Jump to content
The Man in Blue

The COVID-19 Thread - Discussion & Cancellations

Recommended Posts

I'm learning a LOT about my fellow umpires these last couple months.

For one, the fact the "it's just a bad flu" is STILL being sold simply astounds me.  The lack of trust in the "mainstream media" - you know, what we older people call "the media" - and basic science facts and data is discouraging, at best.  And there's a certain air of "aaaahh, F*#K those 3% people!  They'll be *fine*!" being broadcast here.

Just to remind you - that 3% figure cuts across the umpire community, too, fellas.  I'm one of those high-risk people, and I feel like if I get it, there's a really, REALLY solid chance that it'll kill me, at least based on what we've seen so far.  So, the cavalier attitude about the "mere" 3%, or the railing against the "tyranny" of mask-wearing and/or closing businesses (tyranny?  really?  with thousands of years of human ugliness to other humans to which to compare?) is ...... irritating.  And I'm saying that last bit mildly.

Now, you may counter:  "Sure, Hokie.  But that just means we lose an older, useless person like you - and it probably means you were either morally weak, or just a pussy."

And that's fair.

But here's the thing:  even the weak-ass 3% - whether they have underlying risk, or are older, or just a pussy - we'd all like to live, too.  If that's all the same to you.

I'm well aware that my situation is a decently comfortable one, so I'm not desperate to re-start my business or get to work for my employer to pay bills.  But if we F*#K up this "re-starting," we're gonna be out of pocket for even longer and even more people are gonna die.  And, oh yeah - we've already lost 90,000+.

Here in Texas, there are worrying signs about even a slower restart:  we'd been fortunate to have, for our size, decently low death/sickness rates.  And then we restarted, slowly, on 1 May.  Guess what?  We started getting 800-1000 or more new cases per day.  The governor is trying to play the angle that "we're testing more, so of COURSE there'll be more positives."  Maybe.  But it could ALSO have something to do with people interacting again - especially in a state where, it seems to me, a lot of people are still buying the "it's a hoax" line.  And the US death toll is still hitting 1,000/day more often than not.

What's my point?  There are many.  I just started typing, and kept going.  And look - I'm not getting back on the field this year.  For one, the machinations of mechanics all ....... suck, as far as I'm concerned.  If I'm going out, I want to umpire, not jury-rig some nonsense, or do some two-man calling of balls and strikes.  And we're too close to each other for me to feel comfortable, since people won't wear masks and/or won't admit they're sick, or something.  Having said that:  if you want to go out and work games, there's really nothing I can do to stop you.  I hope that you'll be as safe as possible, and I hope that you'll do as much as you can to protect others as much as yourself.

But just know that not every one of us here is some strapping, healthy God Of Officiating who is somehow immune.  (Yeah, that idea cracks me up, too, but I had to say it.)  And our safety/life is tied into you taking the disease, and your responsibility, somewhat seriously.

And if someone wants to end up taking this down, that's cool, too.  I mean, sure, we're an umpire site, but we're 17 pages into a thread that's meandered all over the place.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trophy from me @HokieUmp  :cheers:

I'm sure many of you have received the NASO survey by now.  (For the record, I felt their answer selections sucked and did not encompass many factors.)  The question was directly asked on another forum I frequent" as an umpire, are you staying away, why, and what would it take to get you back?

I'm mid-40s.  Overweight, but otherwise relatively healthy.  My wife is now working on a COVID-19 floor.  My youngest child has an autoimmune disorder.

That said, I have a healthy but rational (IMO) fear of the virus.  However, more importantly, I have an equal concern of me being the one to spread it to your kid playing a game.  My biggest concern on the field is me breathing on the catchers the whole game.

Being on the field doesn't concern me so much as everything around it though.  If I could honestly believe people would follow guidelines and restrictions ... if I could honestly believe people would act courteous and respectful ... if I could honestly believe people would do the right thing ... but I don't.  I have cut down on our grocery store runs.  Not because I am afraid of going to the store, but because I have lost my tolerance for people's ignorance and callous disregard for their fellow human beings.

The problem isn't on the dirt ... the problem is the parking lot, the entrance gate, the concession stand, the bathroom, the dugouts, just getting on and off the field, and even the umpires' area.  The problem for me isn't the virus itself, it is the people.  I have no faith that local authorities are going to do anything to support or enforce proper practices.  I have no faith that a tournament director/organizer trying to make money is going to actually limit the attendance or take proper precautions.  I definitely have no faith in sports parents to do the right thing.

