Give me the number of deaths you are willing to cause to have your Freedom?

independentusa said:

I really want to know how many deaths you are willing to cause to have your freedom to go and do as you want without face masks and social distancing. We have lowered the expected number of deaths by stay at home,masks and social distancing, but if we go back to life before the epidemic, there will be many more deaths and you may be the one to cause them. If you get the virus and never show signs, you could spread the disease to hundreds of people and if the death rate remains almost 6% of the number you infect will die. I read people cheering for those in Michigan who forced the elected legislature to close using guns to intimidate the elected representatives of the state. A majority wore no masks and the certainly did not socially distance, so I wonder how many will get the virus and spread it. When the gun toters came to the Wisconsin capital to protest, they did not force their way into the building, more than two dozen of those protesters now have the disease and you have to know they passed it to others before they had the signs of the disease show up. So how many of those protesters in Michigan will have the disease and how many people will they kill, perhaps including themselves, when they pass it on. So I ask you, how many people are you willing to send to their deaths so you can have your freedom?

Click to expand...

independentusa said:

1) I really want to know how many deaths you are willing to cause to have your freedom to go and do as you want without face masks and social distancing. We have lowered the expected number of deaths by stay at home,masks and social distancing, but if we go back to life before the epidemic, there will be many more deaths and you may be the one to cause them.

2) If you get the virus and never show signs, you could spread the disease to hundreds of people and if the death rate remains almost 6% of the number you infect will die.

3) I read people cheering for those in Michigan who forced the elected legislature to close using guns to intimidate the elected representatives of the state. A majority wore no masks and the certainly did not socially distance, so I wonder how many will get the virus and spread it. When the gun toters came to the Wisconsin capital to protest, they did not force their way into the building, more than two dozen of those protesters now have the disease and you have to know they passed it to others before they had the signs of the disease show up. So how many of those protesters in Michigan will have the disease and how many people will they kill, perhaps including themselves, when they pass it on.

4) So I ask you, how many people are you willing to send to their deaths so you can have your freedom?

Click to expand...

independentusa said:

I really want to know how many deaths you are willing to cause to have your freedom to go and do as you want

Click to expand...

apdst said:

During WW2, it was over 400,000.

Click to expand...

ecofarm said:

Since when does freedom mean the ability to break the law without consequence? That's not freedom, that's criminal. Criminals being free of responsibility is not freedom for anyone.

Give me a get out of jail free card or give me death?

That's not a thing.

Click to expand...

Termn8or said:

Let's lower the speed limit to 15 MPH, 5 in residential areas.

Think of all the lives you'll save.

Click to expand...

independentusa said:

I really want to know how many deaths you are willing to cause to have your freedom to go and do as you want without face masks and social distancing. We have lowered the expected number of deaths by stay at home,masks and social distancing, but if we go back to life before the epidemic, there will be many more deaths and you may be the one to cause them. If you get the virus and never show signs, you could spread the disease to hundreds of people and if the death rate remains almost 6% of the number you infect will die. I read people cheering for those in Michigan who forced the elected legislature to close using guns to intimidate the elected representatives of the state. A majority wore no masks and the certainly did not socially distance, so I wonder how many will get the virus and spread it. When the gun toters came to the Wisconsin capital to protest, they did not force their way into the building, more than two dozen of those protesters now have the disease and you have to know they passed it to others before they had the signs of the disease show up. So how many of those protesters in Michigan will have the disease and how many people will they kill, perhaps including themselves, when they pass it on. So I ask you, how many people are you willing to send to their deaths so you can have your freedom?

Click to expand...

Termn8or said:

You don't see how millions of Americans being forbidden to earn a living by generally illegal and unConstitutional orders is a threat to freedom?

Click to expand...

ecofarm said:

I don't understand how freedom is lost in this case. A representative democracy is making decisions on the basis of public health. There's no loss of freedom there. Freedom means rights and representation. We still have those.

