Curfew restrictions: Is it legal to leave your house?

I assume you've planned on having the government foot the bill for that landline device, along with all the setup costs and those monthly service fees too? :lalaland:

Then someone just stops by and rings your doorbell. And you—well, you answer it, just like always.

Look, I’m not trying to turn something this trivial into a complex study of nuclear physics.

nimbleharbor10 said:And what happens if you're sleeping, showering, or stuck in the bathroom? What then?

Look, you could just minimize those three activities. And obviously, when you hear your phone ringing, you stop whatever you're doing and answer it...

I'm kidding, obviously. My point is to highlight how ridiculous it is to suggest they should call people on their cell phones just to verify their whereabouts. It’s just as nonsensical as trying to track them via GPS. Personally, I don't carry my phone when I go for a run; I’ll leave it at home if I need to. Same goes for when I'm grocery shopping, visiting family, or just driving to a neighboring town for a quick stroll. It simply doesn't make sense. The police have to physically show up at a residence to confirm whether the people who are supposed to be there are actually there. Until we implement electronic ankle monitors or something similar, there really isn't any other effective way to handle this.

Melissa Collins3 said:Look, you could just minimize those three activities. And obviously, when you hear your phone ringing, you stop whatever you're doing and answer it...

I'm kidding, obviously. My point is to highlight how ridiculous it is to suggest they should call people on their cell phones just to verify their whereabouts. It’s just as nonsensical as trying to track them via GPS. Personally, I don't carry my phone when I go for a run; I’ll leave it at home if I need to. Same goes for when I'm grocery shopping, visiting family, or just driving to a neighboring town for a quick stroll. It simply doesn't make sense. The police have to physically show up at a residence to confirm whether the people who are supposed to be there are actually there. Until we implement electronic ankle monitors or something similar, there really isn't any other effective way to handle this.

Or maybe even tracking collars.

Melissa Collins3 said:Look, you could just minimize those three activities. And obviously, when you hear your phone ringing, you stop whatever you're doing and answer it...

I'm kidding, obviously. My point is to highlight how ridiculous it is to suggest they should call people on their cell phones just to verify their whereabouts. It’s just as nonsensical as trying to track them via GPS. Personally, I don't carry my phone when I go for a run; I’ll leave it at home if I need to. Same goes for when I'm grocery shopping, visiting family, or just driving to a neighboring town for a quick stroll. It simply doesn't make sense. The police have to physically show up at a residence to confirm whether the people who are supposed to be there are actually there. Until we implement electronic ankle monitors or something similar, there really isn't any other effective way to handle this.

Then you just call them back five minutes later and everything is fine, right?

Just like how tracking location makes zero sense—I don't even carry my phone when I go for a run. If I need to, I can just leave it at home when I head out for groceries... or to visit family... or even just for a little stroll to a nearby town...

So? 🤔

It's precisely because it doesn't make sense; the police have to physically show up at a residence to verify if the people who are required to be there actually are. And unless we start using electronic ankle monitors or something similar, there isn't really any other (effective) way to do it.

I mean, what's the actual advantage of an ankle monitor over just using an app on a phone?

-briskjackal5

briskjackal5 said:Then you just call them back five minutes later and everything is fine, right?

Just like how tracking location makes zero sense—I don't even carry my phone when I go for a run. If I need to, I can just leave it at home when I head out for groceries... or to visit family... or even just for a little stroll to a nearby town...

So? 🤔

It's precisely because it doesn't make sense; the police have to physically show up at a residence to verify if the people who are required to be there actually are. And unless we start using electronic ankle monitors or something similar, there isn't really any other (effective) way to do it.

I mean, what's the actual advantage of an ankle monitor over just using an app on a phone?

-briskjackal5

Well, for starters, you can't just leave it sitting on your nightstand or hand it off to a buddy to carry for you.

briskjackal5 said:Then you just call them back five minutes later and everything is fine, right?

Just like how tracking location makes zero sense—I don't even carry my phone when I go for a run. If I need to, I can just leave it at home when I head out for groceries... or to visit family... or even just for a little stroll to a nearby town...

So? 🤔

It's precisely because it doesn't make sense; the police have to physically show up at a residence to verify if the people who are required to be there actually are. And unless we start using electronic ankle monitors or something similar, there isn't really any other (effective) way to do it.

I mean, what's the actual advantage of an ankle monitor over just using an app on a phone?

-briskjackal5

For the love of God, please go back and read my previous post that you just quoted... the answer is right there in the text.