To paraphrase a quote that appeared recently from an unnamed MLB executive, "We have no good ideas, just degrees of bad."  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry if anyone took my comments personally. Obviously, I do not wish death or illness on anyone.

I do, though, stand by my comments that the whole situation has been completely politicized by the left.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mussgrass said:

I am sorry if anyone took my comments personally. Obviously, I do not wish death or illness on anyone.

I do, though, stand by my comments that the whole situation has been completely politicized. by the left.

 

 

I fixed that for you. Plenty of politicizing to go around.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LMSANS said:

I fixed that for you. Plenty of politicizing to go around.

I'm going to disagree (and I refer you to previous posts as to the provenance of my opinion.) Equating all opinions as valid is why we're in this situation. His misunderstanding of the facts does not mean that it's been politicized by both sides, and it's a convenient excuse to avoid hard truths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This today, on NBC News, about Arizona:

"Amid reopening in Arizona, the state Department of Health Services cut off a team of Arizona State and University of Arizona experts who provided pandemic modeling specific to the state, saying it was no longer needed as the state preferred to use a federal model. After a backlash, the Health Department reinstated the team, though it's unclear whether state officials are using the local universities' work in their decision-making. Since that dust up, Arizona State released new data showing infections and hospitalizations in the state could soar this summer."

And this, from Missouri:

Despite wearing masks and treating customers who were also masked, "Two hairstylists potentially exposed 140 customers to COVID-19 at a Great Clips in Missouri, according to alerts from a local health department. . . . Missouri has 11,988 confirmed cases of COVID-19, with cases up 6.2% over the last seven days, according to the state health department. There have been 681 deaths.

FWIW, and emphases added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2020 at 10:42 PM, HokieUmp said:

And there's a certain air of "aaaahh, F*#K those 3% people!  They'll be *fine*!" being broadcast here.

I apologize if I have not been clear.  I certainly don't want a single person to die, let alone 1%, 3% or more.

My only point is that this is not a Hobson's choice.  Each person can decide how to proceed as they see fit when analyzing their real/perceived individual risk. For you that may mean riding this out at home, as you have the ability to do that AND the resources and I have no problem at all with that.  And, from what I understand of this you have ZERO chance of getting this if you have no contact with others.  For someone else that is maybe not an option. Take a 28 year old single mom that works at a restaurant, with no savings, that hasn't been able to work in 75 days.  She has no real choice but to "take her chances" or literally end up on the streets, penniless. This is real, a friend's daughter was in this exact situation, but luckily he had the ability to pay her rent, car payment and get food for them for over 50 days and counting.

I also want to be clear that I am not saying this isn't real, or a real killer of folks. It obviously is and only a fool would deny that. Although it is a flu, it is not just another flu.  However, the percentage at which it kills, is up for great debate and quite frankly completely unknown.

The problem we have is that there are those that "go back to normal".  I see this at Home Depot, the grocery store and on and on.  Folks in terrible shape (200 lbs overweight) taking no precautions at ALL. Kids crawling over carts, people in their 80s with no mask, I could go on forever at the stuff I see, and Im sure everyone here sees it as well.  I choose to wear a N95 mask and gloves when in public, not in my car as I'm not afraid of giving it to myself:huh:. I do this not because I LIKE it, but I believe the available research shows it protects me and others.

But, I will NOT apologize, feel bad, or be blamed for unknowingly giving it to someone else that doesn't care enough about themselves to take their own precautions, or in most cases no precautions. That's on them, not me or others. Like I said earlier, if you choose not to buy a throat protecter and get hit in the throat by a foul tip, that's your fault, not the kid at bat.

As for the political debate...I have absolutely no interest in that. It does no good....and its prohibited here.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, aaluck said:

But, I will NOT apologize (or be blamed) for unknowingly giving it to someone else that doesn't care enough about themselves to take their own precautions, or no precautions.

And to be clear - my statement about killing others applies to those who are not taking any precautions at all....people who go out in public and are fine with accepting the risk of getting it themselves (or in many cases don't actually understand the risks), but conveniently forgetting the risk they could pass it on to others, by doing absolutely nothing to try to prevent it - regardless of what others are doing to protect themselves.    And typically speaking, if you're not doing anything to protect yourself, you're not doing anything to protect others.

