Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both

Armstronglivs wrote:

So where do you get your information about the crisis if not from some branch of the media and the health experts they talk to?

How about your own experience, your own life, your own eyes?

Mr Money in the Banks wrote:

Precious Roy wrote:

No. It is working. Lombardy has finally starting to show a consistent decline after being very hard hit. Compliance with lockdown in southern Italy is a growing problem and could reverse progress. But the pattern in Italy is supporting the efficacy of lockdown measures.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/italy-extends-lockdown-amid-signs-coronavirus-infection-rate-is-easinghttps://twitter.com/yaneerbaryam/status/1244756801314263044?s=20

Italy has been up and down between 700 and 900 deaths pretty constantly since 10 days. Nothing indicate yet a decline. Yesterday was up, today down.

The Hell with two documented sources.

No it's not. It is just another stupid faux libertarian sophism like "the solution to our problems is more freedom, not less." These slogans are invoked to avoid the complex discussion that are necessary when weighing individual rights versus the government's obligation to protect the public health and welfare. And they are also frequently used as a decoy to keep people from seeing the clear class underpinnings of argument like send everyone back to work during a pandemic to keep equity prices stable.

Precious Roy wrote:

moran112312 wrote:

The fact that the lockdown in Italy isn't working should clue everyone on this board in that a national lockdown here won't work either.

No. It is working. Lombardy has finally starting to show a consistent decline after being very hard hit. Compliance with lockdown in southern Italy is a growing problem and could reverse progress. But the pattern in Italy is supporting the efficacy of lockdown measures.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/italy-extends-lockdown-amid-signs-coronavirus-infection-rate-is-easinghttps://twitter.com/yaneerbaryam/status/1244756801314263044?s=20

What goes up must come down. The coming down part, according to my regression analysis with Excel, actually has very little to do with the quarantine order.

That ship sailed after 9/11

energeticlotuseater wrote:

“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both”

Something to think about as government shuts down business, forces you to stay in your house, enforces curfews, locks up pastors for violating social distancing measures and is even able to tell you when you can and cannot go for a run.

Limousine Libertarian wrote:

Hot Air Balloon popped wrote:

Where you alive for 911? We gave up privacy.

Duh. Every time we wait in line at the airport and strip down and shove our bags of 3 ounce shampoo through the scanner we are reminded of the liberties we gave up in response to 9/11.

I fear we will double down on the mistakes of the past and implement the TSA + Patriot Act on steroids in response to this.

dude x-ray scanners at airports are not an encroachment on Liberty

Seriously airports and airlines are private companies and they can set up whatever security they want. Get your own plane if you don't want to deal with searches

Honestly I'm all down for a good discussion on how to set up Society to have the best world we can. But if you just start thinking that security for private companies is an encroachment on your Liberty it's not a very measure discussion

PRIORITIES wrote:

Limousine Libertarian wrote:

Duh. Every time we wait in line at the airport and strip down and shove our bags of 3 ounce shampoo through the scanner we are reminded of the liberties we gave up in response to 9/11.

I fear we will double down on the mistakes of the past and implement the TSA + Patriot Act on steroids in response to this.

dude x-ray scanners at airports are not an encroachment on Liberty

Seriously airports and airlines are private companies and they can set up whatever security they want. Get your own plane if you don't want to deal with searches

Honestly I'm all down for a good discussion on how to set up Society to have the best world we can. But if you just start thinking that security for private companies is an encroachment on your Liberty it's not a very measure discussion

Uh what. All airlines are required to do the screenings under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act.

Giles Corey wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

So where do you get your information about the crisis if not from some branch of the media and the health experts they talk to?

How about your own experience, your own life, your own eyes?

You have experienced a coronavirus, a pandemic before? You have medical knowledge? You know what going on in government if the media don't report it? You know what's happening around the world - without being there? You are everywhere at once - because you use your "own eyes"? Are you sure you aren't Rush Limbaugh?