Melissa Collins3 said:Forget all this talk about cell phones and tracking apps. It’s honestly overkill. If you want to actually manage things, everyone just needs to have a landline installed if they don't already have one. That way, when an epidemiologist calls, you actually pick up. Simple as that. If you dodge the call, you're basically telling them you don't exist, and then you can expect the police to show up at your door and haul you straight into quarantine.

Even a landline is pointless since you can just forward the calls.

Rachel Roberts6 said:Restriction vs. Ban... it’s basically the same mess. If you don't have permission, aka a pass, then you're effectively banned from traveling between different counties. It's not the restriction itself that's the problem; it's the way they actually carry it out. Like the example I mentioned earlier, law enforcement seems to be making up their own rules on the fly about who follows the rules and who doesn't. Honestly, treating the fight against this "21st-century plague" with such inconsistency is pretty unprofessional.
Sure, the actual distance someone can travel might depend on whether local mayors are playing nice with each other or not, but it's also obvious that the idiots in charge keep passing rules that make zero sense and are practically impossible to follow.
Besides, I honestly stopped caring about whether these measures were justified the second they allowed that massive parade over on Maui. And from what I heard, that whole procession wasn't even cleared by the local town council, but by some national task force.

Give me a break... you guys and your Maui procession.
If you have a hundred people crowded together on a sidewalk or in a fake version of Central Park every single day with only two feet of space between them, why on earth couldn't an outdoor event happen on Maui!?
What is wrong with you? Try letting your irritation with the church stop you from seeing things clearly.

Joseph Taylor11 said:I mean... is there even a way to head to another town or city without technically "leaving" where you live?
🤔
Am I totally out of the loop on this one? 😁

No.
You're just spinning your wheels.

Rachel Roberts6 said:Let me weigh in on that bolded and underlined part. All of that sounds great on paper if you can actually get a pass. The real headache starts when the authorities refuse to issue one. Take my neighbor back in his small town, for example. His neighbor's grandmother passed away, and she lived in a different jurisdiction. My neighbor barely managed to pull together permissions to attend the funeral for himself, his wife (the deceased's granddaughter), and his wife's niece (also a granddaughter). But he couldn't get permission for his own mother. To me, that means his mom is FORBIDDEN from going to a friend's funeral. Who is the idiot in this country who thinks they have the right to stop a perfectly HEALTHY person from attending a friend's funeral? There were only five people at the service; with my neighbor's mom, there would have been six. And all of them live at the same address! This measure is as foolish as it gets and it's a total violation of basic civil liberties. And since when does some little pass PROVE that you aren't carrying a virus? I guess we're supposed to trust those (unreliable) tests?

How old his mother is provides the definitive answer, though it might be a moot point.

I assume she is over 60. Your opinion is irrelevant; we are dealing with facts. It was my error not to write "(potentially)," but you could have easily inferred that the older population is more vulnerable. Quarantine is preventive, and there is no cure if luck isn't on your side. Tests are clearly very specific. I am no expert on them, so I can only speculate that they are only administered once symptoms begin to manifest.
So, how old is the mother. Medical data likely isn't public, and the doctor is the one who decides and holds access to those records.
I don't consider death and the ceremonies surrounding it to be crucial....

There is no ban if you obtain a permit proving you aren't a (potential) host for the virus.

Melissa Collins3 said:Right? 🤦

God, I love it when people spout absolute nonsense... Who on earth am I supposed to contact to get a permit like that?

The authorities, baby... the authorities. If you are young enough, everything is laid out clearly; you just need to actually read.

https://www.nytimes.com/news/health/...coronavirus/10075963/
March 10, 2020
HOW DOES THE VIRUS WORK?

THE CORONAVIRUS MYSTERY: IT TARGETS THE ELDERLY AND SPARES CHILDREN

Nicole Lee74 said:Give me a break... you guys and your Maui procession.
If you have a hundred people crowded together on a sidewalk or in a fake version of Central Park every single day with only two feet of space between them, why on earth couldn't an outdoor event happen on Maui!?
What is wrong with you? Try letting your irritation with the church stop you from seeing things clearly.

http://hr.n1info.com/Vijesti/a499279...jte-VIDEO.html

Last night, the "Procession of the Cross" took place on Maui, where participants from every local area (Small town, USA, Small town, USA, Small town, USA, Small town, USA, Small town, USA, and Small town, USA) sent about 15 people each, and they have full authorization from FEMA.

Is it clear to you now? Perhaps once you actually make it to Washington, D.C., you might realize... the ceremony itself isn't even the point but rather how widespread this tradition is across the islands.
Regardless, they followed the regulations to the letter.
Objectively speaking, there was no reason to stop it, and I quite appreciate the phrasing used... a protected custom registered with UNESCO...

