Avatar feed
Responses: 7
LTC Dccs
5
5
0
Interesting article. You’re right no one not admitted to a hospital is really “quarantined”, just self isolated. However given the resistance of many folk especially Americans, not sure there won’t be a major uprising if govt started really quarantining people. I can already hear one side yelling fascists and the other communists and blah blah blah
(5)
Comment
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
SSG Robert Webster
11 mo
LTC (Join to see) Here is the thing though - To legally quarantine someone in the US (and in most other localities, like Germany and France) the individual either has to be ill, to have been in known contact with, or come from an area with an infection. The key to the third one (which is actually the one that causes all or most of the ruckus) is actual enforcement; and guess who was against actual enforcement in the beginning? The very 'experts' and other senior political leaders that are screaming about it now, yet are still not actively participating or enforcing it; and that includes many in the medical community, especially those in health enforcement.
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
1SG Claims Assistant
4
4
0
If the issue is how long people are infectious, then I would say the quarantine period could be adjusted to approximate the length of time isolation is necessary to prevent spread. But if the issue is non-compliance, that is a matter for legislation. Laws need to be made and have teeth if you want to really enforce this. The template would be the laws states have for people who knowingly engage in risky behavior when they are HIV-positive.
(4)
Comment
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
SSG Robert Webster
11 mo
1SG (Join to see) There are already laws in place, the problem is that the authorities are not starting with the basic step of actually issuing quarantine orders. Instead of issuing orders to the ill and possibly ill (possible carriers) they are asking people or demanding people to isolate themselves whether they are ill or not. Demanding or mandating that people that are not ill or of known exposure is the sticking point to many people and is a violation of their rights as well.
Bottom line, the authorities are not exercising their lawfully mandated enforcement powers.

We do not need more laws in this area.
(1)
Reply
(0)
1SG Claims Assistant
1SG (Join to see)
11 mo
SSG Robert Webster - My point is that they are attempting to enforce a form of curfew on everybody, infectious or not, by executive fiat. That is unconstitutional in many states.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
SSG Robert Webster
11 mo
1SG (Join to see) - Exactly and that is why they appear to have deliberately lost control at the beginning of this, by not enforcing their legal authority in an appropriate manner.

What does it say in the current law - those that are proven to be ill, those that have been in known contact with those so diagnosed, and those that have traveled in a defined known infectious area being actually placed under a quarantine order.

They had the legal authority to do so, and still do. The problem as you have noted is that they are not using their given power appropriately within the law. Only if they would properly execute the office that they have been appointed to; and that goes from the local health authority, to the state health authority, to the national health authorities at the CDC, the NIH, and ending at the Office of the Surgeon General (USPHS).
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Lt Col Charlie Brown
4
4
0
What they are doing isn't really quarantining and that's part of the reason it isn't working
(4)
Comment
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
SSG Robert Webster
11 mo
Lt Col Charlie Brown Thank you, thank you, thank you.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close