Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
Gladiator wrote:Kronik wrote:The state said Tesla can open, and the county attempted to override the state and said they cannot open. That is like the MP for your area trying to override a directive from the PMDohplaydat wrote:And now the Elon Musk downward spiral continues.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/11/cars ... index.htmlTesla and Elon Musk reopen California facility, defying orders meant to stem coronavirus spread
(CNN Business)Tesla (TSLA) CEO Elon Musk escalated his standoff with county officials in California on Monday as he announced that the automaker would be "restarting production today against Alameda County rules."
The decision follows the executive's sharp Twitter outbursts in recent weeks objecting to state lockdown orders meant to stem the spread of the novel coronavirus. In a tweet on Monday, Musk said he would be at the factory, "on the line with everyone else."
"If anyone is arrested, he tweeted, "I ask that it only be me."
Musk has argued that restrictions put in place by Alameda County closing non-essential businesses, where Tesla's Fremont factory is based, are overly aggressive and unconstitutional. On Saturday, the company filed a federal lawsuit against the county. Musk has also threatened to relocate Tesla's manufacturing out of California.
In a statement Monday afternoon, county officials said they are negotiating with Tesla on a plan to reopen the plant more fully.
"We continue to move closer to an agreed upon safety plan for reopening beyond Minimum Basic Operations by working through steps that Tesla has agreed to adopt," the Alameda County Public Health Department said in a statement. "These steps include improving employee health screening procedures and engaging front-line staff on their concerns and feedback regarding safety protocols."
Musk has won support from some in the Trump administration. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told CNBC on Monday that California's government should work harder to reopen the local economy.
"He's one of the biggest employers and manufacturers in California, and California should prioritize doing whatever they need to do to solve those health issues so that he can open quickly or or they're going to find, as he's threatened, he's moving his production to a different state," Mnuchin said.
But speaking to reporters on Monday, Gov. Gavin Newsom deferred to county officials, saying each county is reopening according to conditions on the ground.
"Again, it's county-led enforcement," he said. Still, Newsom said he had "great reverence" for Tesla and its founder and said he had spoken to Musk "a number of days ago."
In response, Musk tweeted: "Thank you Governor Newsom!"
Newsom added that he expects the county to allow Tesla to reopen by "as early as next week," based on his understanding of interactions between the company and local officials.
Tesla didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Actually its quite different in the US. The Governor has more say as to what happens in the state than the federal Govt...
paid_influencer wrote:the angle of that photo making it look worse than it is. I can see that there are:
- three separate lines
- a 30 to 40 degree angle between each line
- 3 feet front-back distance between each patron
The photo compresses that and makes it look like one big jostle with plenty people. But there is some order there and dare I say this is a good model for the "new normal" in dealing with crowds.
adnj wrote:elec2020 wrote:adnj wrote:elec2020 wrote:redmanjp wrote:elec2020 wrote:https://newsday.co.tt/2020/05/11/young-dont-eat-at-roadside-food-outlets/?fbclid=IwAR3qARUew5aLBwK5XAqkdiKlQDWnKfEKw8zbC_O-Dd0XH7iQ1PgwRhYga5s
In a nutshell Mr. Young stated that people caught eating by roadside vendors can be charged by the police... eating outside falls under what criminal offense? While i understand the need for social distancing this pandemic should be no excuse to violate my himan rights... if u wanna do that call a SOE and stop scaremongering
5 (1) f and g:
I should have taken my time and read the article fully before just reading what was being said on social media... i was of the assumption that you could not eat outside in totality... even if you 100 feet away from the vendor once u eating outside u can get charged... in reading the article i see that he did mention just by roadside vendors... also would you be able to tell me if this was always in the regulations or something they added on after the fact as i could still remember people eating by doubles vendor before the total lockdown in April
The 21 March 2020 order (No. 2) only restricted seated dining.
The "violates my human rights" and "violates my constitutional rights" is a recent dog whistle that has appeared on social media.
Nearly every nation has a department of health and nearly every nation has clauses and conditions in law that allow the suspension of (some) basic human rights when the greater social good requires protection because of disease, war, famine, or social unrest. It is for this reason that prisons are lawful. A state of emergency is not necessary because a worldwide pandemic is known to exist and those existing laws are now relevant.
The special restrictions of quarantine and isolation are nothing new. They are simply not nearly as common because of the reduction in widespread disease outbreak.
