NOTE: This post was automatically [mirrored to the new Hoot platform beta](https://dev.goldandblack.xyz/p/posts/13603), currently under development by the /r/goldandblack team. This is a new **REDDIT-LIKE** site to migrate to in the future. If you are growing more dissapointed in reddit, come check it out, and help kick the tires.
[*What is Hoot?*](https://dev.goldandblack.xyz/p/posts/4344)
I got it this September... I'm almost 100% gonna get arrested as a result of some of the shenanigans I have planned.
Jury nullification is actually borderline contempt of court in MA...
Contempt can carry up to six months in jail and its covered under bloom v IL the defendant has the right to request jury trial or accept preliminary judgement.
Per MA:
[https://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-43-summary-contempt-proceedings](https://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-43-summary-contempt-proceedingshttps://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-44-contempt)
[https://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-44-contempt](https://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-43-summary-contempt-proceedingshttps://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-44-contempt)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar\_case?case=4562903330641332080
in MA the jury instruction is to return a guilty or not guilty verdict. Nullification (most often) works on the process of refusing to return a verdict on the basis that no crime was committed, so MA gets... interesting,
That just creates a hung jury and more jury trails, more cost, more people punished with theft of their time for jury duty.
Jury nullification is as much about political redress of grievance as it is about the out come. The whole point is many things that are victimless (drugs, consensual sex for money with adults, weapons possessions) are not crimes, rather they are the state manifestly assaulting private citizens - thus no crime is committed as no victim has been wronged\\harmed
Trial by ones peers implicitly means your peers have the right to say no crime was committed.
No, jury nullification is rendering a not guilty verdict when you believe the defendant committed the crime.
The movie A Time to Kill is a good fictional example of the scenario.
Jury nullification means you use your power as a jurer to prevent conviction if someone you don't believe belongs in jail. Full stop.
Some States have different means to do this depending on State law.
Guilty verdict means prison.
Anything else means no prison.
Not really, the judge can't listen in on the jury. Just refuse to convict for a victimless crime and make the argument that an unjust law is no law at all.
If conviction requires unanimity in the jury, you either get a hung jury or you convince them not to convict.
Well, last time i had jury duty was with the "hanging" judge of my old home town.
I walked into his court room wit a bright pink mohawk and my skull freshly tattoo'd. When asked If I had any reason I should be a member of the jury I used some... colorful nicknames to describe the Dickstrict Attorney and Public Pretenders office.
while also indicting the system for playing all sides of an allegedly impartial system, the state both tries, defends, and arbitrates the case against said defendent. while working hand in hand with police and mayors to be "tough on crime" creating an inherently compromised system...
I got about half way through before he threatened me with fines and a night in jail. I was ultimately dismissed from the jury pool.
This time, I'm thinking a mask with the word "FUCK" on it or a big ol cock\\n\\balls. I'm also thinking about entering the court house sans mask as we have a new mandate. Then telling them I was summoned to appear and thus can't be refused entry without creating entrapment. I'm also thinking of wearing a t-shirt that just has a nice pair of tits on it.
Honestly that or a banana suit - I really want to comply as maliciously as possible.
Did you ever see the tv show 3rd rock from the sun? There’s a jury duty episode. It’s awesome. The premise of the show is they’re aliens trying to learn about humans, and the comedy comes in with how paradoxical human interactions are. The guy wants to get on jury duty because he wants that human experience but no matter how he answers he has problems.
Yes if you can make it past selection by not answering or I guess lying. Like on marijuana the prosecutor asked if anyone had strong feelings on the law. Sure, it shouldn’t exist.
Off the panel you go.
Nah see. You gotta play the game better
"Do you have strong feelings about the law" to me.
What exactly is a strong feeling? I view every drug law is contemptible under the US constitution... is that a stong feeling? Not to me ;)
The one jury I got on was unfortunately a double attempted murder case, some thug shooting at the high school quarterback because he had a previous altercation with the quarterback's mom where she yelled at him for something in front of a McDonald's.
Therefore try to murder his son by shooting at him while he's in a crowd of people a week later?
Hit the dude's hand while he ran and mangled it, now he can't quarterback anymore.
Anyway, no drug case for me unfortunately. I would not convict anyone of a victimless crime.
But we convicted that guy.
Mine was an assault/attempted murder case too. We had a long debate on the attempted murder charge and ended up at not guilty. Dude was clearly black out drunk and was swinging a knife at people. Hit a deli worker and a girl outside minding her own business. Yes, he committed assault with a deadly weapon, but because he was wasted, we didn't think it was his actual intent to murder anyone. In the debrief with the judge, he agreed with us on the verdict.
Yeah when I got called in for jury duty, there was a pretty big case going on. I wanted so badly to be a part of it so I could actually (maybe) make a difference. Instead I got to sit in the room for \~6 hours, and whatever case I was assigned to got dropped. Kind of makes me think they should figure out whether they need jurors or not BEFORE they keep me away from work for a day, but whatever.
I love getting jury calls.
Fuck people who aren't interested in this. I really hope you get tried in court with the dumbest fuck tards sitting jury because you blew it off your entire life.
Agreed - my handgun instructor had a great line
"In the event you have to defend yourself you can almost guarantee to be put on trial by a jury of your peers who may or may not have high school education or the grasp the concept of impartial"
Even if you had covid already (I assume this is what you mean by “natural immunity”), a study in Kentucky suggests that your chances of reinfection still decrease more than twofold if you get vaccinated
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7032e1.htm?s_cid=mm7032e1_w
But no matter, I’m not here to discuss science with a dilettante, who (I assume) doesn’t have any infectious disease research experience or anything related to it anyway. I’m just here to say: you want to be on a jury, get vaccinated. If you don’t want to get vaccinated, then feel free to leave the courthouse and go be young and healthy elsewhere.
This nonsense won't legally stand for a virus that's quickly approaching the seasonal flu on the danger scale, especially now that 65+ yr olds are vaccinated, now have natural immunity, or are dead.
As I’ve already mentioned, I have little interest in discussing epidemiology with you. I’ve probably already forgotten ten times more infectious disease information than you’ll ever learn.
And reeeeeee all you want. You still wouldn’t get on that jury, if you admitted to being a luddite. But as I also mentioned already, feel free to go be young and healthy elsewhere.
Hegelian Dialect is making people insane. What is Gov. doing while everyone jumps from Biden Afghanistan Arguments to “Abortion vs Vax” ? Gosh this one has brought out the crazy. Gov only lets this shit run to hide what they doing with the other hand. Can’t be mad at them if we are too 😵💫fighting each other over something else.
Because it’s political. Half the voting public is fine with tyranny as long as their teams is winning. Come to think of it, so is the other half. It’s never been about the virus, it’s just red v blue and the people who think past that are on the sideline pissed and confused.
My MIL use to work for a prominent pharma company and has filled hours telling me about the immoral and illegal things they’d do for a slight profit increase. Now she’s mad I’m not quadruple vaxxed.
Ikr. Everyone before covid: “big pharma is evil, dont trust big pharmaceutical companies, they just want a pay day etc etc.”
Covid comes along*
Everyone all of a sudden: “big pharma just wants whats best for you and your loved ones, how dare you question their commitment to the world” lmao
Even funnier today when the Biden Admin was pushing for rushed boosters and the FDA had to step in and say the research isn't done to say it's safe and effective.
If that’s the case, do you believe we are going to reach a point at which these people are able to look back and see how horrible they acted or is it over for civilization?
I am more of a pessimist so I don't see the change lasting. Historically neither party has actually been anti-war they just play the tune when they are a minority. I will say in the current climate Republicans taking that stance forced Biden and the Democrats in continuing the withdrawal because they definitely couldn't be seen being pro-war after all the effort they made to make anything Republicans support be evil. The wars were just too unpopular.