Like you said, some people have no choice but to go out...and they are doing everything they can to minimize their own risk, (not everyone has access to a N95 mask), and even the risk to others, by doing all the right things (short of wearing a hazmat suit), but are being put at risk by others who are doing nothing for their part of the bargain - people who don't respect the six feet, don't wear masks, cough or sneeze out loud, touch everything, don't wash their hands, etc, etc, etc.  In short, most of them are acting like four-year-olds, who are defying the rules, simply to defy the rules...because "you're not the boss of me".

But, many are not so malicious...they are ignorant...I'm still blown away by the number of people who don't know that you can be contagious without having symptoms.  That you can be contagious for a week before you show symptoms....or never get symptoms at all and be contagious the whole time the virus is in your system.    And the number of people who think wearing a mask is a personal health risk (it's amazing how many doctors, nurses, EMT's and construction workers who wear masks all day long and don't die of it - or the number of Asians who have been wearing makeshift masks all day long since SARS 15+ years ago, and haven't died of wearing a mask).   People will come up with any self-rationalization they can to not put on a mask for ten minutes

And, my statements about killing others are directed at the "leaders" who are opting to open up too early against all expert advice, or without precautions, or without guidance, or without any plans to measure, or without plans to clamp down outbreaks, or without enforced rules of conduct - they are killing people...and partly because, as has been proven over this weekend...without rules half the population is either too stupid or too ignorant to understand the risks to themselves and others.    

To paraphrase Jurassic Park, so many people are so focused on whether they can, they forget to ask if they should.

Everyone wants to go on and on about their rights - so many of those people fail to accept the responsibilities and obligations that go with those rights.   The rights and freedoms we are afforded in Canada and the US come with a social contract.   The jingoism is nonsensical and unfounded.  Freedom does not mean "you can't tell me what to do".  And leadership isn't simply giving the majority (or the loudest) what they want.  If leadership was that easy anybody could do it.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aaluck said:

I apologize if I have not been clear.  I certainly don't want a single person to die, let alone 1%, 3% or more.

My only point is that this is not a Hobson's choice.  Each person can decide how to proceed as they see fit when analyzing their real/perceived individual risk. For you that may mean riding this out at home, as you have the ability to do that AND the resources and I have no problem at all with that.  And, from what I understand of this you have ZERO chance of getting this if you have no contact with others.  For someone else that is maybe not an option. Take a 28 year old single mom that works at a restaurant, with no savings, that hasn't been able to work in 75 days.  She has no real choice but to "take her chances" or literally end up on the streets, penniless. This is real, a friend's daughter was in this exact situation, but luckily he had the ability to pay her rent, car payment and get food for them for over 50 days and counting.

I also want to be clear that I am not saying this isn't real, or a real killer of folks. It obviously is and only a fool would deny that. Although it is a flu, it is not just another flu.  However, the percentage at which it kills, is up for great debate and quite frankly completely unknown.

The problem we have is that there are those that "go back to normal".  I see this at Home Depot, the grocery store and on and on.  Folks in terrible shape (200 lbs overweight) taking no precautions at ALL. Kids crawling over carts, people in their 80s with no mask, I could go on forever at the stuff I see, and Im sure everyone here sees it as well.  I choose to wear a N95 mask and gloves when in public, not in my car as I'm not afraid of giving it to myself:huh:. I do this not because I LIKE it, but I believe the available research shows it protects me and others.

But, I will NOT apologize, feel bad, or be blamed for unknowingly giving it to someone else that doesn't care enough about themselves to take their own precautions, or in most cases no precautions. That's on them, not me or others. Like I said earlier, if you choose not to buy a throat protecter and get hit in the throat by a foul tip, that's your fault, not the kid at bat.

As for the political debate...I have absolutely no interest in that. It does no good....and its prohibited here.

Agree.