My entire irk has been that the government and TTPS has made it seem like some of their policies...like the stay at home order... was law... and if caught outside for reasons not listed in the stay at home order you could have been fined or jailed... that has since been corrected after much backlash from the law community... i have no qualms with having legal movement restrictions to prevent the spread of covid... what i have a problem with is misinformation... bending the truth and using scaremongering techniques to do things outside of the legal remit... that has been my issue with some of these restriction policies... we are part of a democracy... and in any democracy their are human rights... people died for these rights that we enjoy today... we should not allow people to tranple on these rights unless they do so with the right legal ammendments... otherwise we are communist state... not only in TnT are people finding fault with the application of these covid restrictions... and just like in TnT many international governments are being taken to court for overextension of these restrictions... again i am not advising nor saying that current government restrictions are wrong... i am just saying misleading, scaremongering and unequal application of these restrictions are wrong... for instance a few people got arrested a few weeks ago for attending a funeral... while i dont agree with what happeneded there i understand why the TTPS did so as those individuals exceeded the 5 member group restriction... what i have a problem with is that in a similar funeral where a brother and sister died in a botched home entry/hit their were photos of said funeral on social media showing scores of people... but their were no articles of people in said funeral being arrested or charged... anyway that is a topic for another discussion
TTPS has had loitering laws on the books for many years. Loitering (vagrancy) is spending time in a public space without apparent purpose or a private space without permission.
I believe that what you may actually be talking to is the perceived loss of personal freedoms due to the authorities. Government isn't taking away your rights, the disease is. This is a normal reaction - and sometimes we need someone to blame.
The fact is that the economy has slowed, jobs have disappeared, the future is uncertain, and we may soon see one million Covid-19 deaths.
As it stands, a $200 fine or 30 days confinement is the punishment for breaking the loitering laws. For those not charged, you got a blight but they risked their own health and the health of others.Sleeping/loitering in public
Sleeping or loitering in public? You could be given a $200 fine or imprisoned for up to one month if you don't have a good enough reason for doing so.
Under the Section 64 (1) of the Summary Offences Act: "A person committing any of the offences mentioned below in this section may be deemed an idle and disorderly person, and shall be liable to a fine of two hundred dollars, or to imprisonment for one month—
(c) any person found sleeping or loitering in or under any building, including any open outhouse, verandah, gallery, passage, or gateway, or in any vehicle or vessel, without leave of the owner, occupier or person in charge thereof, or on or under any wharf, quay, jetty, bridge, footway, or in any street or other public place, and not giving a good account of himself".
https://www.looptt.com/content/10-thing ... and-tobagoThese eleven suspects were subsequently charged with the offence of gathering in a public place where the number of persons gathered exceeded five persons, in accordance with Regulation 3 (1) (b) of the Public Health [2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)] (No. 9) Regulations, 2020.
https://trinidadexpress.com/newsextra/a ... da110.html
paid_influencer wrote:that part about "allowing" on-site consumption might be unconstitutional. The only people that have ability to restrict a person is law enforcement. Restaurants, doubles vendors, and Paria Trading can't allow or disallow anything once you've already purchased the product.
a better regulation would have charged the person eating the bara
elec2020 wrote:Perceived loss of freedom? According to retired high court judge Volney.“These Covid-19 Regulations purport in their intent and execution to derogate, abrogate, and infringe fundamental rights and freedoms declared in sections four and five of the Constitution. They do not form part of existing law saved at Independence, and in their execution and reach serve to treat part of the business community in a discriminatory fashion against the clearly declared constitutional provision against it,”
A man that used to enforce and carry out the law self said that these laws are unconstitutional... think for yourself... massa days done... we are human beigns with rights dont let people overreach and step on them without consequence
adnj wrote:paid_influencer wrote:that part about "allowing" on-site consumption might be unconstitutional. The only people that have ability to restrict a person is law enforcement. Restaurants, doubles vendors, and Paria Trading can't allow or disallow anything once you've already purchased the product.
a better regulation would have charged the person eating the bara
The legal definition of allow is to grant or approve. A vendor can ask a patron to move along or restrict service. By doing neither, a vendor can be shown to be complacent; consequently license can be revoked without treading upon civil liberties.
