100%-subjective former supercop intuition allowed you to glean his state of mind from a <30 sec video where nothing happens

3. Now that you’ve “established felony burglary” (L O f’ing L), in your yet to be defined state that now justifies two chuds hopping in their pickup, engaging in pursuit, and playing aggressor/deputy so they can effect a citizens arrest.

4. And of course, we’ve gotta keep in mind that these two chickenshts with guns, one in a high ground position on the bed, even as the aggressors, might feel threatened and have to defend themselves from one unarmed guy on foot who probably doesn’t even know why he has a gun pointed at him, so of course bubba is entitled to shoot him if the “presumed felon” reaches for his gun ...



“Technical, cold, and unemotional legal lens?” Lmao, who the f are you kidding, dude?

 

[Monty Python]

“Technical, cold, and unemotional legal lens?” Lmao, who the f are you kidding, dude?

Your entire “argument” is

1. Arbery snooped around a residential construction site for 2 minutes, didn’t take anything, then left

2. In your yet to be defined state, that is “felony burglary” because you know his intent because apparently your totally-not-100%-subjective former supercop intuition allowed you to glean his state of mind from a <30 sec video where nothing happens

3. Now that you’ve established “felony burglary” (L O f’ing L), in your yet to be defined state that now justifies two chuds hopping in their pickup, engaging in pursuit, and playing aggressor/deputy so they can effect a citizens arrest.

4. And of course, we’ve gotta keep in mind that these two chickenshts with guns, one in a high ground position on the bed, even as the aggressors, might feel threatened and have to defend themselves from one unarmed guy on foot who probably doesn’t even know why he has a gun pointed at him, so of course bubba is entitled to shoot him if the “presumed felon” reaches for his gun ...



Seriously, do you even hear yourself?

Your questions closely align with how Arbery’s attorney will construct their opening statement. The prosecution will have anticipated them with counter arguments. That’s how it works. My posts are based on numerous times I was grilled on the witness stand by prosecutor and defense attorneys. I know how they reduce everything to form the particular questions they ask in front of the jury, and which the judge will disallow if inappropriate. Our personal opinions, conjecture, ethical arguments, societal analysis, theological doctrines, sense of fairness or right/wrong, etc., while having merit and meaning to us individually have no standing in the courtroom. In there, it is nothing more than examining the evidence vis-a-vis the specifics in state law (ie, the codified elements of a particular crime’s definition), regardless if I disagree with it as a private citizen. More importantly, the jury has the final say.

 

[vector2]

My posts are based on numerous times I was grilled on the witness stand by prosecutor and defense attorneys. I know how they reduce everything to form the particular questions they ask in front of the jury, and which the judge will disallow if inappropriate. Our personal opinions, conjecture, ethical arguments, societal analysis, theological doctrines, sense of fairness or right/wrong, etc., while having merit and meaning to us individually have no standing in the courtroom. In there, it is nothing more than examining the evidence vis-a-vis the specifics in state law (ie, the codified elements of a particular crime’s definition), regardless if I disagree with it as a private citizen.

My point precisely is that there is no evidence of “felony burglary” (the lynchpin of your absurd hypothetical where the armed aggressors of a citizens arrest can pursue, provocate, kill, then subsequently claim self defense) beyond your 100% ridiculous and unsupported assessment of Arbery’s intent based on a short, blurry videoclip.

 

[Monty Python]

My point precisely is that there there is no evidence of “felony burglary” (the lynchpin of your absurd hypothetical where the armed aggressors of a citizens arrest can pursue, provocate, kill, then subsequently claim self defense) beyond your 100% ridiculous and unsupported assessment of Arbery’s intent based on a short, blurry videoclip.

