But this is different? (Posted earlier today)
There wouldn’t be liability. Everyone there would be assuming the risk, which eliminates any possibility of the city being held responsible.
My comment was designed to be read as being sarcastic. Which is tough to convey I guess.
And I didn’t mention I wasn’t onboard. Just that it’s popular.
One. more. time. The increases are where the regulations were relaxed. Not where the protests were. That’s not picking and choosing, that’s evidence. Now I’m going to keep wearing my mask and social distancing here in New Jersey, where protests are considered reasonable and our numbers are still low. Right next door to NYC. Same (though if those hipsters crowding the pavement outside the Brooklyn bars don’t start SD’ing and wearing masks, that could change.)
Also, you keep saying the government “allowed the protests” – if by allow, you mean the herding into small spaces, and spraying with cough-inducing gas, and beating on, sure.
In NJ, they actually did “allow,” and because of that, in our two biggest cities, SD was maintained. Masks were warn. And, like I said, our numbers stayed down.
Protestors moved around and came in for events and went back to wherever they call home. They weren’t 100 percent exclusively from that area. Especially the major cities and DC. Who knows who they connected with the next day or at work and where these folks migrated.
However. I have no idea if they had any impact at all.
I would think to some degree. But opening up broadly perhaps much more so. That’s speculation as well.
2 different restaurants that I follow on Facebook have closed temporarily because an employee tested positive. Both surprisingly said that said employee hadn’t worked in awhile but they were closing over abundance of caution. One restaurant opened only one week ago.
Both are in Michigan
In Philly, by the reports of my child who has been running, greater than 50% of runners are wearing masks.
In my more suburban/ex-urban area, people don’t wear them when exercising outdoors because there is PLENTY of room to social distance.
Are we seriously upending life as we know it for some unsubstantiated social distance of 6 feet without more studies? This is going to cause massive disruption, and we do not know if the number is right??? Singapore seems to have the situation under control, and they use 3 feet. It would make a big difference to our schools-3, 4, 5 or 6 feet can not be that hard to ascertain.
If the Federal government ( the administration) had issued strict guidelines on procedures and precautions necessary to combat CV19 - it likely wouldn’t have even been necessary for the President to even issue an EO (thought he could have.) Instead we got “nothing to see here” and then “it’s the States’ problem” and now, “truly remarkable progress.”
Large gatherings outside can not be limited but they still must adhere to social distancing requirements. Not inside. Funny you left that part out. I think you just read a headline.
Inside gatherings, the ruling said had to be the same as business 50% occupancy rule and must adhere to the social distancing requirement under Phase 2 of reopening,
So, it is not a blanket rule on every gathering no matter the size, unless outdoors, where social distancing must be enforced.
“U.S. District Judge Gary Sharpe ordered New York officials to not enforce any outdoor gathering limitations, if people are following social-distancing requirements.”
“According to his order, the officials are also prevented from enforcing indoor gathering limits against the plaintiffs that are greater than restrictions placed on companies in phase two of the state’s reopening plan. That provision is also stipulated on people following social-distancing requirements.”
LA County has had a large increase in cases and as seen on TV had massive protests and riots.
And your point is?
But so did NYC and it has not. Why would they cause a problem in one place but not another. So I’d look for another more pertinent variable.
So much more of NY has already been infected since it was mishandled so badly initially? Maybe that’s the answer.
I’m pretty plugged into Philadelphia running social media. Not many are wearing masks.
I’m looking at the Los Angeles County case count. No matter how I squint, I can’t see an effect from the protests. Or, really, anything else; it looks like an R of a bit over 1 for the last two months. Los Angeles County looks like, and has for a while looked like, a county that just couldn’t get R below 1.
“I wear masks where required.”
Sounds like most of us, including Trump.
I saw today that California alone had 13.7% of new positive cases, and 15.4% of new tests.
By contrast, AZ, FL and TX had 43% of new cases and 17% of new tests.
We need to get our act together everywhere, all together!
My community had BLM protests. The largest of which is captured in a picture published by the local newspaper. The captioned reads ‘1000’s gather at XYZ in peaceful protest’. Looking at the picture I question the count but that’s not the point.
Shortly after the protests a local LEO was killed in the line of duty. NOT related to BLM.
Also shortly after the protests we lost a fire chief. He was relatively young, he was beloved and he was well integrated into the larger community. He did not die as a result of BLM or COVID.
The point…the memorial for the LEO was attended by over 1000 people. It was organized and sanctioned. A picture of the event showed chairs lined up as if for a wedding. Shoulder to shoulder. There wasn’t even a published expression of intent to limit the crowd.
The fire chief’s family had requested the public to attend via live streaming. At one point there was an attempt to put a fence around a portion of the local park where the memorial was to take place. There was an officially stated intent to limit the crowd. It was not enforced.
IMO, had these memorials occurred prior to BLM protests there WOULD have been crowd size control. There would have been enforced limits - or at the very least officially published limits and details of how people would be denied entry.
Since these memorials occurred after the protests it wasn’t possible for the PTB to say with a straight face ‘for the health of the community we will be strictly enforcing SD and crowd size’ when they had just the other day not only looked the other way but participated in activities identified as dangerous to the publics health.
This lends credence to the idea that the acceptance of the protests has lead to an assumed acceptance of larger crowds. Acceptance of the protests has led to acceptance of behaviors previously considered dangerous and a threat to the common good.
In Singapore, wearing masks is mandatory in public except while exercising or in your car, and the government gave everyone masks.
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/free-one-time-replacement-if-mask-becomes-discoloured
Of course, school classrooms are higher risk situations like restaurants – indoors with people stationary and in proximity to the same other people for long periods of time. So distancing recommendations may be greater in classrooms than on the street or other situations where exposure to others is more transient. The main mitigating factor in K-6 schools is that children appear less likely to get or transmit SARS-CoV-2 (and perhaps their breath or coughs or sneezes do not blast as far as those of adults).
Singapore has some description about returning to school:
https://www.moe.gov.sg/faqs-covid-19-infection