Jerry Robinson56 said:Quote : Steve23

🙂 That is quite kind of you.

Let’s be honest: calling these urban neighborhoods "districts" is nothing more than a classic facade. It is a superficial label designed to provide a sense of structure where none truly exists.

County Civil Court
Municipal Court on El Paso Street 84.

The Municipal Court in Washington, D.C. shouldn't be labeled as a civil court, given that it also handles criminal cases. 😁
Criminal Court 3

Just a brief thought regarding the matter of names...

Quote : Steve23

I am merely providing clarification. Having spent years immersed in certain lines of work, I have come to realize that you truly cannot grasp the sheer level of absurdity one encounters until you are standing right in the middle of it. It is a peculiar thing, really. One assumes they have seen it all, only to be confronted by realities that defy any reasonable expectation.
There is no prohibition against travel if you possess a valid permit proving that you aren't an obvious host for the virus.
We are maintaining a written record of all movements to ensure that if a new outbreak occurs, we can immediately identify the likely source or culprit. Efficiency in response is paramount.

They simply did what was within their power. While their approach falls far short of being perfect, it is precisely what one would propose to curb viral distribution if the pathogen is truly as potent as claimed. That is the fundamental logic here. If there is a legitimate threat to public safety, maintaining records of human movement becomes a necessity. Now, I am staunchly opposed to the idea of monitoring mobile phones, but there is a catch. In this day and age, everything is already being tracked; a precise location can be distilled down to a mere twenty characters. You understand what I mean. The only real hurdle is obtaining a court order. It seems someone finally realized that this could serve as an alternative to mandatory digital passes.

where you can actually move around normally without needing permits...

☕

Honestly, it doesn't matter. No matter how much you try to justify this permit system—it's flawed. The way it’s been designed? It just doesn't work. Maybe it was built with good intentions, but that still doesn't change the fact that it's a mess. And I'm not just shouting into the void here; it's not just my opinion or a few people on this forum anymore. Most people are starting to see it for what it is... even the local news reporters have finally started asking the tough questions... so, yeah... 🤷

Jerry Robinson56 said:How old his mother is provides the definitive answer, though it might be a moot point.

I assume she is over 60. Your opinion is irrelevant; we are dealing with facts. It was my error not to write "(potentially)," but you could have easily inferred that the older population is more vulnerable. Quarantine is preventive, and there is no cure if luck isn't on your side. Tests are clearly very specific. I am no expert on them, so I can only speculate that they are only administered once symptoms begin to manifest.
So, how old is the mother. Medical data likely isn't public, and the doctor is the one who decides and holds access to those records.
I don't consider death and the ceremonies surrounding it to be crucial....

There is no ban if you obtain a permit proving you aren't a (potential) host for the virus.

The authorities, baby... the authorities. If you are young enough, everything is laid out clearly; you just need to actually read.

https://www.nytimes.com/news/health/...coronavirus/10075963/
March 10, 2020
HOW DOES THE VIRUS WORK?

THE CORONAVIRUS MYSTERY: IT TARGETS THE ELDERLY AND SPARES CHILDREN

What does her age have to do with anything? She hasn't been infected, and she hasn't been ordered into isolation. She’d just be with her family at the funeral. You know, the people you normally sit at the table with or watch TV with on the couch.
You're trying to justify a policy that simply can't be justified. Besides, despite all these "smart" measures, the number of cases and deaths keeps climbing.
You seem like a cool guy, but man, you are totally missing the mark on this thread.

With very few exceptions, the permit wasn't just handed to the individual who persistently lobbied for it. I suggest you judge for yourselves whether this measure is actually effective, logical, or even legally sound.
One day, we will look back and realize how someone managed to line their own pockets behind the scenes while seeing absolutely zero actual improvement in public health outcomes.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Reddit

Jerry Robinson56 said:http://hr.n1info.com/Vijesti/a499279...jte-VIDEO.html

Last night, the "Procession of the Cross" took place on Maui, where participants from every local area (Small town, USA, Small town, USA, Small town, USA, Small town, USA, Small town, USA, and Small town, USA) sent about 15 people each, and they have full authorization from FEMA.

Is it clear to you now? Perhaps once you actually make it to Washington, D.C., you might realize... the ceremony itself isn't even the point but rather how widespread this tradition is across the islands.
Regardless, they followed the regulations to the letter.
Objectively speaking, there was no reason to stop it, and I quite appreciate the phrasing used... a protected custom registered with UNESCO...