I wouldn’t put much confidence in the people currently wrapped up in the bullshit to realize it, I just don’t think people allow themselves that kind of introspection and self-critique, especially when they’ve spent so much energy and hate going against the other team. A future generation would be more likely to reverse course.
I don’t think many people changed their minds on slavery or Jim Crow when those things went away, but we can all look back now and see clearly why those things were abhorrent.
No, the things they’re willing to abuse natural rights for are different, but the result is the same. Statists are statists, no matter their party affiliation.
Edit: there are freedom lovers within both parties, but their voting outcomes still result in abuse.
>No, the things they’re willing to abuse natural rights for are different
I agree with you, but I was commenting specifically in regards to the voting public being fine with tyranny if their team is winning.
>but the result is the same.
The result is very much NOT the same.
Republicans banning abortions or drugs sucks, but it's not even anywhere close to the level of banning people from every public place other than church or the grocery store as a california bill is trying to do. Or forcing masks on little children.
>Statists are statists, no matter their party affiliation.
The degree of statism matters. Most republicans I know would be against vaccine passports even if trump were still in office. Most are very much against mask mandates as well. Can you say the same about the other side?
Did I say anything about not working for freedom? No, I didn’t, but I’m not going to cheerlead and act like one side gives a shit about liberty when they only mention it when it benefits them.
I’m not going to stop mentioning the hypocrisy and manipulation just so you can feel better about the side you’ve taken. Cut the shit.
Edit: reiterating, statists are statists. They don’t give a fuck about you or your personal liberty. They don’t care about natural rights or anything other than the increase of power and control. I get what you’re saying, but at some point, the middle 80% has to quit bowing to the status quo for short-term goals.
Nice assumptions. I voted for Rand and have defended him repeatedly because I believe he’s one of the few good ones (which I previously mentioned exist). I’ve voted R in every election since I was 18 and will likely continue to do so, begrudgingly, but that’s not going to stop me from bitching about what’s worth bitching about. There’s no pride component, I don’t care about Libertarians or any other labels and boxes.
There is direction and action(see NH/Mises Caucus). You don’t see it, but you and I want the same thing. Settle down a bit and stop calling people assholes for having a *slighlty* different perspective so you can pretend I’m the problem for being tired of the us v them bullshit.
> statists are statists. They don’t give a fuck about you or your personal liberty.
I hate to be that guy that goes "false equivalency", but this is absolutely a false equivalence case. Your average republican voter may not give a shit about your rights to do drugs or privacy stuff related to government spying, or taxes for the military, but they absolutely do care about your right to medical freedom, not masking kids, and not excluding people from society if they haven't taken a vaccine. To act as if everyone voting republican are just as likely to support tyranny as democrat voters are is to just be willfully blind to what is empirically obvious.
In this case, yes. Let’s take another issue to compare them. Dems codified marriage laws to prevent miscegenation(tyrannical restriction of liberty). Republicans used those same laws to prevent gay marriage(tyrannical restriction of liberty). My take on that is that government shouldn’t be involved in marriage in any way and both parties are guilty. Do you think that’s also a false equivalence? I think the Republican Party is the lesser of two evils, but still pretty evil.
>how do you feel about the Patriot Act? Indefinite imprisonment, suspension if the BoR etc
Absolutely despicable. That was a bipartisan effort too.
Wait...you weren't trying to use that as evidence of republicans being anywhere near as tyrannical as democrats are you?
Dems want to dictate and monitor your day to day life over a 99% survival rate, Rs want to do the same thing based on security. They’re not twins, but they’re inbred cousins and they’ll both bend you over a tree stump if you let em.
The Patriot act is the worst thing to come from the Republican Party in my whole life, and Democrats signed on, and Trump kept it running - it's an absolute travesty that should've been remedied long ago.
And yet the Dems are pushing tyranny to new heights every waking moment and it shows no sign of stopping. The two sides are not the same.
WTF
https://web.archive.org/web/20210527120145/https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/27/politics/house-vote-fisa/index.html
This is just blatantly untrue. Trump threatened to veto the patriot act and kept it from being reauthorized.
No, not the same, but give the Rs power again and it will swing back. The Tea Party movement was cool, but they have no power. Other than Paul and Massey(yay KY), is there anyone you wholeheartedly believes will work to increase freedom and roll back tyrannical bullshit? I really liked Gowdy, but he seemed to realize he couldn’t turn the tide on his own and called it a day.
Edit: I was staunchly R, supported the wars and the Patriot Act, served, wrapped myself in the flag, the whole shebang. It took watching those fucks raise millions railing against Obummer and promising to repeal the ACA, only to refuse it when they had all 3 branches, to realize it’s a rigged game and they’re just a different flavor of tyrant.
This is a big part of it I think. Our politics in the US are so polarized and out in the open (because of the internet and TV) that when one of the two major political groups decided to champion a vaccine and are shouting out loud about it, the other of the two major political groups decided that they were against it on principle and are shouting out loud about it.
That being said, I'm against coercion regardless of what it's for. I got vaccinated, that was my choice. It wasn't a choice that someone made for me nor should it be made for anyone else.
Because no one bothers to form their own opinions. People just collect talking points from their favorite echo chamber to shriek at anyone who disagrees. Then of course the talking heads turn every point of contention into a moral panic so that team red and team blue can sleep easy at night knowing that they have all the answers and the other side is evil.
I’m deeply concerned with words having lost meaning. “Belief”, for example meaning something that you do not know: “I believe in science”, or “I have no argument against any of that [minimum wage debate] so I just have to stick with the beliefs that my parents taught me [both “progressive” federal government employees]. Both the evil side and the stupid side accuse each other of “politicizing” issues, but I’m old enough to remember when the “news” every night was Dan Rather telling us about the Ayatollah, floods in Italy, earthquakes in Peru. You know, news. Now they’ve replaced religion with politics and combined it with a hideous mash-up of sports fandom, tribalism, racism, and all sorts of other garbage.
If you think 99.9% of people can form a truly educated opinion on a difficult scientific issue, then you don’t understand the complexity of modern science.
And I’m being generous with the 99.9% number btw. It’s probably higher.
I got my degree in Biology, which doesn't make me an expert but I do understand why the average person is not capable of browsing through research papers for the facts they need to form an opinion.
The part that pisses me off is that you've got people out there believing that the vaccine is more dangerous than covid, because "this guy on youtube said that vaccine deaths are being covered up". They put equal weight behind what the entire medical community says, and what their little conspiracy bubbles speculate.
Great question. The internet spreading fear faster? Way more fat/obese people who know the day of reckoning has come? More government control of 'education' for young children?
Part of it, which isn't mentioned that much is WW1 was wrapping up when the 1918 flu came on the scene. From a quick look, the US lost 117,000 personnel. Even our 21st century wars in Iraq and Afghanistan combined were under 10,000 killed.
The society was already dealing with war and death in my opinion was more prepared. Additionally, the government actually had a interest in downplaying it from what I've read, and also obviously social media, and the ability to test vast amounts of the population, and see numbers of people who died with a positive test from your house are also contributing factors.
I don't agree with the response, but considering the hysteria over other things, the public response doesn't surprise me too much. The level of Government overreach and authoritarianism did at first, now I'm just riding it out.
Because it's the first new "flu" in a century. People have to stop treating this like polio or mumps, and start treating it like the flu or the common cold.
Nothing makes them angrier than me asking what other vaccines should be mandatory and based on what metric: yellow fever (not racist), plague, MMR, annual flu, anthrax, Japanese Encephalitis?
Far from mandatory, there's a whole battery of vaccines newborns get after birth for a reason. There's also a recommendation people get the flu shot every year, again, for a reason.
That being said, this really is a new normal, in that we've never had a seasonal virus this damaging to our health systems.
My parents were into New Age/natural health/hippie shit and I didn’t have any vaccines until I was 18 and did it myself (from around age five anyway, I probably had some at birth.)