Click to expand...

independentusa said:

I really want to know how many deaths you are willing to cause to have your freedom to go and do as you want without face masks and social distancing. We have lowered the expected number of deaths by stay at home,masks and social distancing, but if we go back to life before the epidemic, there will be many more deaths and you may be the one to cause them. If you get the virus and never show signs, you could spread the disease to hundreds of people and if the death rate remains almost 6% of the number you infect will die. I read people cheering for those in Michigan who forced the elected legislature to close using guns to intimidate the elected representatives of the state. A majority wore no masks and the certainly did not socially distance, so I wonder how many will get the virus and spread it. When the gun toters came to the Wisconsin capital to protest, they did not force their way into the building, more than two dozen of those protesters now have the disease and you have to know they passed it to others before they had the signs of the disease show up. So how many of those protesters in Michigan will have the disease and how many people will they kill, perhaps including themselves, when they pass it on. So I ask you, how many people are you willing to send to their deaths so you can have your freedom?

Click to expand...

rocket88 said:

Civilians don't count? Especially Jews?

But i guess you did say OVER 400,000. More than 10 also.

Click to expand...

apdst said:

I was referring to US deaths. The Holocaust victims didn't sacrifice their lives for freedom. That's some ****ed up ****.

Click to expand...

ecofarm said:

I don't understand how freedom is lost in this case. A representative democracy is making decisions on the basis of public health. There's no loss of freedom there. Freedom means rights and representation. We still have those.

Click to expand...

rocket88 said:

A pretty good number of British, French, and Russians did.

Click to expand...

Chomsky said:

I will add this:

In the time since the WI 'Liberate!' demonstration, a bit over 1900 WI cases have come up, with 72 attributed specifically to what the infected call "a large gathering" (which is believed to be the demonstration). So, by my math it seems this crowd added almost 4% to the infection totals by that one rally alone. But is that, it? What about their meeting & interactions in planning & organizing the event? And what do they add due to their not following proper mitigation in their daily routines? Do they add 8%? 10%? 20%? And how many fatalities does that translate to?

To call them a 'menace to society' might sound hyperbolic. But I think at the least we can say they are causing us additional harm, suffering, and death. That might fit the definition of 'menace', to some.

From Oxford:

men·ace
/ˈmenəs/
noun
a person or thing that is likely to cause harm; a threat or danger.

Reference: (The Independant U.K.) Coronavirus: 72 people in Wisconsin test positive after attending 'large gathering' as state sees stay at home protests

Click to expand...

Chomsky said:

Exactly. There is no loss of freedom. There is anarchy, though, and armed at that.

Click to expand...

Chomsky said:

I will add this:

In the time since the WI 'Liberate!' demonstration, a bit over 1900 WI cases have come up, with 72 attributed specifically to what the infected call "a large gathering" (which is believed to be the demonstration). So, by my math it seems this crowd added almost 4% to the infection totals by that one rally alone. But is that, it? What about their meeting & interactions in planning & organizing the event? And what do they add due to their not following proper mitigation in their daily routines? Do they add 8%? 10%? 20%? And how many fatalities does that translate to?

To call them a 'menace to society' might sound hyperbolic. But I think at the least we can say they are causing us additional harm, suffering, and death. That might fit the definition of 'menace', to some.

From Oxford:

men·ace
/ˈmenəs/
noun
a person or thing that is likely to cause harm; a threat or danger.

Reference: (The Independant U.K.) Coronavirus: 72 people in Wisconsin test positive after attending 'large gathering' as state sees stay at home protests

Click to expand...

apdst said:

Should these people be arrested? Are they a menace?

Click to expand...

Termn8or said:

You don't see any loss of freedom when governors or mayors dictate lockdowns and business closures with one single word of legislation?

Making many millions of Americans face bankruptcy or loss of a business that might have taken a lifetime to build?

What planet does the liberal-left live on?:shock:

Click to expand...

rocket88 said:

Oh boy...now we start with the racism.

Click to expand...