I am not a jury of his peers, who has the final say after all the facts are dissected in court. Again, my posts have been strictly along the lines of what an honest objective non-detective street cop would surmise based on the immediate circumstances of the incident. Detectives, forensics experts, lawyers, etc., could conclude differently after a more in-depth lengthy review of everything over weeks or months. Initial responding patrol officers have very limited time to review the evidence and make an arrest (or not). That’s how I am looking at this scenario. Then it’s up to the DA, grand jury, etc., to review everything with the luxury of time, expert consultation, reflection, and debate. Responding patrol officers have none of those luxuries. In all sincerity I invite everyone to do a ride-along with your city’s police to get another perspective.

 

[deleted126335]

My posts are based on numerous times I was grilled on the witness stand by prosecutor and defense attorneys. I know how they reduce everything to form the particular questions they ask in front of the jury, and which the judge will disallow if inappropriate. Our personal opinions, conjecture, ethical arguments, societal analysis, theological doctrines, sense of fairness or right/wrong, etc., while having merit and meaning to us individually have no standing in the courtroom. In there, it is nothing more than examining the evidence vis-a-vis the specifics in state law (ie, the codified elements of a particular crime’s definition), regardless if I disagree with it as a private citizen. More importantly, the jury has the final say.

True-up to a point, but operationally "The Law" is nothing more than the sum of the behavior of law enforcement personnel, attorneys, judges, and juries. Human beings have different levels of grey matter, values, prejudices, and varying emotional states. The legal process is to be feared as much as it is to be respected. Particularly if you are a minority, don't make a good appearance, don't speak English well, are uneducated, etc.

I have several lawyers in the family including criminal defense. Which prosecutor, which detective, which judge, which county, and does the defendant make a good appearance matter a helluva lot-absent overwhelming evidence.

 

[vector2]

I am not a jury of his peers, who has the final say after all the facts are dissected in court. Again, my posts have been strictly along the lines of what an honest objective non-detective street cop would surmise based on the immediate circumstances of the incident. Detectives, forensics experts, lawyers, etc., could conclude differently after a more in-depth lengthy review of everything over weeks or months.

If you have time I’d love for you to explain in more detail how the “honest objective non-detective street cop” would surmise intent to feloniously burgle from the facts that are currently available to the general public (which is essentially just the video of an unmasked guy in broad daylight looking around an open residential construction site then promptly leaving....with no other corroborating evidence or testimony about what he is doing there).

Because, maybe you don’t realize, but if what Arbery did based just on the video is felony burglary, then literally every instance of benign trespassing magically turns into burglary too.

 

[pgg]

This. One guy is a criminal and two others are just stupid. Not vice versa. That’s the intrinsic bias of millions of white people in this country. It’s a problem whether we admit it or not.

I think I've been pretty clear that I suspect that the McMichaels committed at least two crimes and will probably be convicted of murder.

A former cop is pretty much positive he had intent to steal and was casing the joint. You said earlier it was pretty much obvious he was casing the joint. But sommmmeeehoowwwww the natural conclusion you come to is you think they had no intent to kill. What's your evidence for knowing their state of mind?

I just don't believe anybody could be stupid enough to think they could chase a guy down the street and shoot him in broad daylight and expect to get away with it. They probably had vigilante fantasies of saving the day and protecting their neighborhood and making that citizens arrest and being congratulated by the neighbors they saved. I'm supremely skeptical that their intent was to go kill the guy - and the video supports this, because he didn't get shot until after they were fighting over the shotgun.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter. The evidence available to us at this moment suggests the McMichaels committed at least two crimes, each of which could be argued to have provoked the fight that led to Arbery getting shot.

 

[Neopolymath]

If you have time I’d love for you to explain in more detail how the “honest objective non-detective street cop” would surmise intent to feloniously burgle from the facts that are currently available to the general public (which is essentially just the video of an unmasked guy in broad daylight looking around an open residential construction site....with no other corroborating evidence or testimony about what he is doing there).

Because, maybe you don’t realize, but if what Arbery did based just on the video is felony burglary, then literally every instance of benign trespassing magically turns into burglary too.

It's kind of pointless. The cops weren't there so who really cares what a cop would say upon reviewing the evidence after the fact. It's completely unrelated to a case in which some guy goes into a building and is followed by two non-cops. I just can't understand why this matters at all. This isn't a discussion about what a cop witnessing these acts thinks.