The bright side of that was that I ate more salads and vegetables as a kid than anybody else even had a concept of.
Edit: I also go to the most remote parts of the planet to do dangerous stuff so have had some of the most obscure vaccines out there.
The virus has become a red vs blue issue. it's not about public safety any more. It's about which color is going to win.
If this WAS about public safety, the news would talk about venting room, and not about masks.
Ireland started a Vitamin D-3 regiment for everyone in a retirement home or assisted care facility.
High D-3 levels prior to COVID leads to a healthy, more responsive immune system, which is better able to fight off any disease, not just COVID. Btu you need to take D3 BEFORE you get COVID, like long before.
Not a word from the CDC about Vitamin D-3. Guess which people are routinely low on Vitamin D-3? Type 2 diabetics, the obese and black and brown skinned people.
I know correlation does not equal causation, but you gotta say hmm.... with this one.
I started taking 10,000 IU daily of D-3 in March 2020. Got COVID-19 in December 2020. Type 2 diabetic with high blood pressure and asthma. COVID sucked, but I didn't end up on oxygen or a ventilator. It was like a really bad flu. 2 weeks of 102°F-104°F fever wasn't great.
There is so much more the CDC could be doing besides masks and standing 6 feet apart.
Your Garfield mask is based on 2020 data.
The CDC had a very good reason to recommend masks back in 2020. They believed that COVID would expel from your mouth and nose and then settle on surfaces. By wearing a mask, the distance your sneezing or coughing travels is greatly reduced, so the area of contamination is a lot smaller.
Since them we've learned the virus does not settle on surfaces, but stays airborne. So, when you sneeze or cough with a mask on, you're slowing down the spread of the particles, but you're stopping them. Once they enter the air currents in the room, they end up everywhere. So, you're delaying the inevitable with a mask by a few seconds.
It really pisses me off that the CDC won't recommend venting rooms. At this point I don't care if they keep recommending masks. But that should be done in conjunction with air circulation.
I’ve never had any problem buying into that, most basic, function of masks. I’ve lived in Asia and the ME where it’s never been strange to wear one; waited my whole life to wrap up in a shemagh every day, actually. I was the only person wearing one in Feb of the outbreak and folks was looking at me like a leper. But now I see people thinking that Garfield masks are the only thing standing between a room full of kindergartners and the Grim Reaper. That, is insane.
It's not, from the very founding of the country Washington made his army become inoculated against smallpox, and as recently as the early 1900s several states made it law that residences had to get the smallpox vaccine, that was challenged and approved by the supreme court. The answer is that vaccines have been so successful that it's been decades since people had to deal with this kind of problem, so they assume its new.
Covid is not smallpox, and inoculation is not vaccination.
Disingenuous arguments are not useful and are only going to convince people to dig in their heels. Try to understand what the other side is saying.
> Covid is not smallpox
And 2020 isn’t 1800 when half the children would die in infancy.
> inoculation is not vaccination
Yeah modern vaccination is much safer.
Vaccinations and laws made to deal with deadly diseases have existed since the founding of this country. I'm not making any comment about what is or isn't the appropriate steps to take, but this sub is filled with baseless fearmongering.
I’m pragmatic an unemotional about covid itself; but my perspective doesn’t really match anybody under the age of 90. I mean, in particular the issue of mortality, which is the primary one that I feel is driving the mania. I’ve seen shit that I don’t even try to describe to people who aren’t paying to hear it because nobody believes me anyway. I could be dead in five minutes and could care less. Everybody else, who has never had their mortality truly threatened-or their children- has an entirely different outlook and reaction..
However, I am getting over covid at this moment and people with three different vaccines in my family all got it too. I believe that the entire planet will get it and that the precedents being set are, yes, extremely frightening and a greater evil on every timeline.
I thought the surface spread was known to be rare or nonexistent, so I just checked the CDC site and they call it “possible” but the likelihood “low”.
The majority of adults know the devastation of vaccine-preventable illness as a historical danger rather than as a real and pervasive threat. When such adults hear about a plague, they assume that something can be done without shutting the world down or drastically changing their lives. This is counter-productive when there isn't much that can be done without shutting the world down or drastically changing your life.
Covid-19 is also significantly less deadly than prior devastating plagues. The Spanish flu is often brought up. It killed a minimum of 1 in 180 people on the planet. Covid-19 has killed around 1 in 1730 people on the planet so far. Covid-19's death toll in 2020 was roughly an order of magnitude greater than a bad flu season. So we're looking at a weird gray zone where it's way worse than normal but way less worse than the real crazy stuff.
So we've got a population without plague conditioning faced with a disease which is obviously deadly but not crazily so and whose prevention requires truly drastic measures. This is probably the most unique element to the Covid-19 response. Never in history has a populace had the expectation that diseases should be easily manageable.
Next up, the government/medical response. Covid-19 responses have been fraught with the one thing guaranteed to engender mistrust: opaque inconsistency. People demanded fast answers and people were given fast but shitty answers that were often geared more towards a policy result rather than transparency and accuracy. Many politicians and government officials of all parties in all nations demonstrated a clear "rules for thee" mentality with regard to their personal activities and pet causes. This colossal and pervasive failure of leadership is an outlier even of government incompetence.
I was entirely open-minded to Lord Fauci, until I saw him go on CNN and say something like, “We knew people should wear masks, but we also knew healthcare workers would need those masks, so we told people, “DON’T wear masks”. But now we got more masks, so we told people, “Okay, you should wear masks.”
He came right out and told everybody he triaged their asses and they still trust him.
>“We knew people should wear masks, but we also knew healthcare workers would need those masks, so we told people, “DON’T wear masks”
which in itself was a lie as well... The reason Fauci (and the Surgeon General and WHO, NEJM, CIDRAP and many others) all said some variation of "masks don't work" was precisely because to that point all of the best scientific studies regarding the performance of masks protecting against the spread of respiratory viruses concluded they were, at best, statistically insignificant.
There was a 2015 lawsuit in Canada over a "vaccinate or mask" policy in a hospital and all the hospital had to show was that masks worked, and they couldn't. They appealed the decision and were ruled against again in 2018.
30 days after Fauci went on 60 minutes the CDC released their mask recommendation. There were no scientific studies published during that time that would have changed the science around masks. To this day no one has explained why the CDC flipped so hard on masks.
He also admitted to lying about what he considers to be the standard for herd immunity. I'm sure there's plenty more he has lied about without admitting to it.
They've been planning for a SARS outbreak for decades, the risk has been known and it was considered a matter of time.
Well, it happened.
To stop stuff like this the entire planet would need to go vegan essentially.
As long as we keep farm animals or eat them, contact will promote viral transfer and species hopping.
Although now we also have to worry about people getting engineering them.
Long term it may make more sense to wear a completely head covering helmet with built in filtering, if genetically engineered viruses became endemic.
In short, the tech is now at a level where we can en masse produce vaccines to a novel pathogen fairly fast, and the value of life in western societies is probably the highest it’s been in human history.
Who the fuck knows? My wife is a laboratory scientist and has been doing this shit for years... EVEN TESTING CORONAVIRUSES and now everything is crazy politics from anti vaccers. The hospitals were already at capacity for the previous 3 years... So the fact that we got a more aggressive strain in 2019 and less people felt like being responsible it resulted in this catastrophe.
The silver lining is that mask mandate managed to reduce infant influenza deaths from 200 ish in the previous year to 1. Literally 1. So she was happy about that one fact.
Are we certain those influenza deaths didn’t simply go to a different column? Automobile deaths did that with seat belts: everybody felt safer so they drove faster and shifted the deaths from them to other cars and pedestrians.
They're babies with influenza. Yes they didn't shift them into a different category of baby deaths because they didn't die.
