- Quickdraw McLaw
- 49 Comments
- 434 Views
- DNA ties felon to 2001 sex assault case. [RJ]
- Dayvid Figler says, “Let the people kill.” [TNI]
- Daniel Stewart opines on vaccinations and liberty. [TNI]
- The latest mask mandate will be in place for at least two weeks. Anyone gonna take the under? [Las Vegas Sun]
- A Hawaii attorney for the man accused of hitting trooper Micah May talks about expecting the call about his client. [8NewsNow]
Masks.
Mask good, mask bad. Mask good if vaxed, mask does no good.
I don't know. The Pres, Gov and CDC change the tune weekly. Fauchi is a weather vane.
If there were science behind it, I would follow the science. But again, the people who tell us what the science "is" keep changing the tune.
A failure of leadership all around.
10:08-Very interesting post, which seems to(perhaps unconsciously) incorporate some the cadence and lyricism of the beat poets of the 50's and early 60's(particularly, in the first three lines).
A certain form of free association, within the context of a very serious topic.
The first three lines(starting with "masks" and then ending in comparing Fauchi to a weather vane)is in sort of a beat poet style, but then the post transitions to more linear, and less-inspired, standard prose.
Allen Ginsbergesque.
Scientists change their opinions when the data warrants it. Otherwise it wouldn’t be science.
1:27 – I will fix it for you – "Scientists change their opinions when the government officials in charge and/or the teachers union demands it. Otherwise it wouldn’t be politics."
2:58 – You must have never participated in science fairs where hypotheses were tested.
If, as now seems likely, the C19 virus came out of the Wuhan Lab, as a consequence of so-called "gain of function" research, then doesn't it logically follow that "Trusting the Science" is how we got a "global pandemic" in the first place?
This is absolute insanity. Wuhan has nothing to do with the science on masks. The science on masks has not changed – the science on the variants and the vaccine is evolving because (drumroll) it's new and we're learning more about it every day. Wear a mask! What is the worst that can happen? You are minorly inconvenienced? And the best that could happen? You might protect an immunocompromised person. Don't be a dick. Mask up.
Your calling me a dick is not going to make me comply.
Your shaming is not going to work.
Sorry to say that the "science" you "trust" is corrupted by BIGPHARMA and government bureaucrats.
I am not going to comply. Masks DONT work and DONT protect anyone. Period.
You're being lied to and the fact that you can't see it is truly sad. While I may think you are a sheep and feel sorry for you when I see you masked up, I won't ever shame you or call you names Its your right and freedom to choose to wear a mask.
Just as it is mine.
Big pharma doesn't make masks, smartypants. jfc you tinfoil hat weirdos can't even keep your conspiracies and your youtube medicine straight.
When I see you not wearing a mask, I think you're a moron and I will call you names.
I also referred to government bureaucrats, who mandate masks. Apologies that I didn't make that clear. Oh wait, I did make that clear. Now who is truly the moron?
Thanks, but nobody gives a shit what you think. Sticks and Stones and all that.
While this hasn't been handled perfectly, isn't the point of "following the science" to change and adapt based on evidence?
Masks good, then not needed because we've got vaccine rates up.
Then people stop getting vaccinated and Delta shows up, so masks are back to help.
Agreed. Science, like most disciplines, evolves based upon new evidence. Analyzing the world through politics, which demands black and white conclusions, does not fit well with science (or law for that matter), which both demand a look to nuance. That is why this blog makes me so sad for our profession: it looks more like a review journal comment section.
I refuse to believe that more than 75% of the comments here are written by actual lawyers. We definitely get some interlopers who love to inform us of the latest takes from their favorite twitter follow.
by "changing the tune" do you mean saying masks help limit the spread so wear them, to oh numbers are way down so it looks like it's under control so you probably don't need your masks anymore, to oh crap numbers are spiking again so let's wear the masks again?
The CDC released its data today that prompted the shift in its mask guidance.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/30/health/covid-cdc-delta-masks.html
Lost in the debate is disclosure of the goal here. Remember flattening the curve? Once that was accomplished, another objective was added, and so on. Where are we now, is stopping the spread and getting to zero positivity the new goal? That's like trying to stop the spread of a cold or the flu…remember, this is an influenza strain.
Death rates are very low, meaning that the survival rate of even the Delta variant is very high. If the vaccinated are now getting infected, as has been reported, and spreading the virus as well, then the vaccine makers have more work to do. Shoving masks on everyone's face will not get us to a better vaccine and is more symbolic and oppressive than medically effective at this point given scientific studies on masks. The political leaders need to stop pitting the people against each other and start making decisions that move us forward. If they can't, then they need to be voted out.