 

[vector2]

I think I've been pretty clear that I suspect that the McMichaels committed at least two crimes and will probably be convicted of murder.



I just don't believe anybody could be stupid enough to think they could chase a guy down the street and shoot him in broad daylight and expect to get away with it. They probably had vigilante fantasies of saving the day and protecting their neighborhood and making that citizens arrest and being congratulated by the neighbors they saved. I'm supremely skeptical that their intent was to go kill the guy - and the video supports this, because he didn't get shot until after they were fighting over the shotgun.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter. The evidence available to us at this moment suggests the McMichaels committed at least two crimes, each of which could be argued to have provoked the fight that led to Arbery getting shot.

I also don’t think they’re stupid enough to drive after him and then shoot him in the back from 20 ft in cold blood. That is entirely separate from a more likely scenario in which they perhaps had intent to provoke Arbery verbally and by a show of force to “make the first move” so they could have a “justified” kill.

It's kind of pointless. The cops weren't there so who really cares what a cop would say upon reviewing the evidence after the fact. It's completely unrelated to a case in which some guy goes into a building and is followed by two non-cops. I just can't understand why this matters at all. This isn't a discussion about what a cop witnessing these acts thinks.

Monty is saying that in his yet to be defined state, that is exactly what McMichael’s case could hypothetically boil down to in a court of law (likely felony committed by Arbery -> lawful citizens arrest pursuit -> lawful self-defense shooting)

 

[Monty Python]

True-up to a point, but operationally "The Law" is nothing more than the sum of the behavior of law enforcement personnel, attorneys, judges, and juries. Human beings have different levels of grey matter, values, prejudices, and varying emotional states. The legal process is to be feared as much as it is to be respected. Particularly if you are a minority, don't make a good appearance, don't speak English well, are uneducated, etc.

I have several lawyers in the family including criminal defense. Which prosecutor, which detective, which judge, which county, and does the defendant make a good appearance matter a helluva lot-absent overwhelming evidence.

Points well stated and agreed. There is no perfect system unfortunately.

 

[deleted59964]

can we rename this thread again?

or maybe close it.
the original point of this thread was to discuss the economic impact of COVID.... I think that's been done.

 

[deleted162650]

Wait I’m confused - was it Arbery or one/both of the McMichaels that had COVID??

 

[Arch Guillotti]

maybe close it.

No way after 70 pages...

 

[d9sccr]

can we rename this thread again?

or maybe close it.
the original point of this thread was to discuss the economic impact of COVID.... I think that's been done.

Just get back on topic.

While not proof of origination, there’s apparently cell phone data showing avoidance of the Wuhan viral lab in October.

I mentioned previously that Italian docs commented on this being there in November/December, but now Miami is reporting likely COVID+ cases in December.

 

[Ezekiel2517]

Covid stuff!
"Abbott's rapid coronavirus test, which is used by the White House, looks like it might not work that well"

Abbott Virus Test Used at White House Faces Accuracy Concern

The coronavirus test from Abbott Laboratories used at the White House to get rapid answers to whether someone is infected may miss as many as half of positive cases, according to a report from New York University that the company immediately disputed.

www.bloomberg.com

 

[vector2]

Most of the forum clutter could be solved with a catch all “General Politics / News / Current Events” thread. Promptly close duplicate topics threads and redirect the poster to the mega thread.

 

[anbuitachi]

Ok @Arch Guillotti , first it was COVID economics thread. Now it's ultimate COVID thread. I finally give you permission to change the title to

"General BS aka post about whatever topic pops into your pretty little head. Like, did you know the German word for gloves is literally 'handshoes?' And oh yea, remember when 'Sports' was a thing?" thread

its because everyone realized the Fed is just helping the big corps . no money to be made by the little folks

 

[Monty Python]

Anyone have insight how the curriculum is changed, especially labs? Gross anatomy?

