Anger Grows Over Stay-At-Home Orders, With LA Sheriff Saying He Won’t Enforce Them
deadline.com/2020/12/anger-grows-over-stay-at...
deadline.comPosted Dec 7, 2020, 3:12 PM UTC
31756
deadline.comNice to see people finally waking up in that thread to the things we've been trying to argue for months.
Although, even if the government did pay us to stay home, I still don't agree with it. But at least it makes it significantly more sustainable/fair.
129
I thought I was still on this subreddit when I was reading the comments in that thread. I think if those folks made the same comment about being locked down without support just a month ago, they would be accused of being selfish and killing grandma.
41
Yeah, it feels that the tide truly is turning this time around. More and more viral videos of angry business owners, the hypocritical actions of our governors, lack of financial support for the common man, and the realization that virtual school is not working by any stretch of the imagination.
34
I think you're absolutely right, the tides are really turning now and people are realizing this isn't going to work. Especially considering it didn't work before when there was far less covid going around. I think a lot of people are finally opening up to the fact this isnt nearly as bad as what we thought in March and there absolutely is alternative solutions other than lockdowns and business closures.
Now it's only a matter of time before the full on doomer pro lockdown forever stance is the idea being pushed off into the looney bin conspiracy corner, where it should be.
26
And yet the media is playing April again, but they've dropped "exponential growth" from the vernacular this time around.
8
even if the government did pay us to stay home
Hate to say it but this benefits lazy people and low wage workers. Normal people with decent paying jobs would want to go to work.
16
Although, even if the government did pay us to stay home, I still don't agree with it. But at least it makes it significantly more sustainable/fair.
Printing oodles of money is the opposite of sustainable.
10
[deleted]
3
[removed]
2
Still quite a few comments in there saying the government should just pay everyone’s rent.
2
that's the end goal, pay people to stay at home, make everyone dependent on the government, go full commie. Rely on the govt for all your information and needs.
1
I'm glad there's a surprising amount of sanity in those comments.
84
That’s what I thought! Even though the top comments are pleas for more government financial support, it’s nice to see mainstream subs even acknowledging for a moment that lockdowns have disastrous repercussions and not just parroting “stay home, Karen, you don’t need a haircut!”
58
I don't see them acknowledging it. All I see are entitled comments about how the government is not giving them enough money. Oh, and blaming the landlords, of course.
What's more, they go to blame the federal goverment, and not California's. I am not an american but I see little justice in expecting the poorer states which didn't shut down to subsidize Californiana's shananigans.
44
“If the government just payed everyone’s rent for a few months, we could have a true lockdown and be over this.”
17
r/news has always been pretty open about its criticism of lockdowns. I don't know why this sub specifically but quite often you would have dissident voices there that would still be upvoted.
1
I'm not sure which comments you mean. I just went through them. Lots of doomers.
8
I think it boils down to what we’re used to seeing at this point in these types of posts. Six months ago a sheriff saying “look we’re going to be judicious in how we choose to uphold the law. We’re not going to shake down individuals or raid businesses that are just trying to make ends meet” these chuckle fucks would have been screaming for him to be fired and his head placed on a pike. They’d be comparing a bar that was not in compliance to the owner setting off a bomb in a crowded street and someone going for a jog without a mask to waving a gun in their grandmas face.
At least now there is some semblance of agreement. Some people who you could tell didn’t like it, were still saying things like “what do we expect people to do? Their business is being shut down, they have no source of income, their life’s work is essentially gone, and they’re worrying their families are going to starve”. We might disagree with the necessity of lockdowns, but at least it appears that there is more understanding on the opposing side that it is 100% unjust for the government to fly in at the drop of a hat and cripple a business with nothing more than a shrug and a “we’re all in this together”.
5
Wow I was shocked! Maybe sentiment is finally being to turn.
6
I just wish we had done this in April.
Better late than never. Such hubris to think our actions can control nature, our responses just make this all worse. It’s madness.
67
I'm glad people are expressing sympathy for the small buisnesses, but I disagree with their premise that "people aren't made about the stay at home orders, they're mad about a lack of assistance". That was likely true in April, but not many people want to sit locked up in their house even if they get a steady flow of cash from the government. I'm betting most buisnesses would rather earn $1000 by actually selling their products than "earn" $1200 by getting a check from the government.