 :ranton:

This is a problem I'm runing into on a daily basis. As a contractor, I got to the Depot frequently and I see the exact same thing. Lately, everytime I set foot in the Depot, better than 50% of the people there are not tradesman or contractors. They are just people bored and working on a home project, or wasting time it seems. That's all well and good, but do they need to be there? People are just making excuses to go out and do something. Wal Mart, Home Depot, Target, Grocery Stores, anything that is open are all packed with people that don't necessarily need to be there. So what's the point? People are going out anyway, so you run a risk no matter where you go. Might as well open things up with reasonable precautions. No matter where you go, you're potentially exposing yourself. Unless you decide to hunker down at home, you're putting yourself at risk everytime you go out, and not just for covid.

Bottom line is, you're never going to be able to rely on most other people to make you safe. You must decide what type of precautions you are going to take, and assess your own risk/rewards.

I can't rely on dipsh!ts to wear masks and try to take necessary precautions such as washing their hands and staying home when sick. No more that I can expect someone to not drink and drive, or not to do other illegal things that may put me or my family at risk every day. All I can do is take reasonable precautions and measures to try and make myself safe. May not happen, not just with covid, but what else can you do?

We can sit here and bloviate all day long about what people should do. But the reality is, I have, and always had very little control over what other people do. No one is going to protect me more than myself. I will always be as safe as I can and accept the risk/rewards on my own volition.

So stay home, go out, do whatever you want. But don't expect people to do the right thing and don't act incredulous when they don't. People have been screwing up since the beginning of civilization, and don't expect it to change anytime soon.

Protect yourself and your family as best as you can. In all practicality, what else can you do? :rantoff:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JonnyCat said:

No more that I can expect someone to not drink and drive, or not to do other illegal things that may put me or my family at risk every day

Yes, but there is a social construct in place to at least curb those things.  Education campaigns, laws, penalties, and a general understanding and concern (by most drivers) that they could kill someone else if they're not careful.  Yes, you have an inherent trust that others won't drink and drive, won't speed, won't run that red light while you have the green...and you trust that the guy going 45 mph in the opposite direction of you, also going 45 mph, suddenly won't weave three feet to his left into your lane.

And you have an inherent trust that others are licensed, and in order to do so passed a test in an impartial and competent setting.  And you have an inherent trust that people violating the law will be caught and punished, as you would if you violated in the law.  And you trust that where people can't self-govern that the penalties are incentive enough to keep the vast majority in check.   There's an administrative framework around all of it...and the people who manage it (mostly) know what they're do, and adhere to the appropriate expertise to put the appropriate rules and guidelines in place.

And yes, in the end, once in a while, someone runs a red light, and you get t-boned, and even if you did take all precautions and wore a seatbelt and owned the safest vehicle in the world, you and your family may die.

But having said all that, less than 40k people die every year in car accidents including people who never get in a car, and you accept that risk, do your part to minimize your own risk...and count on the majority of others to do their part.   Knowing that 499 out of 500 car accidents will not result in a fatality....and most YEARS most people don't get in a single fender bender.   And even then, many of those accidents are true accidents, not any result of malice or gross negligence. 

This is a far different set of circumstances than what you are dealing with when you go to Walmart.

So yes, in the end we can only control we can control...but would it be too much to ask our leaders to grow a set and put some enforceable boundaries to manage behavior and risk?

Because right now we have the equivalent of no traffic lights, no speed limits, no lanes, and no cops.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

So yes, in the end we can only control we can control...but would it be too much to ask our leaders to grow a set and put some enforceable boundaries to manage behavior and risk?

Ill answer that....or better yet tell you why this is ridiculous.

Yes it would be asking too much. Police are here to react and respond to crime, not babysit idiots. 

So under this "grow a pair" plan do we put a cop in every establishment (of course after we all add 20-300 times as many officers and vehicles to cover every area)? Who pays for all of these extra police, police cars and jailers? In case you haven't heard cities and states are going bankrupt. Of course we can just print more valueless money.

Do police haul everyone without a mask to jail? If so, how long and where do we house them all, because in my city alone that would be an extra 75,000 folks under arrest and in jail--daily?  That's a lot of police needed for enforcement. And make no mistake without the threat of jail any "grow a pair" plan has no meaning--and I doubt it would anyway.

Do we call the police if someone is not exactly on the 6-foot-X while in line? What if they are 5 feet 10 inches? What about kids with parents not wearing a mask, do we arrest the parents and put the kids in foster care or do they go to jail too? Do we call the police if someone coughs, sniffles or "looks" like they have fever?

If they are under arrest and test positive does the municipality now covers the cost of "treatment" including ICU if needed?