Harvard Medical School Moves Fall Semester Online for First-Year Students | News | The Harvard Crimson

Harvard Medical School will begin classes online for all first-year students in its medical, dental, and graduate programs this fall, the school announced Wednesday.

www.thecrimson.com

 

[anbuitachi]

Anyone have insight how the curriculum is changed, especially labs? Gross anatomy?

Harvard Medical School Moves Fall Semester Online for First-Year Students | News | The Harvard Crimson

Harvard Medical School will begin classes online for all first-year students in its medical, dental, and graduate programs this fall, the school announced Wednesday.

www.thecrimson.com

did they lower the tuition?

 

[Monty Python]

did they lower the tuition?

good point, don’t know.

 

[deleted126335]

its because everyone realized the Fed is just helping the big corps . no money to be made by the little folks

Actually I give the Fed pretty good marks for doing the best that they can with what they have. Put the blame where it should be: the US Congress and President.

 

[Southpaw]

I think I've been pretty clear that I suspect that the McMichaels committed at least two crimes and will probably be convicted of murder.

You have been clear. I'm more referring what I believe the overall response has been in our country. And it's more of the same time and time again. Black man killed by white people. Immediately the country goes 'well, what'd the black guy do to deserve that?'. This is even worse in my opinion, because the racism and institutionalism is so overt and disgusting given those two guys hung out doing whatever they wanted for 2 months until the video surfaced. How do you even get the poor murdered guy off the street without people asking serious questions and arresting the guys given what we saw in the video?

 

[Ezekiel2517]

Germany’s daily coronavirus cases nearly triple - states bring back tougher measures

Germany’s daily coronavirus cases nearly TRIPLE

CORONAVIRUS cases in Germany have almost trebled in the past 24 hours sparking fears of a second wave of COVID-19 infections.

www.express.co.uk

 

[chocomorsel]

I go in houses under construction in my fancy neighborhood every time I walk my dog past one. Oops.

Edit: Additionally, it's clear that law enforcement just does whatever they want and then it's up to the judicial system to figure it all out later.

You clearly were casing the place and planned on coming back with your truck to steal a bunch of copper wire and 4*4s.
I mean why else would you trespass into a house that wasn’t yours and under construction?

 

[chocomorsel]

You live there, the people know you, and I'm going to guess that you don't sprint away down the street when confronted by a neighbor asking what you're doing. You probably say hello and he pets your dog.

He was two miles from his house and one of the neighbors who’s camera caught him every time he went on his run knew specifically who he was.
I am sure she wasn’t the only one.

 

[chocomorsel]

No, I don't think they were planning to kill the guy. I think they went to chase down a guy they thought was committing a crime in their neighborhood to bag him for the cops, then they waved some guns at him, then he was justifiably afraid for his life, and fought with them.

They made some stupid decisions, probably committed two crimes (brandishing firearms, attempting a citizens arrest for a non-felony). Someone died as a direct result of their criminal acts, that's probably murder, they'll probably go to prison. That's what my 'bias' tells me.

I don't think it's 'bias' to point out that if the victim, who was fleeing a crime, attacked a guy with a gun who'd told him to stop, then there might be a winning self-defense argument when the trial rolls around. And that has nothing to do with what color anybody is.

Your “bias” is your repeated assumption that he was casing the joint. You keep saying this over and over hoping that if you repeat it enough it will be true.

Truth is, no one knows one way or the other. But plenty of other people have admitted on multiple online sites that they do this on a regular basis and no one calls the cops nor chases them down with a gun. They admit that they are just nosy.
Are all those people lying and casing the houses? Why do you keep assuming that?

 

[Lawpy]

I don't know what we're talking about and couldn't find the covid economics thread (but I think this thread is the one?):

Stocks Fall as Fed’s Powell Says Outlook ‘Highly Uncertain’

The Dow and S&P 500 dropped after Fed Chairman Jerome Powell said Congress and the White House will need to spend more money to make sure policy makers’ quick initial response to the coronavirus-induced economic contraction isn’t wasted.

www.wsj.com

 

[chocomorsel]

I think I've been pretty clear that I suspect that the McMichaels committed at least two crimes and will probably be convicted of murder.