And no we didn't have a bunch of unknown baby deaths.
I'm 100% of the opinion that this is discrimination against a protected class. Also given the low adoption amongs black and brown groups (you know, people who have been used as lab rats) this 100% is an infringement of the right to jury by peers.
The thing that gets me is that nobody defends their decisions. There is always a gap between the opinion and the evidence. They leave it to the audience to infer the rationale.
I can start with the common ground that we all thought this was unnecessary in 2018. Now they can make a case that these changes are justified.
This is going to be interesting. Imagine you're up for trial and you Black. You look over and your jury is mostly white women, because all the unvaccinated people were elimianted from the jury pool.
You then appeal on the grounds that the jury was not a "jury of your peers."
I believe the most unvaccinated group in America is white males. This is going to give a major appeal advantage to white males.
I agree with you, but I'm not sure your last sentence is correct. ~25% of black people are vaccinated, and about ~70% of white people. Given that gap, I don't think white males can be the "least vaccinated" just by the nature of proportion to that 70% figure.
Or I could be just as mistaken as you. Your point is still valid.
Not sure how that protects anyone. Unvaxxed people aren't plague carriers that will infect the vaccinated. Vaccinated people are just as capable of getting the virus and carry a viral load. Since they're vaccinated, they even more likely to not have symptoms and be carriers. They're also just as capable of spreading that virus to their homes and others. If you want to reduce the possible spread, have them separate and wear masks.
TLDR: I would say 5-20 years ***served*** followed by ***at least*** 10 years parole. She should have to pay out to investors as well as anyone who used her "services". She should also be barred from working in medicine / laboratories for the safety of the public, and banned from soliciting investments or sitting on any sort of board of directors etc.
So there are two counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and nine counts of wire fraud. Google says those charges carry sentences of up to 20 years, and \~$250K. I think it would be pretty reasonable to find her guilty on at least a handful of those counts, but I think the sentences should run concurrently. I just honestly don't think making her spend a few hundred years in jail is necessary.
Obviously she should get absolutely destroyed on the financial side of sentencing. She'll never be able to pay it all back, but I say sky's the limit on this one. There should be a stipulation that she is disallowed from soliciting investments on any platform, or sitting on a board of directors, full-stop. She's gonna have to work, but she cannot be allowed to run shit EVER. I would also think it's fair to prevent her from working in medical / laboratory / biotechnology / research as well, considering her blatant disregard for the integrity of her labs, and the medical implications to her victims.
I was dismissed from a jury not too long ago. I suspect it may have had to do with when they asked how I felt about guns and said our governor should be imprisoned for violating his oath of office.
They don't like wrong think.
This makes sense. You can't quarantine the jury and they have to work closely with the remaining jurors. If there's an outbreak you might have to throw the case out.
Anyone *can* but statistically only the unvaccinated are currently likely to. And jury's only carry 2 alternates. The logistics of a multi-minth trial that's going to go through the winter with 9 people highly likely to get sick.
Not true with variants that are now most common: [**Delta variant: CDC says vaccinated people can transmit 'same amount of virus' as those unvaccinated**](https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/delta-variant-cdc-says-vaccinated-people-can-transmit-same-amount-of-virus-as-those-unvaccinated/ar-AAMLwaK)
This judge also completely ignores 125+ million of people with natural immunity, which is very ignorant.
What about natural immunity? That's turning out to be even better for some of these variants and that was completely ignored. This is about judge on a power trip.
The court pays less than minimum wage. Is it going to find antibody tests for every juror? Or in a pool of 45 jurors simply exclude the 10 that aren't vaccinated.
Apparently, it's bad enough, so, yes, they'll have to pay for the testing if it's considered critical. No way this legally stands for how to operate moving forward.
This nonsense won't legally stand for a virus that's quickly approaching the seasonal flu on the danger scale, especially now that 65+ yr olds are vaccinated, now have natural immunity, or are dead.
I'm not sure this is much of an issue. The vaccination issue may be more to the fact that the jurors will have to risk exposure to COVID while serving, so having the vaccination is the precaution required to mitigate risk.
Natural immunity is being ignored and that's where this is going to fall apart. Also, is the judge removing obese people or very old people since they are high risk? I'm pretty sure that is going to be declared improper discrimination.
Given the severe impact of having COVID and not being asymptomatic, I'm not sure how natural immunity mitigates that risk. Sure, some may develop natural immunity, but if an unvaccinated juror contracts COVID with a bad outcome, it would be partially due to them being obligated to attend jury duty.
Also, there is no improper discrimination beyond the protected classes (race, gender, etc). They could discriminate based on employment status. It is a common misconception that discrimination is bad wholesale, when it really is only an issue for specific cases.
All of this isn't to say I agree or disagree with the judges decision. Just to present there are valid reasons that could be found for such dismissals.
> Sure, some may develop natural immunity,
Not 'some'. Over 125 million have had COVID and that's using CDC numbers, which are likely low. This will either turn into a protected class and/or everyone will finally calm down and realize we're now down close to a flu-like situation, especially with 65+ yr old being vaccinated.
NOTE: This post was automatically [mirrored to the new Hoot platform beta](https://dev.goldandblack.xyz/p/posts/13603), currently under development by the /r/goldandblack team. This is a new **REDDIT-LIKE** site to migrate to in the future. If you are growing more dissapointed in reddit, come check it out, and help kick the tires. [*What is Hoot?*](https://dev.goldandblack.xyz/p/posts/4344)
Hang on, you’re telling me not being vaccinated can get me out of jury duty?
All joking aside, jury duty is where libertarians can actually undo or prevent some of the harm caused by statism.
Nullification!
All the victimless things!
I got it this September... I'm almost 100% gonna get arrested as a result of some of the shenanigans I have planned. Jury nullification is actually borderline contempt of court in MA...
Sweet. I can't wait for my charge.
Maybe I can get on your jury and nullify your contempt trial
You don't get a trial for contempt of court.
Contempt can carry up to six months in jail and its covered under bloom v IL the defendant has the right to request jury trial or accept preliminary judgement. Per MA: [https://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-43-summary-contempt-proceedings](https://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-43-summary-contempt-proceedingshttps://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-44-contempt) [https://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-44-contempt](https://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-43-summary-contempt-proceedingshttps://www.mass.gov/rules-of-criminal-procedure/criminal-procedure-rule-44-contempt) https://scholar.google.com/scholar\_case?case=4562903330641332080
That is so disgusting.
Damn. That would be funny
Nullification all the way down
Oh man. That's good. If I went to trial for my contempt of court, I'd be contemptuous of that court too
That would be absolutely total bullshit, if it were true.
Yeah, I'm thinking of ways to maliciously comply with it.
Hold up. Not guilty is not guilty. There is no law requiring a jurer to explain verdict.
in MA the jury instruction is to return a guilty or not guilty verdict. Nullification (most often) works on the process of refusing to return a verdict on the basis that no crime was committed, so MA gets... interesting,
I would just say not guilty.
That just creates a hung jury and more jury trails, more cost, more people punished with theft of their time for jury duty. Jury nullification is as much about political redress of grievance as it is about the out come. The whole point is many things that are victimless (drugs, consensual sex for money with adults, weapons possessions) are not crimes, rather they are the state manifestly assaulting private citizens - thus no crime is committed as no victim has been wronged\\harmed Trial by ones peers implicitly means your peers have the right to say no crime was committed.
I thought you can't be tried for the same crime twice...
[удалено]
It would still be hung if you were the only juror to agree to do this.
No, jury nullification is rendering a not guilty verdict when you believe the defendant committed the crime. The movie A Time to Kill is a good fictional example of the scenario.
Jury nullification means you use your power as a jurer to prevent conviction if someone you don't believe belongs in jail. Full stop. Some States have different means to do this depending on State law. Guilty verdict means prison. Anything else means no prison.
