TexasCHLforum.com

Killadocg23 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 6:33 pm You “anti-maskers” are so funny it’s comical. Literally funny.

AI Knew an Anti masker who didn’t take it serious. And the virus got the best of him. He was one of those “I ain’t scared of no virus, ain’t no virus gone take me out etc it’s fake blah blah .He is 6ft deep now. You know who hurts the most now? His family.

I am not sure I understand how this is comical or humorous in any way. First, I would like to clarify who you mean by "anti-maskers". Is that people who who do not want to wear masks, people who believe that you cannot require them to wear masks, or people who believe that masks do not protect anyone effectively?

I am a firm believer that masks do not provide protection to ANYONE except in very rare cases. If the virus is airborne as claimed, a mask that does not seal against the skin with an airtight seal will not stop the person wearing the mask from getting a virus. I was trained by the Army many years ago in how to survive in a chemical, biological, or nuclear contaminated environment. We wore a face mask that we were taught to clear the mask and then seal it when we put it on. I know that a cloth mask that does not seal cannot stop me from getting the virus. Knowing the size of the virus, we can also state that most cloth masks do not filter finely enough to stop the virus even if it were sealed.

There is a claim that the mask is not to protect the wearer (which contradicts other claims made but we can accept it for now) but is designed to protect others from germs the wearer might spread. But most people do NOT have the corona virus. It is less than 1 person in 20 by the worst estimates. Obviously the mask cannot protect from them. That means that the mask can only protect from 5% of the people in the nation, and not even from all of them since not all are contagious. There was a claim that the virus is contagious even if you are asymptomatic. There is NO evidence of this at all at this time. There never can be because we have not done nearly enough contact tracing to verify who spread the disease and was asymptomatic. But even if it is true, we are still talking that the mask can only protect from 5% of the population. There is also a problem that the mask cannot stop expelled virus if it is smaller than it filters to. This is answered by pointing out that the virus is actually not airborne, but is carried by water droplets on the breath. The water droplets are large enough for the average cloth mask to stop. But there is a study (from Johns Hopkins IIRC) that pointed out that some of the current cloth masks being pushed or mandated actually helped spread the virus instead of stopping it because they broke up the water droplets which enhanced the spread of the virus.

So, there is scientific evidence that masks only help when it is a person who has the virus and is contagious and the mask is designed to not break up the water droplets. That is a very small percentage of the population and the masks being worn. So, what is comical about people believing in science and not wanting to wear masks?

You will note that I am not addressing the authority of the government to mandate mask wearing or stay at home orders for the population in general. I do not believe they have that authority but I would save that debate for some other time. I support the right of any person or business to make any rules they want for entering their property. If I disagree with their requirements, I go elsewhere.

Texas_Blaze wrote: ↑Wed Mar 24, 2021 7:49 pm Trying to understand the double mindedness in touting a business private property right to require masks & opposing that same business if they put up 30.06/30.07

This is 100% alright in my opinion. They have the right to require masks or ban guns. I have the right to shop there or not depending how I feel about the decision made in either case.

I agree that some others seem to have a cognitive dissonance in their opinions.

Deitz83 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 22, 2021 11:16 am Or if you need to hire a home care person. Can you discriminate and choose the person you want to associate with? Yes...happens every minute of the day.
My cousin does home healthcare and travels in rural areas in the east coast. She has gone to countless homes with confederate flags hanging on the front porch. After knocking on the door and telling the patient she is there to provide care. They refuse to let a person of color enter their home and provide care. She tells them that no one else will be coming out to give them their meds and if they refuse care they are taking their health in their own hands. Many have family members that help defuse the situation. Others don't get the care they need. I am not sure how many get sicker or die. My cousin is a health care professional. Providing care is her main goal. She does not judge people for their political or racial beliefs.

I am glad your cousin is a professional and handles this situation that way. It is a good way to handle it. But, as I understand it and I could be wrong, federal law prohibits discrimination in hiring and applies to cases like this. Obviously, the law only comes into play when someone files a legal complaint about it but my point was that the law does override their right to do this.

Tex1961 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 21, 2021 7:52 pm

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Sun Mar 21, 2021 7:45 pm

Tex1961 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 11, 2021 1:32 pm My business, my rules. I can kick you out anytime for any reason.

Unless the "you" is an off duty cop and is being kicked out for carrying. In that case the business would be liable for a civil penalty if such an action were taken. Certain classes of individuals are special and your rules don't apply to them.

Aww come on, now you’re just nitpicking. Of course a business has to follow the laws and I’m no exception. My house, my business I make the rules but I’m still bound by the rules and laws of the land. Geez.

I believe this is the point he is making. The rules should be "my property, my rules", whether it is my home or my business. Why do we have these laws that interfere with it? If the cop is off-duty, why does he have any special privileges? I pointed this out elsewhere when I said that my right to freedom of association is being infringed by laws that require me to allow certain customers in my business, even if I have to spend my money to make it possible for them to enter or lose other customers.

As a retired cop, I do know one possible answer, in Texas, why certain off duty officers must be allowed in with their guns. There is a Texas law that says any officer MUST take action when a crime occurs in his presence or view AND in his jurisdiction. It makes sense to me that you cannot disarm an officer who might be called on to respond to a crime. And as we all know, the crime might not be in your business but might be between your business and where he had to leave his firearm. I can understand officers in this one case. But the law doesn't apply to just off-duty officers in their jurisdiction and that is a problem. If a Dallas police officer is in San Antonio on vacation, he has no legal requirement to respond so the argument doesn't really apply.

So we come up with the argument that the government can make you disregard your own rules on your own property. And if they can do it in one case, how do you limit when they can do it? If they can do it to your business, can they do it to yoru home? And before you answer that, consider if you have a need to take in a boarder to help you financially for some reason. Or if you need to hire a home care person. Can you discriminate and choose the person you want to associate with?

OneGun wrote: ↑Thu Mar 11, 2021 1:32 pm My wife and I know several small business owners. These owners have received feedback from customers that if they require masks, these customers will shop elsewhere.

It's a really unfortunate situation. These business owners are trying to survive, but a couple of them are in the high-risk category for Covid and do not have other people to manage their businesses.

Some stores are receiving just the opposite feedback. If they do not "require" customers to wear masks, and enforce it, then these people would shop elsewhere. H.E.B. caved and announced they would change their policy from request to require.

I do not have a problem with a business owner making the decision either way, but both parties that threaten the business owner are wrong, IMO. I might feel the same as they do (and shop elsewhere if I disagree with the store position), but threatening in advance to get them t pick my way is wrong.