I just don't believe anybody could be stupid enough to think they could chase a guy down the street and shoot him in broad daylight and expect to get away with it. They probably had vigilante fantasies of saving the day and protecting their neighborhood and making that citizens arrest and being congratulated by the neighbors they saved. I'm supremely skeptical that their intent was to go kill the guy - and the video supports this, because he didn't get shot until after they were fighting over the shotgun.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter. The evidence available to us at this moment suggests the McMichaels committed at least two crimes, each of which could be argued to have provoked the fight that led to Arbery getting shot.

You are extremely skeptical of their intent to murder the victim.
But you aren’t skeptical at all that Aubrey was just being nosy.
Be honest with yourself and ask yourself why that is.

 

[pgg]

Your “bias” is your repeated assumption that he was casing the joint. You keep saying this over and over hoping that if you repeat it enough it will be true.

Truth is, no one knows one way or the other. But plenty of other people have admitted on multiple online sites that they do this on a regular basis and no one calls the cops nor chases them down with a gun. They admit that they are just nosy.
Are all those people lying and casing the houses?

We may just have to agree to disagree on this.

Why do you keep assuming that?

The video, the body language prior to entry, sprinting away afterwards. This is not how "innocently nosy" people act.

You are extremely skeptical of their intent to murder the victim.
But you aren’t skeptical at all that Aubrey was just being nosy.
Be honest with yourself and ask yourself why that is.

The videos. I think the two white guys were bumbling idiots who provoked an unnecessary and probably illegal confrontation with a black guy who told his mother he was "jogging" while he looked for stuff to steal.

Mind you, I'm not defending or even giving the benefit of the doubt to the McMichaels. I'm not assuming noble or even "innocently nosy" intent. These guys left a gun in an unlocked vehicle in front of their house at a time when they were allegedly concerned about a series of thefts in the neighborhood. They're stupid, recklessly negligent; probably criminals. So don't act like I'm defending them because they're white, and criticizing Arbery because he's black. Everyone in this story played stupid games for stupid prizes.

I suppose it's possible that everyone watching those videos, you included, me included, see what they expect to see, and see what they want to see. Everyone has experience that shapes how they perceive the world they see. I'm not sure there's much to be gained by arguing this further.

 

[vector2]

The video, the body language prior to entry, sprinting away afterwards. This is not how "innocently nosy" people act.
.

I can’t even imagine the number of unjustified homicides or unjustified arrests or unjustified police shooting acquittals that have resulted solely from subjective perception like this. You really think a nosy black guy in the Deep South in a white neighborhood might not run for any other reason than he must’ve done something criminal?

 

[ChiDO]

We flattened the curve. Didn't overwhelm the medical system. Cases are going to spike if we open tomorrow or in 3 months. Deaths are going to go up now or in 3 months. As long as we don't overwhelm the medical system, why not open up? WHATS THE LONG TERM PLAN!? Originally, it was to flatten the curve; we succeeded...now goalposts are moving again. We closing until there is 0 deaths and a vaccine in 2 years?

There was a recent model I saw that showed opening now vs in 3 months. Opening now showed faster spike and more deaths, but faster decline. Opening in 3 months, showed slower spike, slower death rate, bur prolonged. In the end, it was the same amount of deaths for both models.

If you are in a high risk group, change your lifestyle for the time being. In the US, there are I think 3 deaths in <18yo from the CDC stats.

Evidence suggests children are not transmitting the disease as adults are: https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2020-05/Evidence-Summary_Covid-19_Spread-in-Children.pdf.pdf

Children 'not significant contributors' to virus spread

The Health Information and Quality Authority has said it appears that children are not substantially contributing to the spread of coronavirus, in their household, or in schools.

www.rte.ie

Canceling classes for the fall already..absurd.

 

[vector2]

WHATS THE LONG TERM PLAN!?