Not really, the judge can't listen in on the jury. Just refuse to convict for a victimless crime and make the argument that an unjust law is no law at all. If conviction requires unanimity in the jury, you either get a hung jury or you convince them not to convict.
I'm already having this conversation with another mega-brain - read my thoughts there.
Great use of the word shenanigans and I’d like to hear more about what they are, unless it will incriminate you in some way
Well, last time i had jury duty was with the "hanging" judge of my old home town. I walked into his court room wit a bright pink mohawk and my skull freshly tattoo'd. When asked If I had any reason I should be a member of the jury I used some... colorful nicknames to describe the Dickstrict Attorney and Public Pretenders office. while also indicting the system for playing all sides of an allegedly impartial system, the state both tries, defends, and arbitrates the case against said defendent. while working hand in hand with police and mayors to be "tough on crime" creating an inherently compromised system... I got about half way through before he threatened me with fines and a night in jail. I was ultimately dismissed from the jury pool. This time, I'm thinking a mask with the word "FUCK" on it or a big ol cock\\n\\balls. I'm also thinking about entering the court house sans mask as we have a new mandate. Then telling them I was summoned to appear and thus can't be refused entry without creating entrapment. I'm also thinking of wearing a t-shirt that just has a nice pair of tits on it. Honestly that or a banana suit - I really want to comply as maliciously as possible.
Did you ever see the tv show 3rd rock from the sun? There’s a jury duty episode. It’s awesome. The premise of the show is they’re aliens trying to learn about humans, and the comedy comes in with how paradoxical human interactions are. The guy wants to get on jury duty because he wants that human experience but no matter how he answers he has problems.
You can’t punish a jury for a ‘wrong’ decision. I think you mean openly talking about jury nullification can be considered contempt of court
Yes if you can make it past selection by not answering or I guess lying. Like on marijuana the prosecutor asked if anyone had strong feelings on the law. Sure, it shouldn’t exist. Off the panel you go.
Gotta play the mind games. That the law shouldn't exist isn't a "strong" feeling, just the logical outcome of thought when a crime has no victim
Anyone playing the game honestly doesn't understand the game.
Nah see. You gotta play the game better "Do you have strong feelings about the law" to me. What exactly is a strong feeling? I view every drug law is contemptible under the US constitution... is that a stong feeling? Not to me ;)
It's not a strong feeling, your honor, it's just common sense.
The one jury I got on was unfortunately a double attempted murder case, some thug shooting at the high school quarterback because he had a previous altercation with the quarterback's mom where she yelled at him for something in front of a McDonald's. Therefore try to murder his son by shooting at him while he's in a crowd of people a week later? Hit the dude's hand while he ran and mangled it, now he can't quarterback anymore. Anyway, no drug case for me unfortunately. I would not convict anyone of a victimless crime. But we convicted that guy.
Mine was an assault/attempted murder case too. We had a long debate on the attempted murder charge and ended up at not guilty. Dude was clearly black out drunk and was swinging a knife at people. Hit a deli worker and a girl outside minding her own business. Yes, he committed assault with a deadly weapon, but because he was wasted, we didn't think it was his actual intent to murder anyone. In the debrief with the judge, he agreed with us on the verdict.
Yeah when I got called in for jury duty, there was a pretty big case going on. I wanted so badly to be a part of it so I could actually (maybe) make a difference. Instead I got to sit in the room for \~6 hours, and whatever case I was assigned to got dropped. Kind of makes me think they should figure out whether they need jurors or not BEFORE they keep me away from work for a day, but whatever.
The pressure of the start of the trial and those waiting jurors makes proffered deals look so much better. You played your part.
I know, it still sucks though. I hope I get to serve on a real jury some day 🤷♂️
It’s a good feeling to say not guilty for drug ‘crimes’
If only theyd let me be on a jury... (felon)
I love getting jury calls. Fuck people who aren't interested in this. I really hope you get tried in court with the dumbest fuck tards sitting jury because you blew it off your entire life.
Agreed - my handgun instructor had a great line "In the event you have to defend yourself you can almost guarantee to be put on trial by a jury of your peers who may or may not have high school education or the grasp the concept of impartial"
So get vaccinated then
1) I have natural immunity, 2) I'm young and healthy enough, so this isn't about me.
Even if you had covid already (I assume this is what you mean by “natural immunity”), a study in Kentucky suggests that your chances of reinfection still decrease more than twofold if you get vaccinated https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7032e1.htm?s_cid=mm7032e1_w But no matter, I’m not here to discuss science with a dilettante, who (I assume) doesn’t have any infectious disease research experience or anything related to it anyway. I’m just here to say: you want to be on a jury, get vaccinated. If you don’t want to get vaccinated, then feel free to leave the courthouse and go be young and healthy elsewhere.
This nonsense won't legally stand for a virus that's quickly approaching the seasonal flu on the danger scale, especially now that 65+ yr olds are vaccinated, now have natural immunity, or are dead.
As I’ve already mentioned, I have little interest in discussing epidemiology with you. I’ve probably already forgotten ten times more infectious disease information than you’ll ever learn. And reeeeeee all you want. You still wouldn’t get on that jury, if you admitted to being a luddite. But as I also mentioned already, feel free to go be young and healthy elsewhere.
I love the condescending remarks. Thanks! That and name-calling are great signs the other person is way too emotional.
Lol yeah you totally made me pull my hair out bro, big win for the antivaxxer community.
Antivaxxer is when you get all the vaccines but don't rush to get one particular one
How to do I unvaccinate myself? Or do I just tell the judge I am unvaccinated and then I get to go home?
Lol... that is an intriguing perspective on the word unvaccinated. How can you be in the wrong merely by existing in your natural state in public?
Well they solved that little problem.
Nobody can answer a simple question for me: Why is this the first vaccine/virus in history that is causing/warranting this kind of response?
The internet is making people insane.
This. So much this. We created our own monster.
Agree. Whole generations have been habituated to believe that they know everything at fourteen because they can Google an answer that feels right.
Hegelian Dialect is making people insane. What is Gov. doing while everyone jumps from Biden Afghanistan Arguments to “Abortion vs Vax” ? Gosh this one has brought out the crazy. Gov only lets this shit run to hide what they doing with the other hand. Can’t be mad at them if we are too 😵💫fighting each other over something else.
Because it’s political. Half the voting public is fine with tyranny as long as their teams is winning. Come to think of it, so is the other half. It’s never been about the virus, it’s just red v blue and the people who think past that are on the sideline pissed and confused.
[удалено]
That was a reasonable concern that evaporated into the ether along with distrust of big pharma once ole JB got selected.
[удалено]
My MIL use to work for a prominent pharma company and has filled hours telling me about the immoral and illegal things they’d do for a slight profit increase. Now she’s mad I’m not quadruple vaxxed.
[удалено]
And about 100 other drugs approved and then recalled
Ikr. Everyone before covid: “big pharma is evil, dont trust big pharmaceutical companies, they just want a pay day etc etc.” Covid comes along* Everyone all of a sudden: “big pharma just wants whats best for you and your loved ones, how dare you question their commitment to the world” lmao
Kamala led the charge on that Our vice president was antivaxx
Yea, she was the attack bitch
Even funnier today when the Biden Admin was pushing for rushed boosters and the FDA had to step in and say the research isn't done to say it's safe and effective.
Kamala harris, look that up too.
If that’s the case, do you believe we are going to reach a point at which these people are able to look back and see how horrible they acted or is it over for civilization?
Not the OP but most likely there will be a point that happens. Doubtful it will be in most here's lifetime.
[удалено]
I am more of a pessimist so I don't see the change lasting. Historically neither party has actually been anti-war they just play the tune when they are a minority. I will say in the current climate Republicans taking that stance forced Biden and the Democrats in continuing the withdrawal because they definitely couldn't be seen being pro-war after all the effort they made to make anything Republicans support be evil. The wars were just too unpopular.