@ 10:42. I agree. I am the one who continually admonishes that unless you're a licensed attorney or law student, then STAY OFF THIS BLOG! Go port your nonsense to Parler and Faux Newz. Quaere: Would a requirement to wear masks survive a Daubert challenge? I believe so. I believe most attorneys would agree with that statement. And if you don't know what Daubert is, then you're not an attorney, so, again: STAY OFF THIS BLOG!
I am wearing a mask. But it seems that most have forgotten that early in the pandemic, we were told that the science showed that masks are ineffective and urged the general population to just wash hands and don't touch your face. I clearly recall Fauci and others making the statement. If you doubt, and have spare time on your hands, could probably find that statement on video, probably in the range of March to June 2020.
@1042 and 1113
Yes, because licensed attorneys cant possibly disagree with your highnesses. Holy shit, you are arrogant and probably believe that because Betsy Gonzalez ruled against you once, that she is a terrible judge that refuses to follow the law.
Sorry, but attorneys differ in their opinions and analysis involving these issues, just like non-attorneys and just the same as when they walk into court to argue two sides of an issue. But, unless you graduated Boyd '13, you should know this.
Get off your self appointed pedestal and STOP BOSSING the non-attorneys around. You're no better than the trolls.
How dare you, 1:20. You bow to Boyd '13.
@1218
Well said. The point is that when the people stop complying, doing what their told at every turn, the government moves the goalposts. When the "authorities" can't agree, many choose to do nothing. For me and mine, we dont trust or believe the government bureaucrats and choose to discuss these matters with out own doctors, who aren't afraid of HCQ and Ivermectin, because it might actually cure cases of this thing.
Sincerely,
NOT WEARING A MASK
http://www.lasvegasdoctorsblog.blogspot.com
12:18–You claim that we should ignore what politicians tell us. But what you are really saying is to ignore what democratic politicians tell us, but to instead be slavishly compliant with what republican politicians tell us.
You, of course, claim otherwise, and attempt to act intelligent, independent, and even somewhat noble, by stressing we have a responsibility to ignore all government officials, and polarized political opinions, and instead rely on what our doctors tell us.
I call bullshit on that. If you asked your doctor, and they suggested that you mask up and vaccinate, you would ignore that, and wait till you have an appointment with a doctor who supports you in your decision not to mask up and not be vaccinated.
Everyone claims they are independent, intelligent, and thus relying on science, but truth is almost no one really delves into any of the research. As much as everyone claims they ignore, and even despise, politicians, there is a fascinating dynamic out there which suggests that many people are almost completely controlled, and brain-washed, by the idiot sound-bite politicians in both parties.
If you are a democrat, you vaccinate and mask up, and you spout what your talking head politicians, news commentators, and hand-picked medical "experts" spout on CNN.
And if you are a republican, you DON'T vaccinate, you don't mask up, and you spout what your talking head politicians, news commentators, and hand-picked medical "experts" spout on FOX.
But although everyone bellows about sound science, and that they reject what politicians and political commentators say, many people listen to these commentators and politicians hours per day, but I have not yet met too many people who have actually done a dep dive into any of the empirical studies.
I have done my best at such attempt, but, admittedly, it is very slow going, and can be quite difficult and compacted. The bulk of what I've read clearly leans in favor of vaccinating, but some lean the other way.
Some of us simply don't trust whatever Fauci says. The lockdowns were a crime against humanity and did nothing good, as hundreds of years of pandemic science apparently predicted. Flatten the curve my ass. Trump deserved to lose for going along with that.
"simply." Couldn't have said it better myself.
@10:42 and 11:13. This is the Las Vegas Law Blog. It isn't the Las Vegas Lawyers only blog. This blog is for the legal community to chime in to. Just because you passed the bar doesn't mean that your now some sort of untouchable deity whose opinion is unquestionable.
But for taxes and chilly weather, I'd put Sweden above Florida as my next stop:
As the CDC urges Americans to mask up against the Delta variant, Sweden’s chief epidemiologist has argued that more data is needed about the strain’s infectiousness. His mask-free nation is hovering at zero Covid deaths per day.
You should definitely go to Sweden…."COVID-19 on the rise in Swedish cities as Delta outbreaks dominate" according to Reuters.