How about all of the folks arrested negative that get it in jail? What if they turn out negative, do we still jail them for not wearing a mask? How so if they pose no risk to anyone else, only themselves?  Great idea, lets make a bunch of laws (or as you like to call them, enforceable boundries) that are unenforceable and every knuckle head will ignore anyway.

There are about 330,000 in the US. Under this "grow a pair" plan 1/2 would be in jail and 1/4 would be in foster care or wards of the state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, aaluck said:

 

There are about 330,000 in the US. Under this "grow a pair" plan 1/2 would be in jail and 1/4 would be in foster care or wards of the state.

As one judge once said when told by the defendant "everyone was speeding".....you can't catch every fish in the stream.

Everything you said is not only absurd, but can be absurdly applied to every single law on the books.

And why jail?  Does everyone who runs a red light get sent to jail?  Hell, if you're gonna put everyone in jail, why not just shoot them on sight in your absurd little fantasy land?

How did we the police manage to handle it when we developed all those inconvenient traffic laws.  What a travesty it must have been for the police force when seat belt laws were introduced.   And did we put every driver who drove 1 mph over the speed limit in jail?  And how are all those incapable cops you describe in your fantasy land able to determine if a driver is following another too closely...and how on earth can they determine if you ran the yellow light safely, or could have stopped safely?

My God the hardships our police force must endure on a daily basis with all those nasty laws on the books.  You must think very little of our police force to think they can't use judgment or discretion or common sense.

And, gasp, how are all those other countries that are passing these laws handling such a massive hardship...I know in your fantasy land they are incapable of using discretion and judgment, and somehow need to quadruple their workforce...but somehow here in reality we manage to pull it off every day.

Come on, you can do better than that.   

You'd rather a free for all.   Where the strongest win I guess.  Your end game isn't pretty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

So yes, in the end we can only control we can control...but would it be too much to ask our leaders to grow a set and put some enforceable boundaries to manage behavior and risk?

Because right now we have the equivalent of no traffic lights, no speed limits, no lanes, and no cops.   

What could they do? Seriously, what more measures do you want them to take? We can't be forced to sit at home for 2 years until a vaccine is available. And there's that pesky thing here in the US called the constitution. You can mandate all you want that people wear masks, wash their hands, stay away from others, stay home when sick, blah, blah, blah. How do you effectively enforce it? Please.

It's entirely possible that we did the best we could and that many more people could have died as a result of this. If it is so contagious and deadly as everyone is saying, how could we not expect many deaths? A lot of people are going to die because of this. It's unfortunate, but it's the reality of this novel virus. It's very contagious and spreads easily and quickly. 

Honestly, I don't need more laws. I could use less, especially here in California.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

And why jail?  Does everyone who runs a red light get sent to jail? 

That's what I thought. You're proposed "grow a pair" plan is EXACTLY what we are doing.  Telling folks how to behave without any enforcement. You obviously slipped on the keyboard when you typed "enforceable" boundaries. There is no enforcement without punishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

The difference is those pandemics (not even Spanish Flu) didn't have the contagiousness COVID-19 does.

What the hell are you talking about?!

From Wikipedia:

Quote

The Spanish flu, also known as the 1918 flu pandemic, was an unusually deadly influenza pandemic caused by the H1N1 influenza A virus. Lasting more than 12 months from spring 1918 (northern hemisphere) to early summer 1919,[2][3] it infected 500 million people – about a third of the world's population at the time.[4] The death toll is estimated to have been anywhere from 17 million to 50 million, and possibly as high as 100 million, making it one of the deadliest pandemics in human history.

You, beerguy55, can't gauge "contagiousness". And you sure can't compare it to other pandemics in such loose brushstrokes.

And I was just about to launch into a diatribe when this article from the Washington Post appeared in my feed:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/tell-me-what-to-do-please-even-experts-struggle-with-coronavirus-unknowns/2020/05/25/e11f9870-9d08-11ea-ad09-8da7ec214672_story.html

I'll pull the applicable quote out of it:

Quote

The experts shy away from predictions and instead offer “scenarios.” For example, last week the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a document titled COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios that offered guidance to public health officials. The document gave a wide range of numerical estimates for the contagiousness and lethality of covid-19. The guidance was presented with a cautionary preamble: “Information about [covid-19’s] biological and epidemiological characteristics remain limited, and uncertainty remains around nearly all parameter values.”