Precious Roy wrote:

[quote]—Benjamin Franklin wrote:

[quote]Precious Roy wrote:

[quote]

No it's not. It is just another stupid faux libertarian sophism like "the solution to our problems is more freedom, not less." These slogans are invoked to avoid the complex discussion that are necessary when weighing individual rights versus the government's obligation to protect the public health and welfare. And they are also frequently used as a decoy to keep people from seeing the clear class underpinnings of argument like send everyone back to work during a pandemic to keep equity prices stable.

https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/14/how-the-world-butchered-benjamin-franklins-quote-on-liberty-vs-security/

^ this. Never forget that our current economic system is socialism for the rich and rugged libertarianism for the poor

What goes up must come down. The coming down part, according to my regression analysis with Excel, actually has very little to do with the quarantine order.

Oh, wait. I didn't know you had an excel spreadsheet. I guess that proves everything. And you cited the well known principle of infectious diseases "what goes up must come down". Was that the subject of your Phd dissertation? I am currently working on "pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered" and also have an excel spreadsheet. I am working 24/7 to get it done before my colleague publishes his work on "a bird in hand is worth two in the bush". I don't want to have to present at the same conference of internet dodo brains as that guy. He would steal my thunder.

I am sympathetic to people desiring a strong response. However, history is replete with examples of a clear pattern of how a civilized society breaks down into an authoritarian regime.

Step 1) Identify a potential threat (e.g. Hitler used the Jews, which he described as a 'disease')

Step 2) Stoke fear (this disease threatens complete destruction of our society).

Step 3) Provide a solution (We must take away a small amount of freedom in order to eradicate this disease)

Step 4) Stoke fear (this disease continues to get stronger despite our efforts!)

Step 5) Continue to incrementally tighten (we must now endure these small additional inconveniences in order to destroy this disease once and for all)

Step 6) Begin to publicly identify and shame dissenters. (can you believe these selfish, stupid people who won't take on the small inconveniences we have all burdened ourselves with?)

Step 7) Continue Steps 4-6 until gov. has enough control to quash dissenters.

Step 8) A ton of blood lost.

Step 9) Wake up and say, "how the heck did we get here?"

Step 10) Depose dictator and regain freedom.

Step 11) Repeat ad infinitum because, despite our impressive ability to read and write, our memories are apparently incredibly worthless when we are afraid.

Talking heads in government and media DON'T WANT A REAL SOLUTION. There is tons of evidence that certain drugs are cures. There are no negative side effects. Doctors themselves are taking the drugs to prevent themselves from getting coronavirus. But politicians and media are melting down because it hasn't been researched for 10+ years. We will let people smoke cigarettes and kill themselves but we won't let people take a drug that can save their lives with no negative side effects.

That's how backwards it is now in America.

What drugs cure COVID-19? Where are the "tons of evidence" supporting that those drugs exist and have no side effects? If doctors have been taking the drugs to prevent them from contracting COVID-19, why are doctors still dying of COVID-19?

There are several different types of coronaviruses and COVID-19 is just one of them. Some other types have been around far longer and have therefore been studied far more extensively; some other coronaviruses have vaccines and known cures, but COVID-19 currently does not.

If anything, the US government would probably welcome a vaccine or cure because a) they would be able to exploit people's desperation and charge a disgustingly high price for the vaccine/cure, and b) it would get everyone back to work sooner so that the precious stock market and all the corporations they've been throwing trillions of dollars at can recover financially. The government very clearly prioritises wealth other human lives, but continuously tries (usually unsuccessfully) to avoid overtly demonstrating that; if there was a solution to COVID-19, it's almost certain that the US government would be publicising it in order to make insane amounts of money off of it while also portraying itself as the saviour of the American populace.