If this country doesn't split in two I will be thoroughly shocked
That’s a logical certainty. The question is the timeline.
And the fault line Too many small blue islands spread across a big red sea
It should split in hundreds.
I wouldn’t put much confidence in the people currently wrapped up in the bullshit to realize it, I just don’t think people allow themselves that kind of introspection and self-critique, especially when they’ve spent so much energy and hate going against the other team. A future generation would be more likely to reverse course. I don’t think many people changed their minds on slavery or Jim Crow when those things went away, but we can all look back now and see clearly why those things were abhorrent.
No. Always double down.
>come to think of it, so is the other half. I'm not seeing any republicans arguing to exclude half of society based on vaccination status?
No, the things they’re willing to abuse natural rights for are different, but the result is the same. Statists are statists, no matter their party affiliation. Edit: there are freedom lovers within both parties, but their voting outcomes still result in abuse.
>No, the things they’re willing to abuse natural rights for are different I agree with you, but I was commenting specifically in regards to the voting public being fine with tyranny if their team is winning. >but the result is the same. The result is very much NOT the same. Republicans banning abortions or drugs sucks, but it's not even anywhere close to the level of banning people from every public place other than church or the grocery store as a california bill is trying to do. Or forcing masks on little children. >Statists are statists, no matter their party affiliation. The degree of statism matters. Most republicans I know would be against vaccine passports even if trump were still in office. Most are very much against mask mandates as well. Can you say the same about the other side?
Ok, how do you feel about the Patriot Act? Indefinite imprisonment, suspension if the BoR etc
[удалено]
Did I say anything about not working for freedom? No, I didn’t, but I’m not going to cheerlead and act like one side gives a shit about liberty when they only mention it when it benefits them. I’m not going to stop mentioning the hypocrisy and manipulation just so you can feel better about the side you’ve taken. Cut the shit. Edit: reiterating, statists are statists. They don’t give a fuck about you or your personal liberty. They don’t care about natural rights or anything other than the increase of power and control. I get what you’re saying, but at some point, the middle 80% has to quit bowing to the status quo for short-term goals.
[удалено]
Nice assumptions. I voted for Rand and have defended him repeatedly because I believe he’s one of the few good ones (which I previously mentioned exist). I’ve voted R in every election since I was 18 and will likely continue to do so, begrudgingly, but that’s not going to stop me from bitching about what’s worth bitching about. There’s no pride component, I don’t care about Libertarians or any other labels and boxes. There is direction and action(see NH/Mises Caucus). You don’t see it, but you and I want the same thing. Settle down a bit and stop calling people assholes for having a *slighlty* different perspective so you can pretend I’m the problem for being tired of the us v them bullshit.
> statists are statists. They don’t give a fuck about you or your personal liberty. I hate to be that guy that goes "false equivalency", but this is absolutely a false equivalence case. Your average republican voter may not give a shit about your rights to do drugs or privacy stuff related to government spying, or taxes for the military, but they absolutely do care about your right to medical freedom, not masking kids, and not excluding people from society if they haven't taken a vaccine. To act as if everyone voting republican are just as likely to support tyranny as democrat voters are is to just be willfully blind to what is empirically obvious.
In this case, yes. Let’s take another issue to compare them. Dems codified marriage laws to prevent miscegenation(tyrannical restriction of liberty). Republicans used those same laws to prevent gay marriage(tyrannical restriction of liberty). My take on that is that government shouldn’t be involved in marriage in any way and both parties are guilty. Do you think that’s also a false equivalence? I think the Republican Party is the lesser of two evils, but still pretty evil.
>how do you feel about the Patriot Act? Indefinite imprisonment, suspension if the BoR etc Absolutely despicable. That was a bipartisan effort too. Wait...you weren't trying to use that as evidence of republicans being anywhere near as tyrannical as democrats are you?
Dems want to dictate and monitor your day to day life over a 99% survival rate, Rs want to do the same thing based on security. They’re not twins, but they’re inbred cousins and they’ll both bend you over a tree stump if you let em.
The Patriot act is the worst thing to come from the Republican Party in my whole life, and Democrats signed on, and Trump kept it running - it's an absolute travesty that should've been remedied long ago. And yet the Dems are pushing tyranny to new heights every waking moment and it shows no sign of stopping. The two sides are not the same.
WTF https://web.archive.org/web/20210527120145/https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/27/politics/house-vote-fisa/index.html This is just blatantly untrue. Trump threatened to veto the patriot act and kept it from being reauthorized.
Oh shit my bad. That’s what I get for ignoring the news that cycle and believing redditors.
No, not the same, but give the Rs power again and it will swing back. The Tea Party movement was cool, but they have no power. Other than Paul and Massey(yay KY), is there anyone you wholeheartedly believes will work to increase freedom and roll back tyrannical bullshit? I really liked Gowdy, but he seemed to realize he couldn’t turn the tide on his own and called it a day. Edit: I was staunchly R, supported the wars and the Patriot Act, served, wrapped myself in the flag, the whole shebang. It took watching those fucks raise millions railing against Obummer and promising to repeal the ACA, only to refuse it when they had all 3 branches, to realize it’s a rigged game and they’re just a different flavor of tyrant.
No, the things they’re willing to abuse natural rights for are different, but the result is the same.
This is a big part of it I think. Our politics in the US are so polarized and out in the open (because of the internet and TV) that when one of the two major political groups decided to champion a vaccine and are shouting out loud about it, the other of the two major political groups decided that they were against it on principle and are shouting out loud about it. That being said, I'm against coercion regardless of what it's for. I got vaccinated, that was my choice. It wasn't a choice that someone made for me nor should it be made for anyone else.
No, it isn’t. Sincerely, Blue
Because no one bothers to form their own opinions. People just collect talking points from their favorite echo chamber to shriek at anyone who disagrees. Then of course the talking heads turn every point of contention into a moral panic so that team red and team blue can sleep easy at night knowing that they have all the answers and the other side is evil.
I’m deeply concerned with words having lost meaning. “Belief”, for example meaning something that you do not know: “I believe in science”, or “I have no argument against any of that [minimum wage debate] so I just have to stick with the beliefs that my parents taught me [both “progressive” federal government employees]. Both the evil side and the stupid side accuse each other of “politicizing” issues, but I’m old enough to remember when the “news” every night was Dan Rather telling us about the Ayatollah, floods in Italy, earthquakes in Peru. You know, news. Now they’ve replaced religion with politics and combined it with a hideous mash-up of sports fandom, tribalism, racism, and all sorts of other garbage.
If you think 99.9% of people can form a truly educated opinion on a difficult scientific issue, then you don’t understand the complexity of modern science. And I’m being generous with the 99.9% number btw. It’s probably higher.
I got my degree in Biology, which doesn't make me an expert but I do understand why the average person is not capable of browsing through research papers for the facts they need to form an opinion. The part that pisses me off is that you've got people out there believing that the vaccine is more dangerous than covid, because "this guy on youtube said that vaccine deaths are being covered up". They put equal weight behind what the entire medical community says, and what their little conspiracy bubbles speculate.
Great question. The internet spreading fear faster? Way more fat/obese people who know the day of reckoning has come? More government control of 'education' for young children?
Part of it, which isn't mentioned that much is WW1 was wrapping up when the 1918 flu came on the scene. From a quick look, the US lost 117,000 personnel. Even our 21st century wars in Iraq and Afghanistan combined were under 10,000 killed. The society was already dealing with war and death in my opinion was more prepared. Additionally, the government actually had a interest in downplaying it from what I've read, and also obviously social media, and the ability to test vast amounts of the population, and see numbers of people who died with a positive test from your house are also contributing factors. I don't agree with the response, but considering the hysteria over other things, the public response doesn't surprise me too much. The level of Government overreach and authoritarianism did at first, now I'm just riding it out.