36
This article is crap, probably should be removed. The quote is from a press release issued by San Mateo County, which is not remotely close to LA. The headline references LA County Sheriff Alex Villanueva but nothing in this article backs up the headline or provides even a quote from him or his office.
21
It does quote Villanueva. Has it been edited?
5
Yes, it must have been in the last 2-3 hours.
1
The top comment in that news thread thinks that people aren’t upset with the order itself but because the government won’t enforce it with an iron fist. Reddit actually believes normal middle class Americans want to see people tased and arrested for leaving their home. These people are scary insane, man.
20
Beware it could be a bot
1
Article is not correct that San Mateo County is not "enforcing" the SAH order. As of now, SMCo doesn't have one, the health officer elected not to join the rest of the Bay Area counties in shutting down early, before the ICU capacity reached 85% for the region. Pretty sure if the county does get a SAH order the sheriff and local officials would be fine enforcing it -they are pretty spineless and all Democrats (I know, I know, we can pretend this isn't political.)
17
before the ICU capacity reached 85% for the region
Is this really true that ALL hospitals are 85% capacity? Maybe I should drive over and take a peek how full they really are but I have a hard time believing all hospitals are near topped off in ICU beds in the greater bay area.
11
Oh no, not at all, they are way lower, and the Bay Area counties (minus San Mateo) acted EARLIER than Newsom's 85% number. Heard on the news last night that San Mateo Co has 24% beds available. Even if a "region" over all is at 85% that doesn't mean a particular county or hospital is. For example, the Southern Cal region had to shut down yesterday but San Diego county still had 20% of ICU beds open.
12
As u/h_buxt and other hospital workers on here have stated, hospitals generally operate at 90 to 95% capacity on a typical day.
7
what do they do if a bus full of people crashes and they need to all be taken to an ICU? how do hospitals normally deal with a large influx of patients at one time and how is COVID influx of patients supposedly different? I'm so sick of the parroting from pro-lockdown that "we are at capacity", no way have hospitals not thought out capacity issues
7
There was a show on CBS I think called “Code Black” which was a fictional drama based on a real-life hospital in Los Angeles whose emergency room regularly goes into “code black” which means that there is a huge influx of people needing emergency treatment and barely enough doctors and beds. So this is a common thing with certain hospitals. I don’t understand how this year became the year of avoiding that shit. Maybe because the show got canceled a couple of years ago?
5
That would be what is referred as a “mass casualty event,” and ERs literally do drills for it. Actually had a real one during my senior practicum for nursing school—I did my capstone at the hospital closest to the STEM school in Colorado that had a shooting in spring 2019. That one was objectively speaking pretty small, but basically all the triage happened in the ER. How it works is that a “mass casualty event” is called in to the nearest ER by ambulance dispatch, at which point the hospital calls it in over the intercom for all available qualified staff to report to the ER immediately. So nurses and doctors from every part of the hospital swarm the ER to help quickly make room by moving other patients into other areas.
Once victims of the mass casualty event arrive, they are immediately triaged in order of urgency—this generally means more serious injury first, BUT if there are like dozens of victims, then those tagged as “black” are not prioritized, because they are largely beyond help (ie someone with a penetrating gunshot wound to the head would be prioritized BEHIND someone with a lacerated femoral artery, because the latter case can be fully saved if you act quickly, whereas the former likely cannot.
Once people are stabilized in the ER, the hospital then evaluates who needs to be admitted on the spot (ie to that hospital’s floor or ICU), vs who can be transferred elsewhere. This is what happened with the STEM shooting—a couple of the victims who were 18+ were admitted to that hospital, while the others who were younger and medically stable enough to transfer were sent to Children’s Hospital in Aurora. So this is what would always happen—you would almost never admit EVERY victim of a mass-casualty event into the same hospital; you would simply take all the victims to the nearest ER and then admit/transfer them to different hospitals from there.
And yes, the other comments are correct: dispatch will be alerted to divert all other ambulance traffic to other hospitals while that ER is dealing with a mass casualty event.
4
what do they do if a bus full of people crashes and they need to all be taken to an ICU?
In a case like that, one ER would not accept all casualties. They would be triaged with the most severe injuries going to the closest or most appropriate trauma center and less severe would go to other hospitals.