Can we talk about how OP took a quote from a historical figure, changed the wording to say what he wanted it to say, posted it in quotations (but with no name attributed to it) so readers who had heard the original quote would confuse it for that one/assume it was by a historical figure, and then when he got called out on it went "what if I quoted myself? that's still technically a quote, right?". I think people will take the quote a lot less seriously if they found out it was made by some loser on a forum rather than a respected founding father.

By living in a governmental system, you necessarily give up some liberties. Everyone has to follow laws, everyone has to pay taxes. Why do we do this? Security.

+1

nasty brutish and short wrote:

... Why do we do this? Security.

It's not just security. For example without enforceable contracts a lot of economic activity would be very difficult.

This is (in part) why many countries that lack a properly functioning legal system are economically badly off... it's hard to do business.

Let’s all keep in mind that the government (s) that are taking away our civil liberties have given us no definite timeline or even target on when they will drop their lockdowns/stay-at-home orders. It is very worrisome when people like Dr.Faucci, Trump, Pence can only give very vague phrases like “flatten the curve” when they talk about the goal of the lockdowns and EVEN then Dr.Faucci won’t commit to when he would be willing to drop the lockdowns.

Read a bit about the Reichstag Fire Decree. You’ll find a bunch of similarities between that and today’s situation. Both were/are supported by people from all political affiliations.

That doesn't seem like "a bunch of similarities." Right now the government is telling people to stay home because there's a pandemic going on and social distancing is the only method they currently have for slowing the spread of the virus. It has nothing to do with suppressing political opposition, which becomes immediately apparent when you look at the media -- a lot of people are going after politicians at the moment, and that would be the one of the first things to be suppressed if the situation was in any way similar to the Reichstag Fire Decree.

Nobody can give an accurate estimate as to when stay-at-home orders will be lifted because we've never had a COVID-19 pandemic before; we don't know how long this will take, and giving false estimates would irritate people at best or, at worst, they would resume normal activities as soon as we reached the estimated date -- regardless of updated information and guidelines -- and the virus would spread even more rapidly and exacerbate the problems we're already facing. This is the reason Fauci isn't being specific with a date. Trump and Pence aren't being specific because they clearly don't have a good enough understanding of the situation to make an informed statement. Actually, Trump did try to establish a date for things to return to normal -- he said he wanted everything to restart by Easter, and everyone told him no because we knew from watching the progression of the virus in other countries that the situation wouldn't improve in such a short time frame.

If the insinuation is that by telling people to not hold large gatherings the government is violating the First Amendment right to freedom of assembly, that's not true. The government is trying to prohibit large gatherings of people because it could increase the rate at which the virus is transmitted; the emphasis is on adhering to social distancing guidelines, not on outlawing any sort of congregating whatsoever. Furthermore, the Reichstag Fire Decree took away far more freedom, including the rights to free speech and press -- given the amount of dissent in America right now, those freedoms are clearly still active. Also, the RFD allowed for indiscriminate arrest of political opponents; not only has this not happened in America, even in light of the pandemic, but many people haven't been arrested even when violating social distancing guidelines designed to protect vulnerable people from a potentially lethal disease.

The American government is handling the situation poorly, I won't argue against that, but they're not violating civil liberties. They're being nowhere near as strict as other countries like Italy and Spain, and the relatively lax attitude toward this whole pandemic is at least partially responsible for the severity of the situation in America.

The government is deeming this a national emergency and using this as the reasoning for severely restricting our rights and movement that we took for granted just two months ago. Furthermore the government has set no timeline or even a firm target to return those rights.

The German government severely restricted its citizens rights and freedoms after the Reichstag Fire deeming it necessary because of the communist threat to the country. They also set no timeline or firm target to return those rights to its people.

In both instances the governments did/are playing on people’s fear and the people, regardless of political affiliation, are allowing their government to take those rights and assume incredible power because they are scared.

Just because “we aren’t being as strict as Spain or Italy” isn’t really a comforting argument. Mussolini’s Italy wasn’t as strict as Stalin’s USSR, I wouldn’t want to live in either.