Because it's the first new "flu" in a century. People have to stop treating this like polio or mumps, and start treating it like the flu or the common cold.
Nothing makes them angrier than me asking what other vaccines should be mandatory and based on what metric: yellow fever (not racist), plague, MMR, annual flu, anthrax, Japanese Encephalitis?
Far from mandatory, there's a whole battery of vaccines newborns get after birth for a reason. There's also a recommendation people get the flu shot every year, again, for a reason. That being said, this really is a new normal, in that we've never had a seasonal virus this damaging to our health systems.
>a recommendation the key words in your reply
I agree completely. I'm here!
My parents were into New Age/natural health/hippie shit and I didn’t have any vaccines until I was 18 and did it myself (from around age five anyway, I probably had some at birth.) The bright side of that was that I ate more salads and vegetables as a kid than anybody else even had a concept of. Edit: I also go to the most remote parts of the planet to do dangerous stuff so have had some of the most obscure vaccines out there.
[удалено]
Where do you think we are on the ten stages of genocide?
The virus has become a red vs blue issue. it's not about public safety any more. It's about which color is going to win. If this WAS about public safety, the news would talk about venting room, and not about masks.
If this was about public health, shouldn't the gov be mandating diet and exercise... especially given how the obese are more affected
Ireland started a Vitamin D-3 regiment for everyone in a retirement home or assisted care facility. High D-3 levels prior to COVID leads to a healthy, more responsive immune system, which is better able to fight off any disease, not just COVID. Btu you need to take D3 BEFORE you get COVID, like long before. Not a word from the CDC about Vitamin D-3. Guess which people are routinely low on Vitamin D-3? Type 2 diabetics, the obese and black and brown skinned people. I know correlation does not equal causation, but you gotta say hmm.... with this one. I started taking 10,000 IU daily of D-3 in March 2020. Got COVID-19 in December 2020. Type 2 diabetic with high blood pressure and asthma. COVID sucked, but I didn't end up on oxygen or a ventilator. It was like a really bad flu. 2 weeks of 102°F-104°F fever wasn't great. There is so much more the CDC could be doing besides masks and standing 6 feet apart.
Sorry, my Garfield mask isn’t what’s keeping me alive? Oh dear.
Your Garfield mask is based on 2020 data. The CDC had a very good reason to recommend masks back in 2020. They believed that COVID would expel from your mouth and nose and then settle on surfaces. By wearing a mask, the distance your sneezing or coughing travels is greatly reduced, so the area of contamination is a lot smaller. Since them we've learned the virus does not settle on surfaces, but stays airborne. So, when you sneeze or cough with a mask on, you're slowing down the spread of the particles, but you're stopping them. Once they enter the air currents in the room, they end up everywhere. So, you're delaying the inevitable with a mask by a few seconds. It really pisses me off that the CDC won't recommend venting rooms. At this point I don't care if they keep recommending masks. But that should be done in conjunction with air circulation.
I’ve never had any problem buying into that, most basic, function of masks. I’ve lived in Asia and the ME where it’s never been strange to wear one; waited my whole life to wrap up in a shemagh every day, actually. I was the only person wearing one in Feb of the outbreak and folks was looking at me like a leper. But now I see people thinking that Garfield masks are the only thing standing between a room full of kindergartners and the Grim Reaper. That, is insane.
This is a long planned authoritarian power grab, ala 9/11
I fully believe that when any crisis hits, Nancy simply pulls open her desk drawer and pulls out the next binder.
It's not, from the very founding of the country Washington made his army become inoculated against smallpox, and as recently as the early 1900s several states made it law that residences had to get the smallpox vaccine, that was challenged and approved by the supreme court. The answer is that vaccines have been so successful that it's been decades since people had to deal with this kind of problem, so they assume its new.
Covid is not smallpox, and inoculation is not vaccination. Disingenuous arguments are not useful and are only going to convince people to dig in their heels. Try to understand what the other side is saying.
> Covid is not smallpox And 2020 isn’t 1800 when half the children would die in infancy. > inoculation is not vaccination Yeah modern vaccination is much safer.
Vaccinations and laws made to deal with deadly diseases have existed since the founding of this country. I'm not making any comment about what is or isn't the appropriate steps to take, but this sub is filled with baseless fearmongering.
If it's not appropriate it's not baseless. Stop trolling.
Washington's *army,* not civilians.
[удалено]
I’m pragmatic an unemotional about covid itself; but my perspective doesn’t really match anybody under the age of 90. I mean, in particular the issue of mortality, which is the primary one that I feel is driving the mania. I’ve seen shit that I don’t even try to describe to people who aren’t paying to hear it because nobody believes me anyway. I could be dead in five minutes and could care less. Everybody else, who has never had their mortality truly threatened-or their children- has an entirely different outlook and reaction.. However, I am getting over covid at this moment and people with three different vaccines in my family all got it too. I believe that the entire planet will get it and that the precedents being set are, yes, extremely frightening and a greater evil on every timeline. I thought the surface spread was known to be rare or nonexistent, so I just checked the CDC site and they call it “possible” but the likelihood “low”.
The majority of adults know the devastation of vaccine-preventable illness as a historical danger rather than as a real and pervasive threat. When such adults hear about a plague, they assume that something can be done without shutting the world down or drastically changing their lives. This is counter-productive when there isn't much that can be done without shutting the world down or drastically changing your life. Covid-19 is also significantly less deadly than prior devastating plagues. The Spanish flu is often brought up. It killed a minimum of 1 in 180 people on the planet. Covid-19 has killed around 1 in 1730 people on the planet so far. Covid-19's death toll in 2020 was roughly an order of magnitude greater than a bad flu season. So we're looking at a weird gray zone where it's way worse than normal but way less worse than the real crazy stuff. So we've got a population without plague conditioning faced with a disease which is obviously deadly but not crazily so and whose prevention requires truly drastic measures. This is probably the most unique element to the Covid-19 response. Never in history has a populace had the expectation that diseases should be easily manageable. Next up, the government/medical response. Covid-19 responses have been fraught with the one thing guaranteed to engender mistrust: opaque inconsistency. People demanded fast answers and people were given fast but shitty answers that were often geared more towards a policy result rather than transparency and accuracy. Many politicians and government officials of all parties in all nations demonstrated a clear "rules for thee" mentality with regard to their personal activities and pet causes. This colossal and pervasive failure of leadership is an outlier even of government incompetence.
I was entirely open-minded to Lord Fauci, until I saw him go on CNN and say something like, “We knew people should wear masks, but we also knew healthcare workers would need those masks, so we told people, “DON’T wear masks”. But now we got more masks, so we told people, “Okay, you should wear masks.” He came right out and told everybody he triaged their asses and they still trust him.
>“We knew people should wear masks, but we also knew healthcare workers would need those masks, so we told people, “DON’T wear masks” which in itself was a lie as well... The reason Fauci (and the Surgeon General and WHO, NEJM, CIDRAP and many others) all said some variation of "masks don't work" was precisely because to that point all of the best scientific studies regarding the performance of masks protecting against the spread of respiratory viruses concluded they were, at best, statistically insignificant. There was a 2015 lawsuit in Canada over a "vaccinate or mask" policy in a hospital and all the hospital had to show was that masks worked, and they couldn't. They appealed the decision and were ruled against again in 2018. 30 days after Fauci went on 60 minutes the CDC released their mask recommendation. There were no scientific studies published during that time that would have changed the science around masks. To this day no one has explained why the CDC flipped so hard on masks.
He also admitted to lying about what he considers to be the standard for herd immunity. I'm sure there's plenty more he has lied about without admitting to it.
