Horowitz: Is this quarantine or tyranny?

[txradioguy]

Everyone agrees that states have broad internal police power to take action to stop the spread of a public health crisis. You know, kind of like the federal government has power to stop the security and health crisis at our border, yet failed to act upon it for over a year. But are there no limits whatsoever to these internal powers? Can any governor or county executive simply flick his pen and shut every business even if it doesn’t create crowds? Can they unilaterally restrict every aspect of the Bill of Rights indefinitely without any oversight, due process, benchmarks, or transparency?

In Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), the Supreme Court ruled, “It is within the police power of a State to enact a compulsory vaccination law, and it is for the legislature, and not for the courts, to determine.” It therefore held that the state’s mandatory vaccine against smallpox was within its constitutional authority. This built upon the established concept alluded to in the landmark Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) case that “reasonable regulations established directly by legislative enactment as will protect the public health and the public safety.”

However, that same court made it clear that there is a point where states can enact policies in “such an arbitrary, unreasonable manner, or might go so far beyond what was reasonably required for the safety of the public” that they would be outside constitutional bounds.

<snip>

We’ve simply never done this before in our history. These are not mere quarantine laws that supporters cite to justify what is going on today. Quarantine laws traditionally separate an individual or an entire group of people from the general population. What we are doing now, however, is locking down the entire general population.

Whether they use the term or not, governors are ordering nothing short of martial law, shutting down nearly all businesses and churches to the point that there will be no public services for Easter and Passover under any circumstance, and unemployment will surpass the levels of the Great Depression. Yes, there are times when that might be necessary, but the question should require a debate, transparency, time limits, and the production of more evidence about the value of these additional measures, which will undoubtedly grow legs in the coming days.

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/horowitz-quarantine-tyranny/

[txradioguy]

We are failing miserably at this test we are going through for future...permanent...Progressive transgressions on our freedom and our rights.

[txradioguy]

More from the article:

There’s got to be some limit. As the Supreme Court said in the landmark Shelton v. Tucker (1960) case, “Even [when] the governmental purpose [is] legitimate and substantial, that purpose cannot be pursued by means that broadly stifle fundamental personal liberties when the end can be more narrowly achieved.” It can’t be unlimited and indiscriminate, and pronouncing the death penalty on jobs, the economy, and the mental health of hundreds of millions of people is as broad as it gets.

Remember, these governors are just getting warmed up. We’re only two weeks into this phase. At this pace, if we don’t rise up and demand answers, there is no limit to what these politicians might do with their divine right of kings. It’s appalling that Congress and state legislatures are in recess indefinitely, as random executives – from governors and mayors to county supervisors and sheriffs – rule the nation by fiat. It’s time for some real debate and accountability with public input and hearings (remotely, if needed).

All of us are willing to sacrifice for public safety – a lot. But there are limits, and there are serious questions about whether those sacrifices are even helping, or in some instances, downright hurting. Either way, we will never recover from this devastating blow to liberty.

[Bigun]

We are failing miserably at this test we are going through for future...permanent...Progressive transgressions on our freedom and our rights.

  Very much so!

[Polly Ticks]

Excellent article.

[libertybele]

We are failing miserably at this test we are going through for future...permanent...Progressive transgressions on our freedom and our rights.

Our first amendment rights have been thrown out the window (they say temporarily).  It is absolutely imperative that we retain our 2nd amendment rights.

[Absalom]

In a perfect world, Man would intuitively grasp the need to avoid crowding during a plague.
Yet we are not in a perfect world, so persuasion is necessary to sustain the greater good; life itself.
Yet for cranks such as Horowitz, ideology trumps the greater good.

[txradioguy]

Our first amendment rights have been thrown out the window (they say temporarily).  It is absolutely imperative that we retain our 2nd amendment rights.

The first amendment went by the wayside ("temporarily") with barely a whimper.  I hope there is a louder roar if they try to impost the same "temporary" halt to the second amendment.  But I'm not holding out much hope.