That's just one paragraph. There's more. That entire article is rich with both assertions and concessions.

The summary paragraph is even better:

Quote

“We all want answers today, and science is not going to give them,” Nosek said. “Science is uncertainty. And the pace of uncertainty reduction in science is way slower than the pace of a pandemic.”

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, MadMax said:

You, beerguy55, can't gauge "contagiousness". And you sure can't compare it to other pandemics in such loose brushstrokes.

um...r-naught...used to determine how contagious, how infectious, a disease is - the rate at which it spreads or reproduces.  The higher the number, the more difficult to contain.  It's an oversimplification, but yes, you can gauge how contagious an infection is.   Basically, how many people a single person infects.  It needs to be measured alongside a time factor (ie. how long the virus takes to incubate before it can be spread), but the number on its own tells enough of a picture.

The r0 for Spanish Flu was estimated to be 1.5 to 3 - and probably closer 1.5...It was after all a strain of H1N1.  The fact that it immediately followed WW1 was a significant factor in how it spread and how deadly it was - the virus on its own was not that aggressive - the underlying conditions, and the state of the world, exacerbated its effectiveness.

For H1N1 from 2009 - 1.3.   

Seasonal flu - 1.2

COVID-19 - 5.7 - that puts it in line with Small Pox, Polio, German Measles to how it spreads   (yes, i expect that estimate to change, up or down, before this is over - it has already changed once from 2)

This is the number that explains the quick devastation in Italy, Spain, New York City, UK.   Italy went from "locking down is the worst idea ever" to total country lock down in less than three weeks.  UK went from "let's lock up the old people and race to immunity" to "that was the worst idea ever" in two weeks.  Because it spread ridiculously fast.

Compound that with the fact that, unlike most other viruses, including the above, COVID-19 is contagious while the person is still asymptomatic...in many cases it could be a week before a person gets symptoms...they're contagious that whole time AND they are contagious for another week after symptoms develop.  Worst are the set of people who NEVER develop symptoms and remain contagious the entire time they have the virus.  And yes, with that one paragraph I can compare with broad brushstrokes, because this one factor makes it different from that "typical flu" and other coronaviruses.   People want to paint this in with "bad flus" in their broad brushstrokes...I'm using the same strokes to show why it's an outlier to what we think we know.

Why did SARS disappear in 2003?   Because it didn't spread without symptoms...people who developed symptoms stayed home.  Very deadly, but ended up being very easy to contain.

And if you're going to compare to Spanish Flu - what do you think the COVID-19 numbers would look like today if we hadn't shut down?  We've only been at this for five months and are still in the first wave, and it's likely 95% of the world's population hasn't been exposed to it yet.  Spanish Flu had three waves over 15 months.  Will this be as deadly as SF - for a number of reasons, likely not.  But do not underestimate how the rate of spread will wreak havoc on that number, and any models around projecting it.  And when this is all over, do not be surprised if 50 million lie dead worldwide.  And if the US continues this cavalier blase march to freedom do not be surprised to see a million dead, but free, Americans by year end.

Frankly, our most compelling hope is this evolves into a less deadly strain...the other option is a more deadly strain that kills people before they spread it.  Historically, the first scenario is more likely.

Beyond that, I'm not really clear on your point - yeah, the modelling is uncertain, and will continue to evolve as more data comes in.  I'm well aware of the statistical and modelling ramifications of all the data, projections and scenarios to date.  That's no reason to ignore the data to this point...it has a range and a probability.   It's more clear than it was four months ago.  And it frankly looks more dire than it did four months ago.   It's all dictated by how we respond to it, and how the health system can handle it.

After all that, my point is simple - be careful.  Protect yourself, and consider others.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to an Umpire Board!

With states/counties/cities/towns re-opening, anyone getting back to umpiring?

Are the Plate Umps behind the Pitcher?

What kind of rotations are being used?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aaluck said:

That's what I thought. You're proposed "grow a pair" plan is EXACTLY what we are doing.  Telling folks how to behave without any enforcement. You obviously slipped on the keyboard when you typed "enforceable" boundaries. There is no enforcement without punishment.

um...fines?  Really?  Do you live in some strange land where people go to jail when they run a red light?