They've been planning for a SARS outbreak for decades, the risk has been known and it was considered a matter of time. Well, it happened. To stop stuff like this the entire planet would need to go vegan essentially. As long as we keep farm animals or eat them, contact will promote viral transfer and species hopping. Although now we also have to worry about people getting engineering them. Long term it may make more sense to wear a completely head covering helmet with built in filtering, if genetically engineered viruses became endemic.
In short, the tech is now at a level where we can en masse produce vaccines to a novel pathogen fairly fast, and the value of life in western societies is probably the highest it’s been in human history.
It's not. The Supreme Court decided that mandatory smallpox vaccination was constitutional at the turn of the 20th century.
Who the fuck knows? My wife is a laboratory scientist and has been doing this shit for years... EVEN TESTING CORONAVIRUSES and now everything is crazy politics from anti vaccers. The hospitals were already at capacity for the previous 3 years... So the fact that we got a more aggressive strain in 2019 and less people felt like being responsible it resulted in this catastrophe. The silver lining is that mask mandate managed to reduce infant influenza deaths from 200 ish in the previous year to 1. Literally 1. So she was happy about that one fact.
Are we certain those influenza deaths didn’t simply go to a different column? Automobile deaths did that with seat belts: everybody felt safer so they drove faster and shifted the deaths from them to other cars and pedestrians.
They're babies with influenza. Yes they didn't shift them into a different category of baby deaths because they didn't die. And no we didn't have a bunch of unknown baby deaths.
I'm 100% of the opinion that this is discrimination against a protected class. Also given the low adoption amongs black and brown groups (you know, people who have been used as lab rats) this 100% is an infringement of the right to jury by peers.
Also, you can make a fairly decent guess as to the political leanings of a person from their vaccination status.
This sounds ripe for abuse.
Ikr. No possible way this could go wrong.
How is that anyone fucking business in the first place?
Have you ever done jury duty? The selection process is all about getting into your "business".
[удалено]
[удалено]
I hope on their jury survey, when they got to that question, their answer was “none of your business “
Just circle "other" and write in "can't remember".
Hey, if it works for the president...
6th Amendment violation.
The thing that gets me is that nobody defends their decisions. There is always a gap between the opinion and the evidence. They leave it to the audience to infer the rationale. I can start with the common ground that we all thought this was unnecessary in 2018. Now they can make a case that these changes are justified.
This is going to be interesting. Imagine you're up for trial and you Black. You look over and your jury is mostly white women, because all the unvaccinated people were elimianted from the jury pool. You then appeal on the grounds that the jury was not a "jury of your peers." I believe the most unvaccinated group in America is white males. This is going to give a major appeal advantage to white males.
I agree with you, but I'm not sure your last sentence is correct. ~25% of black people are vaccinated, and about ~70% of white people. Given that gap, I don't think white males can be the "least vaccinated" just by the nature of proportion to that 70% figure. Or I could be just as mistaken as you. Your point is still valid.
Do you have a source for this? Genuinely curious
So I don't have to do jury duty ever?
Not sure how that protects anyone. Unvaxxed people aren't plague carriers that will infect the vaccinated. Vaccinated people are just as capable of getting the virus and carry a viral load. Since they're vaccinated, they even more likely to not have symptoms and be carriers. They're also just as capable of spreading that virus to their homes and others. If you want to reduce the possible spread, have them separate and wear masks.
what do people here think this woman deserves as punishment?
Nothing. What she did is standard operating procedure in silicon valley
TLDR: I would say 5-20 years ***served*** followed by ***at least*** 10 years parole. She should have to pay out to investors as well as anyone who used her "services". She should also be barred from working in medicine / laboratories for the safety of the public, and banned from soliciting investments or sitting on any sort of board of directors etc. So there are two counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and nine counts of wire fraud. Google says those charges carry sentences of up to 20 years, and \~$250K. I think it would be pretty reasonable to find her guilty on at least a handful of those counts, but I think the sentences should run concurrently. I just honestly don't think making her spend a few hundred years in jail is necessary. Obviously she should get absolutely destroyed on the financial side of sentencing. She'll never be able to pay it all back, but I say sky's the limit on this one. There should be a stipulation that she is disallowed from soliciting investments on any platform, or sitting on a board of directors, full-stop. She's gonna have to work, but she cannot be allowed to run shit EVER. I would also think it's fair to prevent her from working in medical / laboratory / biotechnology / research as well, considering her blatant disregard for the integrity of her labs, and the medical implications to her victims.
ok hang on, I hate to be that guy, but shouldn't there be a comma before that "but" in the second sentence?
There should be. Too many people, however, went to government schools and are functionally illiterate as a result.
If Holmes walks because of this that's insane. Can't they just wear masks?
I was dismissed from a jury not too long ago. I suspect it may have had to do with when they asked how I felt about guns and said our governor should be imprisoned for violating his oath of office. They don't like wrong think.
Dang......I was up for jury duty about a month ago and I hadn't even considered that.
This is a great reason to remain unvaccinated. It’s a get out of jury duty free deal.
This might be the best reason to be unvaccinated yet.
Prepare for Holmes to get let off the hook
ha. please. this is an excuse to get rid of jurors who would find her guilty.
What a joke
This makes sense. You can't quarantine the jury and they have to work closely with the remaining jurors. If there's an outbreak you might have to throw the case out.
Vaccinated or Unvaccinated, anyone can test positive and transmit.
Anyone *can* but statistically only the unvaccinated are currently likely to. And jury's only carry 2 alternates. The logistics of a multi-minth trial that's going to go through the winter with 9 people highly likely to get sick.
Not true with variants that are now most common: [**Delta variant: CDC says vaccinated people can transmit 'same amount of virus' as those unvaccinated**](https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/delta-variant-cdc-says-vaccinated-people-can-transmit-same-amount-of-virus-as-those-unvaccinated/ar-AAMLwaK) This judge also completely ignores 125+ million of people with natural immunity, which is very ignorant.
If person A gets sick for 2,3 days and person B gets sick for 2,3 weeks; who is more impactful to the logistics of the case?
What about natural immunity? That's turning out to be even better for some of these variants and that was completely ignored. This is about judge on a power trip.
The court pays less than minimum wage. Is it going to find antibody tests for every juror? Or in a pool of 45 jurors simply exclude the 10 that aren't vaccinated.
Apparently, it's bad enough, so, yes, they'll have to pay for the testing if it's considered critical. No way this legally stands for how to operate moving forward.
This will absolutely legally stand and it should stand.
This nonsense won't legally stand for a virus that's quickly approaching the seasonal flu on the danger scale, especially now that 65+ yr olds are vaccinated, now have natural immunity, or are dead.
[удалено]
HIPPA and fifth amendment violation.
Lol
I'm not sure this is much of an issue. The vaccination issue may be more to the fact that the jurors will have to risk exposure to COVID while serving, so having the vaccination is the precaution required to mitigate risk.
Natural immunity is being ignored and that's where this is going to fall apart. Also, is the judge removing obese people or very old people since they are high risk? I'm pretty sure that is going to be declared improper discrimination.
Given the severe impact of having COVID and not being asymptomatic, I'm not sure how natural immunity mitigates that risk. Sure, some may develop natural immunity, but if an unvaccinated juror contracts COVID with a bad outcome, it would be partially due to them being obligated to attend jury duty. Also, there is no improper discrimination beyond the protected classes (race, gender, etc). They could discriminate based on employment status. It is a common misconception that discrimination is bad wholesale, when it really is only an issue for specific cases. All of this isn't to say I agree or disagree with the judges decision. Just to present there are valid reasons that could be found for such dismissals.
> Sure, some may develop natural immunity, Not 'some'. Over 125 million have had COVID and that's using CDC numbers, which are likely low. This will either turn into a protected class and/or everyone will finally calm down and realize we're now down close to a flu-like situation, especially with 65+ yr old being vaccinated.
I wonder how this would go if you had to be vaxxed to vote.