2
what do they do if a bus full of people crashes and they need to all be taken to an ICU?
same thing when they went to the ER. they got triaged. hospitals will treat the most critical ones before moving on to the least injured.
moreover, every state already has enough stockpile of ventilator that if something like an influx of patient requiring icu happens (which is itself very unlikely) then they can convert any bed into an icu bed in no time.
remember around the peak of the virus in may-june timeline the army corps of engineers built hundreds of field hospitals in big metro areas and the majority of which received absolutely ZERO patients before being dismantled.
2
Oh, and to answer the second part of your question—the only arguable difference is that they made it sound like Covid was going to be day after day after day of mass casualty events, which obviously would NOT be sustainable. But that isn’t what has actually happened, and it’s also not comparable because people showing up in an ER for Covid aren’t bleeding profusely or missing limbs...basically, a real mass casualty event moves much more quickly, and mere minutes can be the difference between life and death. Even the worst Covid patients you have more time than that to figure out what they need.
2
Anyone keeping a tab on how many sheriffs around the country have refused to enforce these ridiculous rules?
15
So far in California; Riverside County sherriff, Orange County, LA County, San Bernardino County. San Mateo county itself said it wont. Those are just in response to the current lockdown measures, a lot of county sheriffs previously said they wouldn't enforce lockdowns and business closures and may not feel the need to make another statement. There's also counties like the one I live in where the sherriff and other LE agencies have made no statement, but clearly aren't enforcing anything and havent been for months.
The only place I've heard of that said they'd be ramping up enforcement is San Diego county's sherriff.
13
They just announced lockdown in my city and a mayor (city has many mayors) announced he's not shutting down christmas street venues
13
Resist!
12
Where does the money come from and how long does it last? In Canada our deficit this year is projected 380 billion and we have long term structural deficit issues because our economy is smashed harder than my best friend on Boxing Day. For reference, our debt at the start of the year was already 700 billion.
12
You know all these pro lockdown people should give up their entire paycheck to the restaurant industry. It sounds like they can afford afford it and all.
Just reading the comments section made me brain hurt. These fucking people don't know civics and thinks that woman should "suck it up" because there's cases. There's so many heartless bastards out there.
7
So much respect for this sheriff for going up and making a stand against these hypocritical stay-at-home orders.
6
I support them in not enforcing the stay at home orders since it is just a power grab by the tyrants that are currently running this state and quite honestly, the Sheriffs and police have more important things to do like catching real criminals, not telling some teens to wear a mask or busting out a tape measurer to make sure they are standing six feet apart!
4
Thanks for your submission. New posts are pre-screened by the moderation team before being listed. Posts which do not meet our high standards will not be approved - please see our posting guidelines. It may take a number of hours before this post is reviewed, depending on mod availability and the complexity of the post (eg. video content takes more time for us to review).
In the meantime, you may like to make edits to your post so that it is more likely to be approved (for example, adding reliable source links for any claims). If there are problems with the title of your post, it is best you delete it and re-submit with an improved title.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
0
"dEFuNd tHe pOlIcE! ACAB 1312!!!!"
"wAiT WhY wOnT tHeY sHuT tHiNgS DoWn NNNOoooOOOOooOOO!"
"oh, you mean the same folks we vilified and called to defund or disband aren't gonna be there to act in our proxy to force places to shut down and people to mask up? Oh noez!!"
Seems like these agencies have more important things to do, like dealing with actual criminal activity.
They don't even do that last part even a fraction of the way towards a "good job" though, so I don't understand why people expect them to even pretend to do their jobs right.
[deleted]
How about reform the police, and let everyone get back to their lives?
Shut up with your dirty non-sensationalist POV!
I'm still in the ABOLISH them camp, but yeah, everything else you said is spot on.
I'm with ya buddy. Wish they'd do away with firefighters too. Our community has access to tap water, we can start putting out the fires ourselves
[deleted]
Imagine being so shortsighted that you want to get rid of the police. At least you're a real libertarian I guess
Ehh.... Libertarian encompasses more than ancom and ancap. Id say the vast majority of us agree police riding around in tanks is absurd, but Murder, theft, etc? probably oughta have cops for that.
The venn diagram between people who wanted to 'abolish the police' and people who call the cops on people having a birthday party is a near perfect circle these days
^ gold.