BREAKING: New data coming out of Singapore shows that three-quarters of the new COVID-19 cases are among the fully vaccinated, so this is clearly not a “pandemic of the unvaccinated,” as President Joe Biden has said.
#TRUMP/DESANTIS2024
Over the last year the goal has moved from "flatten the curve" to "blind obedience". What a strange trip it's been.
Do they speak English in Sweden, which side of the road do they drive on, and is U.S. currency accepted? Asking for a friend.
When I was there a couple of years ago I didn't have any problems finding people that spoke English (and went out of their way to be helpful). I can't say the same about the people I encountered in Germany.
I don't remember the side of the road they drove on but have a vague recollection it was the same as in the U.S.
As to currency, most of Europe (at least the western nations) are members of the EU and use the Euro as a common currency. When I was there they didn't take U.S. currency directly but there were plenty of currency exchange places to do the exchange. Their ATM's issued Euro's and did the conversion with your bank to withdraw dollars from your bank account. Whether your bank (or credit card) charges a foreign exchange fee is a policy set by the bank (or credit card issuer).
I can't wrap my mind around any attorney trusting BigPharma. How many billion dollar judgements does Mark Lanier need to rack up before it becomes obvious that BigPharma is toxic. Here, with the shots, they have complete immunity, so they have zero downside risk and huge upside filthy profit bonanza. Profits over people.
@718pm
YEEEEESSSS!
124 here.
As for me and mine, our doctor (chosen over several months of research) is NOT beholden to BIGPHARMA or the Govt. bureaucrats.
As for @202pm, your kidding yourself by limiting everyone to R or D. There are a whole slew of Americans that dont trust most of both parties.
Government and their shills, the politicians and bureaucrats, and their partners, BIGPHARMA and the mainstream media are the enemy of real americans, sheep and non-sheep alike. The sheep just dont realize it yet. Its ok, you will all be awoken soon enough.
you know you are a bad dude when your attorney and family don't even appear to be upset that police had to shoot you
I do not think that they are not upset; however I did get the impression that they are not surprised. As someone who has had clients lost into drugs, mental illness and/or crime, you truly have affection for them but resignation when you did all that you could do and yet fear that this outcome is very possible.
Not trying to make anyone feel bad, but how do criminal defense attorneys feel knowing they got the last charges dismissed for this guy and now he is responsible for death of a trooper?
We should definitely arrest people for the bad things they will do. It could be called a precrime unit, perhaps relying on a panel of futureseers who would determine who to arrest.
Yes, I think there's a movie with John Travolta's closet mate that addresses this. The biggest precrime right now is all the un-vaxxed who are slaughtering grannies across the land. Off to the camps! Take the SUV-driving Polar Bear killers, too!
@1:28 yes, it's called the Minority Report!
12:50, and their lay person moral grand-standing(while seemingly totally oblivious to the constitutional safeguards of criminal defendants) is an example of what another poster has pointed out–that as many as 75% of the posters on this blog may be non-lawyers.
No lawyer would offer the shop-worn yarn of: how can this attorney represent someone who they know may be responsible for causing something really bad?
I suppose the poster will claim I missed their main point–that after some charges were dismissed, the defendant is accused of something else bad.
Yeah, okay, fine. That makes all the difference in the world. You're right. How can lawyers represent people who are accused of doing bad things.
Okay, genius. Great point.
1:16–Uh, are you using that new thing known as…what is it again…sarcasm?
1:16 perhaps needs to be more direct before 12:50 understands the absurdity of what they posted.
To make the point clear, tell 12:50 that you are forming a law firm which will only represent people accused of doing really good things that benefit others greatly.
Bankruptcy Judge Beesley from Reno just announced today publicly a rather sudden retirement effective as of the end of August 2021: https://www.nvb.uscourts.gov/news-rss/announcements/2021/0730-retirement/ Not sure if this is health-related or what, but I certainly hope not. He was always a very nice guy.
and they call it a "juris doctorate" degree. nope!
Sad to see him retire, because besides him and Judge Spraker (who's home district is Alaska, not here), the bankruptcy judges are a joke. Although smart, they are mean, condescending, and won't hesitate to mentally shrink every practitioner before them to three inches tall.
If they do authorize a replacement, let's hope the process doesn't take over a year, like it frequently does. Bring in someone fast that's already been through the application process/background checks and people know, like Brian Shapiro or someone else local (and NO, I'm not Brian). And someone who is decent dealing with other people as well.