Maui
Size: 115 square miles
Population: 11,500

Washington, D.C.
Size: 247 square miles
Population: ~780,000

What kind of insane island spread are we even talking about here? I mean, look at the math. We’re dealing with an area twice as large as Maui, plus there are almost 80 times more people in the D.C. area for this thing to actually tear through. It's not even a fair comparison.

The issue is that you’ve got a few dozen people gathering from all over Maui—not even anyone infected, if I had to guess—just for one day to hold a procession while following every single rule to the letter. So why is it suddenly a massive crisis when thousands of Washingtonians are out wandering around Lake Tahoe, trekking up Mount Rainier, or just hitting the streets of D.C. every single day? You're talking a lot of double standards here.

Joseph Taylor11 said:where you can actually move around normally without needing permits...

☕

Honestly, it doesn't matter. No matter how much you try to justify this permit system—it's flawed. The way it’s been designed? It just doesn't work. Maybe it was built with good intentions, but that still doesn't change the fact that it's a mess. And I'm not just shouting into the void here; it's not just my opinion or a few people on this forum anymore. Most people are starting to see it for what it is... even the local news reporters have finally started asking the tough questions... so, yeah... 🤷

I am not justifying the permits themselves; I am merely explaining why some level of oversight is necessary. From that standpoint, I support the existence of permits. Since I don't personally use them, I'm not intimately involved in the application process, but it’s obvious from the numbers that they are being issued without much trouble.
However, you have to realize that this was the only way to get anything done. Imagine if sick people were just wandering around aimlessly... far from their own homes, or even traveling from tiny rural towns while infected...

I hope it’s clear now why I emphasized the concept of "location" or localization.

fadedranger162 said:Maui
Size: 115 square miles
Population: 11,500

Washington, D.C.
Size: 247 square miles
Population: ~780,000

What kind of insane island spread are we even talking about here? I mean, look at the math. We’re dealing with an area twice as large as Maui, plus there are almost 80 times more people in the D.C. area for this thing to actually tear through. It's not even a fair comparison.

The issue is that you’ve got a few dozen people gathering from all over Maui—not even anyone infected, if I had to guess—just for one day to hold a procession while following every single rule to the letter. So why is it suddenly a massive crisis when thousands of Washingtonians are out wandering around Lake Tahoe, trekking up Mount Rainier, or just hitting the streets of D.C. every single day? You're talking a lot of double standards here.

You're making assumptions about Washington, D.C., yet I traverse this city in all directions multiple times almost every day. And frankly, nearly everyone adheres to the rules...
Let me reiterate: the raw number is irrelevant! For heaven's sake, understand this once: if an infection occurs, you will at least know who was standing near you. It isn't like some stranger from deep within D.C. or someone from Maui. That is the crux of the matter. In your own community, you actually recognize the people around you; elsewhere, you don't.

Rachel Roberts6 said:What does her age have to do with anything? She hasn't been infected, and she hasn't been ordered into isolation. She’d just be with her family at the funeral. You know, the people you normally sit at the table with or watch TV with on the couch.
You're trying to justify a policy that simply can't be justified. Besides, despite all these "smart" measures, the number of cases and deaths keeps climbing.
You seem like a cool guy, but man, you are totally missing the mark on this thread.

🙂 And you to me. 😉Look, I agree that household members should be granted an exemption, but they wouldn't just be surrounded by family in those settings. I must reiterate that a carrier doesn't necessarily show symptoms, and from what I can see, detection only happens once symptoms actually manifest. Furthermore, we cannot ignore the fact that older individuals are far more vulnerable to this virus, or that it accelerates their final stages.
As a preventative measure, one shouldn't let an elderly person go anywhere. I haven't even seen my mother in a month and a half... and I only see my brother in passing... you understand? And yet, I am asymptomatic (at least regarding COVID).

Prevention is justifiable regardless of the current outcome. Especially when it comes to a funeral... if I had the choice, I wouldn't even attend my own.🕺

Jerry Robinson56 said:You're making assumptions about Washington, D.C., yet I traverse this city in all directions multiple times almost every day. And frankly, nearly everyone adheres to the rules...
Let me reiterate: the raw number is irrelevant! For heaven's sake, understand this once: if an infection occurs, you will at least know who was standing near you. It isn't like some stranger from deep within D.C. or someone from Maui. That is the crux of the matter. In your own community, you actually recognize the people around you; elsewhere, you don't.

All of that goes out the window the moment you step into a subway station or walk past a skyscraper.