A Logical Refutation to Common Pro Lockdown Arguments | Reddit Link
(www.reddit.com)
Comments (18)
sorted by:
archived
This Spring during the first big WuFlu epidemic wave, a French doctor had something bugging his mind, and dug up samples from pneumonia patients back in December. One patient with no travel history to China had WuFlu in December 2019.
Now it is possible but unlikely the transmission chains broke and the virus had to be re-introduced in late Febuary/March.
But it's more likely it spread, largely as asymptomatic infections or mild colds, with the occasional older, vulnerable person getting complications and getting listed as "pneumonia".
Oh and we still have exactly zero dead kid from this in Québec. Hardest hit place in the Confederacy.
P.S. : If it turns out the Moderna corp's vaccine that can be kept in a regular freezer is confirmed 94.5% effective, we do have a shot at eliminating that virus with vax campaings.
At a 95% effectiveness and ~75% vaccination coverage, it's almost a win in the box.
The Pfizer vaccine ( 90%+ effective preliminary results ) needing -70C? I don't see ot happening in the third world. It's already a logistical difficulty in rich countries.
Since I'm not at risk I am not getting a vaccine without a rock'-solid plan for effective total elimination. Vaccinate at-risk people : problem solved.
Low-risk people are at less risk from this than the regular flu, and it might be better for kids to grow-up getting periodic exposure to it so their immune system develops a good response to it over the long term, if we cannot eliminate it totally.
It's unconstitutional. The 4th amendment still applies. You have no authority to rule by edict.
Stasi Raus.
Es ist aus.
Unfortunately "muh constitution", while absolutely a valid argument, is one that the left has made sure to tarnish first by attacking the 2nd amendment and now the 1st amendment. They've slowly eased their voter base into the idea of benevolent dictatorship.
I don't think you grasp the other two statements that work with that.
I'm not asking the courts to rule in my favor.
"Stasi, get out! It's over."
I'm not taking no for an answer. I'm not asking the courts to rule correctly, they either do, or the rest of us act correctly for them.
The Constitution remains, whether or not the state enforces it is a different problem. Whether we, or even I, enforce it is the correct question.
What does unlawful searches and seizures have to do with lockdowns? If you were to argue the lockdowns were unconstitutional, surely it'd be on the basis of the 1st amendment's right to assemble.
Unlawful detention. The government has seized your person, and with tracing apps is unlawfully surveiling your movements.
The government is effectively placing you under house arrest without probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion. They are then fining and arresting you for violations of that unlawful detention.
It's not just peaceful assembly. That's for groups. I'm talking about your right to freely travel without being detained. You're not 'assembling' if you simply choose to go for a drive or walk. You're being detained if the government is forcing you to stop.
Ah, I see. My mind is going to the law of groups larger than X people or containing members of Y households.
It's in violation of the 1st amendment, not the 4th. If lock downs were attempted at the federal level, then they would probably be in violation of the 10th amendment as well.
I see this as government seizure of a person via house arrest. That's why I claim the 4th amendment. They unlawfully detaining a person without probable cause.
You guys are still in the "battle of ideas" stage. You should know by now that ideas don't matter, great arguments don't matter, the narrative is all that matters. We're being governed by irrationality and it's not going to end anytime soon.
^ This. The time for arguments and protest definitively ended when governors and "health officials" signed off on people lighting cities on fire.
This is a time for non-compliance. Treat this with the same seriousness as our Betters do. That is the only peaceful way this ends.
There are some people actually trying to defend Gavin in that thread...
Holy shit, reddit actually is as gay as I remember. Pretty decent arguments in this post, though. Just extremely bluepilled.