What was the leading cause of death for law enforcement last year?

@maxdancona,

Wouldn't you do well to follow your own advice?

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

bobsal u1553115 wrote:

Wouldn't you do well to follow your own advice?

What advice is that bobsal? I don't claim to be ignoring anyone.

0 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

bobsal u1553115 wrote:

You mean other than drugs and Covid represent unequal threats? That drugs aren't viruses? Other than a Covid infected person can breathe Covid on me and drug user can breath drug addiction on me?

Try staying on topic.

You seemed to make the claim that enforcement is appropriate as a response to public health policy. You seemed go make that as a general claim.

Do you stand by this principle or not? If you want to back down then fine. If you want to stand by your own principle, then drug enforcement is a perfectly reasonable example.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Drug policy is a perfectly good example of a public health issue being addressed by enforcement.

True. But maybe we shouldn't be looking at the enforcement mechanism but at the actual laws themselves. Drug policy has been a failure – no matter how many users we imprison, more people still become involved with illegal drugs. So in this case, enforcement isn't really working; it's not a solution and it doesn't dissuade all people from taking drugs. It's become widely accepted that many of the strict laws do more harm than good.

Is there any reason to think that mandatory vaccinations would fail to control the spread of covid as dismally as anti-narcotics laws fail to control drug use? I don't think so. Ideally, getting as many people vaccinated as possible is the best way to reduce the spread of this disease. The problem with mandatory vaccinations is not that they would be ineffective, but that they might impinge on people's "rights".

So, in this case, I don't think the comparison between enforcement of a broken drug policy and enforcement of vaccination with a working vaccine is valid. If drug law penalties were actually effective your argument would be stronger.

3 Replies

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

Quote:

Drug policy is a perfectly good example of a public health issue being addressed by enforcement.

True. But maybe we shouldn't be looking at the enforcement mechanism but at the actual laws themselves. Drug policy has been a failure – no matter how many users we imprison, more people still become involved with illegal drugs. So in this case, enforcement isn't really working; it's not a solution and it doesn't dissuade all people from taking drugs. It's become widely accepted that many of the strict laws do more harm than good.

Is there any reason to think that mandatory vaccinations would fail to control the spread of covid as dismally as anti-narcotics laws fail to control drug use? I don't think so. Ideally, getting as many people vaccinated as possible is the best way to reduce the spread of this disease. The problem with mandatory vaccinations is not that they would be ineffective, but that they might impinge on people's "rights".

So, in this case, I don't think the comparison between enforcement of a broken drug policy and enforcement of vaccination with a working vaccine is valid. If drug law penalties were actually effective your argument would be stronger.

Four comments:

One...your arguments on this issue are grade A+.

Two...since I agree so completely with your take on the issue, my grading may be biased.

Three...you are pissing into the wind here with Max.

Four...you are pissing into the wind here with Max.

0 Replies

@hightor,

1. A policy of enforcement has unintended consequences. You accept this in the drug war. Everyone agrees that getting people to not avoid opioids and methamphetamine is a good thing. The issue is pain caused by the enforcement.

2. There are unintended consequences of vaccine mandates. People are getting fired. Communities are being effected. Agencies are already reporting that they are having trouble replacing employees.

3. Whether you think vaccine mandates are necessary, you shouldn't cheer people being fired over it. It when people ciesheer over workers losing their jobs (and some people here seem giddy with joy over it). You may disagree with their decisions, but these people didn't ask to be part of a pandemic... it was pushed on them (just as it was on all of us). This is impacting people and communities and the fact you think they deserve is irrelevant.

4. I actually think the comparison is between vaccine mandates and the drug war is apt. It is not exactly equal, but there are real parallels. They are both political policies based on fear that drives a call for punishment.

0 Replies

@hightor,

Hightor, are you confusing vaccines with vaccine mandates?

You and I agree that vaccines are safe and effective and that people should get them. We also agree that illegal drugs are dangerous and that people shouldn't use them.

Our disagreement is about enforcement; whether people should be punished for defying public health policy.

- I accept your point that covid is contagious, and yes that is a valid difference.

- I question your assertion that vaccine mandates will be effective. It is unclear of how many lives enforcement will save (as compared to a voluntary program that includes some exemptions).

- I don't think you are acknowledging that vaccine mandates come with real social costs, businesses, people and communities (at at least one NFL team) will be hurt by them.

1 Reply

Puyallup Tribe Announces Vaccine Requirement For Employees

TACOMA, WA — The Puyallup Tribe of Indians is the latest Washington employer to announce a vaccine mandate for employees.

"We are in unprecedented times, and the COVID-19 vaccine is one of the best tools we have for protecting the health and safety of the Tribe’s community members and employees," the Tribal Administration said in a statement announcing the mandate Monday.

Under the policy, there will be two separate requirements depending upon when the employee was hired. If the Tribal employee was hired before Sept. 30, 2021, they must either provide proof of vaccination against COVID-19, or file a personal or medical exemption and then provide negative COVID-19 tests weekly. Employees hired after Sept. 30 do not have a testing option, and must provide proof of vaccination against COVID-19, no exemptions allowed.

Similar mandates have already been ordered by Microsoft and Boeing, among other Washington employers — and falls in line with new federal guidelines issued Thursday that require Washington employers with 100 or more employees to develop a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/foodnews/puyallup-tribe-announces-vaccine-requirement-for-employees/ar-AAQsJXc

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

We also agree that illegal drugs are dangerous and that people shouldn't use them.

