Originally Posted by
tinfoilzag
Federal law only takes precedence when it is specifically enumerated.
I agree that they would be called upon to enforce federal law for a "temporary" period in the event of a disaster. In a "normal" disaster, they would help. But this is not a hurricane or earthquake and this is not something where resources contribute to ending the disaster. Actually stopping activity and not working closely with community members is what helps. This event does not share characteristics with other disasters.
What happens when "temporary" is defined in years? Not getting in the way of federal agencies is very different than working for and with federal agencies (ask California). You're going to ask local law enforcement to enforce federal mandates at the same time you tell them to stand down during riots? Your going to say arrest people for unauthorized behavior while you work to defund their departments?
There was a chance to stop this early but once elected officials realized the death count would be in the .5% range instead of the 5% range and that they and their families would be safe, they saw it as a political opportunity and acted accordingly. This fact is recognized by a part of the US population and now they won't work with mandates as they see it in bad faith.
For a lot of Americans, the risk of COVID is not severe enough to give up their livelihoods and liberty and this will be reflected in state and local law enforcement as they serve the local communities and not the feds. This may make some feel like these people don't care about others but the fact is that people work in their own self-interest, including politicians.
You continue to come at the from a purely selfish and self-interested view. I don't understand it.
Your theory about "wanting to control people" is paranoid delusions born of myths found in certain isolated groups that have been terrified of this very thing since Clinton was president.
Who said a thing about riots? Destruction of property or hurting people is against the law and should be enforced. Many law enforcement hurt people needlessly (I have copies of the video if you need, starting in Lafayette park), but violent riots are entirely different than peaceful demonstrations, of which the vast majority were and shouldn't have been broken up. Most wore masks.
I love your argument about asking local law enforcement to enforce federal mandates. That's exactly what the Right is asking for in knuckling under sanctuary cities. All sanctuary cities or states mean is that local law enforcement is not going to help with immigration and not turn over witnesses to ICE (they will turn over criminals, always have). A sanctuary city has nothing to do with federal officials coming in and enforcing immigration law. It only means locals won't help. It is the flipside of what you're asking for with COVID.
You keep talking about you, your freedoms, citing .5% mortality (I'd like to see a link, I haven't seen that as correct) but even at .5% YOU have decided YOU want to carry on with YOUR life, without factoring in that there is enough virus out there to stuff hospital ICUs full, ask TX, AZ, FLA. So YOU and your decision leads you and others to get sick and put more pressure on the healthcare system, putting my family at risk of dying bc I have family working in intensive cares.
Again, your self-obsession with your liberty is impacting other people's safety by potentially using up resources, ventilators, staffing, etc. whether it is .5% (it's higher) or .1%, there is enough out there to overwhelm the healthcare system and risk having people die in parking lots bc you were demanding your freedom.
As for economic pain, that's real and understandable. Rather than $2 trillion going to corporate America (do you support that socialism?), more money should have gone to hourly and salaried workers, as it did in other countries to reduce the pain of being at home.
The self-obsession ignores the pain that is inflicted on others while one person demands their outright freedom. It is a balance whereby we try to accommodate as many interests as possible making reasonable decisions.
But, the assertion that pols want to control lives sounds like Alex Jones level conspiracy theory that I can assure you is delusional. I spend a lot of time inside the political bubble with a lot of pols, none want control of your life. They do want a more equitable society. None other than Adam Smith said that for capitalism to work it would take heavy regulation. We have socialism for the wealthiest corps, it is time to shift it over to where it can trickle up.
IMO.
If we do not get rid of the virus (which will take everyone sacrificing together) the economy will not come back.
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
Mark Twain.
!!!