The long-term presumably science-based plan was the 63 page one the CDC released which you can read here:

CDC reopening document offers detailed guidelines for states and cities

It provides far more specific instructions than the Trump administration's plan.

www.axios.com

That was the plan, at least until the WH shelved it due to a mixture of political (election) reasons and presumably because all the lobbyists and their corporate overlords who actually run this country were quite displeased.

 

[Lawpy]

We flattened the curve. Didn't overwhelm the medical system. Cases are going to spike if we open tomorrow or in 3 months. Deaths are going to go up now or in 3 months. As long as we don't overwhelm the medical system, why not open up? WHATS THE LONG TERM PLAN!? Originally, it was to flatten the curve; we succeeded...now goalposts are moving again. We closing until there is 0 deaths and a vaccine in 2 years?

There was a recent model I saw that showed opening now vs in 3 months. Opening now showed faster spike and more deaths, but faster decline. Opening in 3 months, showed slower spike, slower death rate, bur prolonged. In the end, it was the same amount of deaths for both models.

If you are in a high risk group, change your lifestyle for the time being. In the US, there are I think 3 deaths in <18yo from the CDC stats.

Evidence suggests children are not transmitting the disease as adults are: https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2020-05/Evidence-Summary_Covid-19_Spread-in-Children.pdf.pdf

Children 'not significant contributors' to virus spread

The Health Information and Quality Authority has said it appears that children are not substantially contributing to the spread of coronavirus, in their household, or in schools.

www.rte.ie

Canceling classes for the fall already..absurd.

I think a lot of people forgot the point of the lockdown was to flatten the curve. They just don't want any more deaths from covid 19.

 

[ChiDO]

I think a lot of people forgot the point of the lockdown was to flatten the curve. They just don't want any more deaths from covid 19.

That's like saying we don't want any more deaths from <fill in the blank>. Get rid of all the politicians. Term limits for all.

 

[Monty Python]

I think we’re going to hear a lot more of this philosophy in the near future.

Universal health care.

https://health.usnews.com/health-care/for-better/articles/the-case-for-universal-health-care

 

[deleted162650]

Everyone in this story played stupid games for stupid prizes.

I smell a new prime time game show.

 

[vector2]

I smell a new prime time game show.

Bruh we on that game show right now, it’s called America 2020

 

[Spikebd]

We flattened the curve. Didn't overwhelm the medical system. Cases are going to spike if we open tomorrow or in 3 months. Deaths are going to go up now or in 3 months. As long as we don't overwhelm the medical system, why not open up? WHATS THE LONG TERM PLAN!? Originally, it was to flatten the curve; we succeeded...now goalposts are moving again. We closing until there is 0 deaths and a vaccine in 2 years?

There was a recent model I saw that showed opening now vs in 3 months. Opening now showed faster spike and more deaths, but faster decline. Opening in 3 months, showed slower spike, slower death rate, bur prolonged. In the end, it was the same amount of deaths for both models.

If you are in a high risk group, change your lifestyle for the time being. In the US, there are I think 3 deaths in <18yo from the CDC stats.

Evidence suggests children are not transmitting the disease as adults are: https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2020-05/Evidence-Summary_Covid-19_Spread-in-Children.pdf.pdf

Children 'not significant contributors' to virus spread

The Health Information and Quality Authority has said it appears that children are not substantially contributing to the spread of coronavirus, in their household, or in schools.

www.rte.ie

Canceling classes for the fall already..absurd.

Call me a tin foil hat but I’m confident this has stopped being a public health issue and is now exclusively a political issue. I think some high level global elites are using COVID to move society in a new direction. More surveillance, less small business, more people totally dependent on the state.

If some of us wake up, watch out! It’ll be time for another revolution, and we might be part of history!

 

[deleted59964]

Call me a tin foil hat but I’m confident this has stopped being a public health issue and is now exclusively a political issue. I think some high level global elites are using COVID to move society in a new direction. More surveillance, less small business, more people totally dependent on the state.

If some of us wake up, watch out! It’ll be time for another revolution, and we might be part of history!