I never said that. I only described the ineffectiveness of criminalizing drug use.

Quote:

I don't think you are acknowledging that vaccine mandates come with real social costs, businesses, people and communities (at at least one NFL team) will be hurt by them.

Pandemics inflict social costs; this is one of them. It's ridiculous to think that the world can be overrun with a deadly disease and no one will have to pay a price or suffer any disruption. The businesses, people, and communities hurt by a vaccine mandate will recover. The people killed by the pandemic won't.

1 Reply

@hightor,

My point is that there are two sides of the coin. One one side is a serious problem that is causing deaths, on the other is enforcement which has social costs. You seem to be only considering one side and ignoring the other.

Let assume (for the moment) that there is an epidemic of illegal drug use. Imagine there was an opioid epidemic that was killing people and a deadly surge of methamphetamine use. In this case, you could make the same argument. People who are arrested and jailed will recover. People dead from a Fentanyl overdose will never recover.

My opinion is that the social costs of vaccine mandates are not worth the social costs of people being fired, losing jobs or being jailed.

I am not asking you to agree with my opinion. I am asking you to accept the downsides of your position.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Covid is not drugs. Covid is not the other side of drugs.

2 Replies

Judge upholds United Airlines' Covid vaccine mandate for employees
Source: CNN

A US federal judge on Monday ruled United Airlines can impose a Covid-19 vaccine mandate on its employees that only provides unpaid leave for workers who are exempted for medical or religious reasons.

US District Judge Mark Pittman in Fort Worth, Texas, rejected arguments by employees that the airline was improperly putting them in an "impossible position" by forcing them to choose a vaccine or unpaid leave.

Pittman was critical of United Airlines' (UAL) approach toward employees seeking religious exemptions, but said in the end, human resources policy was up the company and no employee was forced to accept a vaccine.

[snip]

Employer mandates, which include exemptions for religious and medical reasons, have generally been upheld by courts. United Airlines was the first major air carrier to impose a vaccine requirement and others have since followed.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/09/business/united-airlines-covid-vaccine-mandate/index.html

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

How do you feel about being given drugs secretly by someone else?

How do you feel about being exposed to Covid secretly by someone else?

Grow up.

0 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

bobsal u1553115 wrote:

Judge upholds United Airlines' Covid vaccine mandate for employees
Source: CNN

A US federal judge on Monday ruled United Airlines can impose a Covid-19 vaccine mandate on its employees that only provides unpaid leave for workers who are exempted for medical or religious reasons.

US District Judge Mark Pittman in Fort Worth, Texas, rejected arguments by employees that the airline was improperly putting them in an "impossible position" by forcing them to choose a vaccine or unpaid leave.

Pittman was critical of United Airlines' (UAL) approach toward employees seeking religious exemptions, but said in the end, human resources policy was up the company and no employee was forced to accept a vaccine.

[snip]

Employer mandates, which include exemptions for religious and medical reasons, have generally been upheld by courts. United Airlines was the first major air carrier to impose a vaccine requirement and others have since followed.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/09/business/united-airlines-covid-vaccine-mandate/index.html

No one...under ANY circumstances, should be allowed an exemption "for religious reasons."

PERIOD!

2 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

bobsal u1553115 wrote:

Covid is not drugs. Covid is not the other side of drugs.

1. They are both public health epidemics that can be deadly.

2. In both cases, enforcement is being suggested as a solution; specifically that punishing people will force them to stop unhealthy behavior.

You are proposing that people should be punished for not complying with public health mandates in the case of Covid. In fact, you seem downright giddy that people are being punished.

I am simply questioning whether punishing people for not complying with public health mandates is either reasonable or productive.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

How extreme are you Frank?

Some Native Americans are resisting the vaccines because of very real historical fears. It wasn't that long ago that the government forced them to have sterilizations. Now the same government is forcing them to get vaccines.

You are correct in saying that these Native Americans aren't being logical to equate the two things. But that is what are doing, and it certainly understandable.

Do we put them in jail?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

How extreme are you Frank?

Some Native Americans are resisting the vaccines because of very real historical fears. It wasn't that long ago that the government forced them to have sterilizations. Now the same government is forcing them to get vaccines.

You are correct in saying that these Native Americans aren't being logical to equate the two things. But that is what are doing, and it certainly understandable.

Do we put them in jail?

Allow me to repeat what I wrote...and then you can address that, because I never said anything about Native Americans.

Quote:

No one...under ANY circumstances, should be allowed an exemption "for religious reasons."

PERIOD!

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

I am pushing back on absolutism. I accept your point. However, I would like to know if you would put Native Americans in jail for refusing a vaccine.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

I am pushing back on absolutism. I accept your point. However, I would like to know if you would put Native Americans in jail for refusing a vaccine.

No, I would not. Nor would I put anyone else in jail for refusing a vaccine. \

But I would not allow them to be police officers, teachers, healthcare providers, airline personnel...or hold any other job that requires interaction with the general public.

It is my opinion that they have a right to refuse the vaccine. They do not have a right to hold a job that requires interaction with the general public.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

I agree, though I'm insisting on my religious exemption from paying taxes. The IRS is taking a hard line on it.

0 Replies

What was the leading cause of death for law enforcement last year?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know