This stance of legislation impeding civil rights in times of disease is very similar to the arguments against suicide and assisted suicide; both of which have been argued and still held illegal in most nations. But that too can change in time.elec2020 wrote:Perceived loss of freedom? According to retired high court judge Volney.“These Covid-19 Regulations purport in their intent and execution to derogate, abrogate, and infringe fundamental rights and freedoms declared in sections four and five of the Constitution. They do not form part of existing law saved at Independence, and in their execution and reach serve to treat part of the business community in a discriminatory fashion against the clearly declared constitutional provision against it,”
A man that used to enforce and carry out the law self said that these laws are unconstitutional... think for yourself... massa days done... we are human beigns with rights dont let people overreach and step on them without consequence
It is Volney's legal opinion, and that is fine. Apparently, his legal opinion is currently in the minority but that can change in time. In retrospect, after being fired as Justice Minister for misrepresentation of the opinions of the Chief Justice, I tend to take his utterances with a rather large grain of salt.
sMASH wrote:well that rough. only good thing is, official data shows, its not in the population, so nothing to spread.
goalpost wrote:So when that one patient go home, we opening back in full??
goalpost wrote:So when that one patient go home, we opening back in full??
sMASH wrote:i say, bring on herd immunity. let it pass tru,
pugboy wrote:imagine if a case shows up with an illegal vene
will be interesting to see govt response
uncharted watersgoalpost wrote:So when that one patient go home, we opening back in full??
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:sMASH wrote:i say, bring on herd immunity. let it pass tru,
Have you seen what happened in New York hospitals?
I passed Couva hospital in early periods of covid in march and it had tents too...soMaxPower wrote:Friends,
Something going on in Mt. Hope?
Dunno if true...
sMASH wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:sMASH wrote:i say, bring on herd immunity. let it pass tru,
Have you seen what happened in New York hospitals?
yes. we got all our undetected infections via the carnival episode. what ever there was, first wave, second wave third wave, already went through the population from that time. by the time they started lock down, it was already swimming from persons to persons. the criteria for testing was restricted to only flight history or the primary contact of that person if they very symptomatic.
because of our late lock down we more or less did what sweden did, just we did not test widely, we stuck our heads in the sand.
now after a good while, a month or more, they NOWWWWW want to test the population with survelance testing. what they should do i antibody testing to see who had HAD it, if they want to know.
thats my script. we already got it, and we can reopen the internal business. leave borders closed.
govt script is, 116 cases, 8 deaths no new cases for the longest while, most cases discharging. their story means that we practically didnt get it. thier data makes it even more logical to reopen cause it says we didnt get it.
Dohplaydat wrote:sMASH wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:sMASH wrote:i say, bring on herd immunity. let it pass tru,
Have you seen what happened in New York hospitals?
yes. we got all our undetected infections via the carnival episode. what ever there was, first wave, second wave third wave, already went through the population from that time. by the time they started lock down, it was already swimming from persons to persons. the criteria for testing was restricted to only flight history or the primary contact of that person if they very symptomatic.
because of our late lock down we more or less did what sweden did, just we did not test widely, we stuck our heads in the sand.
now after a good while, a month or more, they NOWWWWW want to test the population with survelance testing. what they should do i antibody testing to see who had HAD it, if they want to know.
thats my script. we already got it, and we can reopen the internal business. leave borders closed.
govt script is, 116 cases, 8 deaths no new cases for the longest while, most cases discharging. their story means that we practically didnt get it. thier data makes it even more logical to reopen cause it says we didnt get it.
This definitely did not happen, otherwise our hospitals would have been overwhelmed by now.
What happened was we and most of the Caribbean locked down early after seeing what happened in the US.
Carnival did not bring Covid here, if it did we would have seen a huge peak in cases late March.
If the travellers who arrived the week before the border closed you'd see a huge number of cases end of April. We did not.
We got away, at most 1% of our population has immunity due to having it already. At most. We're very susceptible to a huge real first wave.
The current behaviour I'm seeing, if anyone of these idiots has Covid-19 and it starts rapidly spreading through out the community, expect to see a surge mid to end of June.
Trinis you have dissappointed me, wear allyuh freaking masks it's not a joke.
Gladiator wrote:Went to the grocery yesterday and merchandisers busy packing all the shelves. Not one person was wearing a mask. I don't think that people getting the idea. Old people also making they grocery and wearing no masks...
paid_influencer wrote:Gladiator wrote:Went to the grocery yesterday and merchandisers busy packing all the shelves. Not one person was wearing a mask. I don't think that people getting the idea. Old people also making they grocery and wearing no masks...
I just leaving this here and going. It is a New Zealand government document:
https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files ... 6-2020.pdf
also the MoH in the press conference today sent out some guidelines for cloth mask use. People are not suppose to sneeze or cough in their mask. You are supposed to take off your mask and sneeze or cough into your elbow.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: pugboy and 73 guests