 

2 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

And there's that pesky thing here in the US called the constitution. You can mandate all you want that people wear masks, wash their hands, stay away from others, stay home when sick, blah, blah, blah. How do you effectively enforce it?

Ah, yes, that Constitution thing.  Because I keep forgetting that the US is the only country in the world with a constitution, a bill of rights, or freedom in general.

If the cops can figure out how to stop a transaction for sex between two consenting adults I'm sure they can figure out how to fine someone for not wearing a mask into a store.  Sure, yes, if you get a mass protest it would be problematic...I'd frankly take the approach of warning first, and only fining the egregious or aggressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2020 at 10:06 AM, beerguy55 said:

That's pretty cavalier.

If someone told you you could go back to the normal life you experienced in 2019...all you have to do is play Russian Roulette once...would you play if the gun had...

5 chambers?

10?

50?

100?

500?

1000?

What's your line?   And what if you were told that if you chose to play, then the ten people you love the most MUST play as well.

So now this is just running a red light or speeding as opposed to Russian roulette?  Please at least be consistent. Makes debating very difficult when you continue to flip flop. I could cut and paste your continuous comments where this is the most serious thing ever and now the equivalent of a traffic violation?  Really?

yeah let’s fine someone for what you say is intentional/negligent  murder...that will stop it in its tracks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

What could they do? Seriously, what more measures do you want them to take? We can't be forced to sit at home for 2 years until a vaccine is available. And there's that pesky thing here in the US called the constitution. You can mandate all you want that people wear masks, wash their hands, stay away from others, stay home when sick, blah, blah, blah. How do you effectively enforce it? Please.

The Constitution does not prevent states from infringing on fundamental rights if there is a compelling state interest. Mitigating a pandemic has already been held to be a compelling state interest by SCOTUS. Not to mention, not all rights are fundamental (for example, states are not required to use grand juries.) 

You enforce it the same way as anything else. There's all sorts of options, from civil sanctions to criminal ones, punitive and non-punitive.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aaluck said:

So now this is just running a red light or speeding as opposed to Russian roulette?  Please at least be consistent. Makes debating very difficult when you continue to flip flop. I could cut and paste your continuous comments where this is the most serious thing ever and now the equivalent of a traffic violation?  Really?

yeah let’s fine someone for what you say is intentional/negligent  murder...that will stop it in its tracks. 

Not really relevant.   My opinion to the severity of one's depravity doesn't typically align with what's practical.   But if you really want to go there...intentionally running a red light, and many other forms of reckless/dangerous driving, is indeed the same type of Russian Roulette, and our current system of law only treats it with an administrative fine.  So be it. It's just a crazy world...some people spend 30 years in jail for carrying a dime bag of weed, and others get to pay a fine for vehicular manslaughter...who are you or I to comment on the consistency of what is considered justice. 

It's really crazy...there are countries out there, and not totalitarian regimes, but countries with the same levels of freedom as the US  (I know, it sounds nuts but they're real), that have managed to implement, AND ENFORCE, COVID related social distancing laws - typically speaking by using warnings (but not always) followed by significant fines...and they get along just fine doing it, and none of them have had to blow the bank by recruiting and training an entire new police force.   And, even crazier, people are following the law knowing the potential penalties.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

Ah, yes, that Constitution thing.  Because I keep forgetting that the US is the only country in the world with a constitution, a bill of rights, or freedom in general.

If the cops can figure out how to stop a transaction for sex between two consenting adults I'm sure they can figure out how to fine someone for not wearing a mask into a store.  Sure, yes, if you get a mass protest it would be problematic...I'd frankly take the approach of warning first, and only fining the egregious or aggressive.

Sorry, didn't mean to insult your political or constitutional prowess.

The point I was trying to make, and you obviously missed it, is there is only so much elected officials can do, and parts of the US constitution may stand in the way of enacting some restrictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

Sorry, didn't mean to insult your political or constitutional prowess.

The point I was trying to make, and you obviously missed it, is there is only so much elected officials can do, and parts of the US constitution may stand in the way of enacting some restrictions.

I doubt it.  People will use it as a weapon, a shield and an excuse when it suits their purposes.  No matter the country, the constitution, or the list of freedoms, lawmakers will find a way.   The US constitution doesn't stand in the way as much as lobby groups do.

The only true obstacle is the fear of losing the next election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...