[txradioguy]

In a perfect world, Man would intuitively grasp the need to avoid crowding during a plague.
Yet we are not in a perfect world, so persuasion is necessary to sustain the greater good; life itself.
Yet for cranks such as Horowitz, ideology trumps the greater good.

This isn't a plague...it's really not even a pandemic.

And Horowitz isn't a crank. 

[DB]

This isn't a plague...it's really not even a pandemic.

And Horowitz isn't a crank.

It is the very definition of a pandemic.

[txradioguy]

It is the very definition of a pandemic.

Not historically...not even when you look at the flu deaths already this year or what the H1N1 did to us previously.  And our reaction to it has certainly gone way over the top in regards to what is happening.

[DB]

Not historically...not even when you look at the flu deaths already this year or what the H1N1 did to us previously.  And our reaction to it has certainly gone way over the top in regards to what is happening.

The definition of pandemic has nothing to do with how many will die or have died. It has to do with its global coverage in a short time period.

[txradioguy]

The definition of pandemic has nothing to do with how many will die or have died. It has to do with its global coverage in a short time period.

If that's the case then in all honesty there are a lot of other things killing people by the millions all over the world that need to be declared a pandemic before the Chinese Virus does.

[Absalom]

This isn't a plague...it's really not even a pandemic.
And Horowitz isn't a crank.

------------------------------
So:
1) This ain't a plague. / A falsehood beyond dumb!
2) It not even a pandemic. / Even dumber!!
3) Horowitz ain't a crank./ True; he's an absolute zero!
Hey one out of three ain't bad!!!

[Cyber Liberty]

If that's the case then in all honesty there are a lot of other things killing people by the millions all over the world that need to be declared a pandemic before the Chinese Virus does.

You mean like the gun violence epidemic the CDC has spent years and millions of dollars studying, instead of, I dunno, actual "disease?"

[txradioguy]

You mean like the gun violence epidemic the CDC has spent years and millions of dollars studying, instead of, I dunno, actual "disease?"

Exactly.  We can't even get accurate from our own country on what qualifies as a death from Chinese Corona Virus much less thrust what China is putting out or as Dr. Brix and Dr. Fauchi suggested today we go by the Italy model.

At this point there's a distinct feeling they are spitballing and making it up as they go.

[txradioguy]

------------------------------
So:
1) This ain't a plague. / A falsehood beyond dumb!
2) It not even a pandemic. / Even dumber!!
3) Horowitz ain't a crank./ True; he's an absolute zero!
Hey one out of three ain't bad!!!

I'm sorry this is happening to you.

[DCPatriot]

I'm sorry this is happening to you.

Hope it makes you very uncomfortable @txradioguy ... I agree with you totally.

[txradioguy]

Hope it makes you very uncomfortable @txradioguy ... I agree with you totally.

LOL! Nope not at all...we agree with that what we agree on and disagree with that on which we disagree.

It's all good.

[Bigun]

Hope it makes you very uncomfortable @txradioguy ... I agree with you totally.

So do I FWIW.

[roamer_1]

It's tyranny. And to grand applause.

I could never see how America would bow her head and accept her chains without blood.

But I can see it now.

[txradioguy]

It's tyranny. And to grand applause.

I could never see how America would bow her head and accept her chains without blood.

But I can see it now.

[roamer_1]

Precisely right. And it makes me weep.

[DCPatriot]

So do I FWIW.

And that doesn't surprise me one bit!   

[Fishrrman]

I believe the states (not the feds) closed businesses and restricted personal movements during the 1918 Spanish flu epidemic.

So... it's hardly unprecedented.

Restrictions on personal liberties (i.e., freedom of movement)?
Yes, I guess they are.

But... they're necessary and prudent in such times as we are now in.

What will demonstrate whether or not we remain a "free society" will be determined AFTER the virus is gone -- as to whether such restrictions are quickly and FULLY rescinded... or not.