Ok ... tinfoil hat

 

[Spikebd]

Ok ... tinfoil hat

We should be careful what we wish for, because I don’t think the mega cities of the future will be as utopian as our so called experts would like us to believe. Far more hellish than they even are today.

 

[Ezekiel2517]

Not a good sign when actual physicians have the same depth of understanding of this issue as Trump lol. That they are just as dumbfounded and clueless as he is as far as a plan. Imagine being an MD and trusting Trump's intellect over the guidance of the country's top public health officials, scientific experts, and economists. Jesus christ. By the way, many places are reopening and as they do, without adequate testing, providing the perfect ground that nCoV needs to swell and swell and swell.

 

[Ezekiel2517]

 

[Lawpy]

Not a good sign when actual physicians have the same depth of understanding of this issue as Trump lol. That they are just as dumbfounded and clueless as he is as far as a plan. Imagine being an MD and trusting Trump's intellect over the guidance of the country's top public health officials, scientific experts, and economists. Jesus christ. By the way, many places are reopening and as they do, without adequate testing, providing the perfect ground that nCoV needs to swell and swell and swell.

Economists are rather a bit of a disaster because the very foundations of the subject they're supposed to be experts at are flawed and even they recognize that. Also their forecasts are a disaster. I agree with following other experts.

 

[Ezekiel2517]

Increasing cases of Kawasaki-like disease in kids, now being called pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome.

About 100 N.Y. Children Treated for Illness Tied to Virus (Published 2020)

“This is a truly disturbing situation,” Governor Cuomo said of the rising number of cases of the mysterious inflammatory syndrome.

www.nytimes.com

Italian report on the Kawasaki disease: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31103-X/fulltext

 

[Ezekiel2517]

Both France and Spain coming out with their seroprevalence numbers today (Spain's paper not out yet). Both report around 5% infected. Not ideal, since this means they had big death tolls despite limited spread.

AAAS

science.sciencemag.org

 

[Impromptu]

In the USA the stay at home orders were to prevent the hospitals from being overrun and to buy time to develop an effective antiviral regiment and vaccine. While to a limited extent the stay at home orders are meant to reduce the number of cases, that is not their primary purpose. The way South Korea did it was by forcing quarantine of those testing positive and all of their contacts, often at a government facility for 14 days.

So now we are awaiting the ex machina of a vaccine or an antiviral medications regiment. What is the plan if neither of those things occur? That is a very likely reality. A vaccine was never developed for HIV. The best antiviral medications took 30-40 years to perfect. I believe in creating a plan that does not depend on a miracle breakthrough.

For possible flu pandemics we have effective antiviral medications. And a new vaccine will take 4-5 months. Not so for the coronavirus.

We need a plan that takes into account the reality that we face now. And if something better happens, then we rejoice and move forward that much faster.

The reality we face now is that a lockdown for an extended time that does not take into account all of the other facets of life, like job loss, economic destruction, hopelessness, despair, suicides, domestic violence, fewer vaccinations, fewer cancers detected, less medical care for chronic conditions, isolation, solitude, destruction of savings due to inflation, loss of security, a lock down like that is not a real plan. Every single public policy decision has costs and benefits. We know that allowing a speed limit of 60 mph will result in more deaths, especially among the elderly and teenagers, yet we do not limit the highway speeds to 15 mph because of that. Public policy will need to take cues from all facets of life, public health, economy, religion, civil rights, etc.

Especially as we learn more about the behavior of the virus, we do not need to take as broad, wide spectrum health measures. We can focus in on what will work, such as protecting the nursing homes (that was a major failure on the parts of the governors, which has resulted in a very large number of deaths. Access to ventilators was not the game changer it was made out to be. So lets find out what worked and build on that.

 

[vector2]

In the USA the stay at home orders were to prevent the hospitals from being overrun and to buy time to develop an effective antiviral regiment and vaccine. While to a limited extent the stay at home orders are meant to reduce the number of cases, that is not their primary purpose. The way South Korea did it was by forcing quarantine of those testing positive and all of their contacts, often at a government facility for 14 days.

So now we are awaiting the ex machina of a vaccine or an antiviral medications regiment. What is the plan if neither of those things occur? That is a very likely reality. A vaccine was never developed for HIV. The best antiviral medications took 30-40 years to perfect. I believe in creating a plan that does not depend on a miracle breakthrough.

For possible flu pandemics we have effective antiviral medications. And a new vaccine will take 4-5 months. Not so for the coronavirus.

We need a plan that takes into account the reality that we face now. And if something better happens, then we rejoice and move forward that much faster.

The reality we face now is that a lockdown for an extended time that does not take into account all of the other facets of life, like job loss, economic destruction, hopelessness, despair, suicides, domestic violence, fewer vaccinations, fewer cancers detected, less medical care for chronic conditions, isolation, solitude, destruction of savings due to inflation, loss of security, a lock down like that is not a real plan. Every single public policy decision has costs and benefits. We know that allowing a speed limit of 60 mph will result in more deaths, especially among the elderly and teenagers, yet we do not limit the highway speeds to 15 mph because of that. Public policy will need to take cues from all facets of life, public health, economy, religion, civil rights, etc.

Especially as we learn more about the behavior of the virus, we do not need to take as broad, wide spectrum health measures. We can focus in on what will work, such as protecting the nursing homes (that was a major failure on the parts of the governors, which has resulted in a very large number of deaths. Access to ventilators was not the game changer it was made out to be. So lets find out what worked and build on that.

The CDC guideline called for merely 14 days of declining cases before phased reopening. As of now, only about a dozen states have even bent the curve, meanwhile 40 states are making a push to open. I honestly don’t know where the “governors or some other people want indefinite lockdowns leading to widespread economic destruction and hopelessness and suicides etc etc” false narrative strawman is coming from.

 

[Spikebd]

In the USA the stay at home orders were to prevent the hospitals from being overrun and to buy time to develop an effective antiviral regiment and vaccine. While to a limited extent the stay at home orders are meant to reduce the number of cases, that is not their primary purpose. The way South Korea did it was by forcing quarantine of those testing positive and all of their contacts, often at a government facility for 14 days.

So now we are awaiting the ex machina of a vaccine or an antiviral medications regiment. What is the plan if neither of those things occur? That is a very likely reality. A vaccine was never developed for HIV. The best antiviral medications took 30-40 years to perfect. I believe in creating a plan that does not depend on a miracle breakthrough.

For possible flu pandemics we have effective antiviral medications. And a new vaccine will take 4-5 months. Not so for the coronavirus.

We need a plan that takes into account the reality that we face now. And if something better happens, then we rejoice and move forward that much faster.

The reality we face now is that a lockdown for an extended time that does not take into account all of the other facets of life, like job loss, economic destruction, hopelessness, despair, suicides, domestic violence, fewer vaccinations, fewer cancers detected, less medical care for chronic conditions, isolation, solitude, destruction of savings due to inflation, loss of security, a lock down like that is not a real plan. Every single public policy decision has costs and benefits. We know that allowing a speed limit of 60 mph will result in more deaths, especially among the elderly and teenagers, yet we do not limit the highway speeds to 15 mph because of that. Public policy will need to take cues from all facets of life, public health, economy, religion, civil rights, etc.

Especially as we learn more about the behavior of the virus, we do not need to take as broad, wide spectrum health measures. We can focus in on what will work, such as protecting the nursing homes (that was a major failure on the parts of the governors, which has resulted in a very large number of deaths. Access to ventilators was not the game changer it was made out to be. So lets find out what worked and build on that.

Unfortunately a large swath of people are so blinded by politics and left vs right that they can’t understand that experts can be wrong and that experts don’t always agree.
I was probably one of the first people who advocated for a lockdown of some sort. I thought Gavin new son did well for California on this issue. Why can’t a typical democrat ever get past a CNN talking point and try and find common ground? Newsflash, not all of us are as dumb as you think