COVID-19 Coronavirus UPDATES, BANS, CLOSURES, ADVISORY, etc.

Hogpatrol said:
Just wanted to let yall know - today I received my Stimulus Package.
It contained two tomato seeds, cornbread mix, a prayer rug, a machine to blow smoke up my ass, two discount coupons to KFC, an "Obama Hope & Change" bumper sticker, and a "Blame it on Bush" poster for the front yard. The directions were in Spanish.

Watch for yours soon.
Click to expand...
I'll go find a Toyota Prius to put the Obama sticker on.
 
thumbnail111.png
 
375 Ruger Fan said:
As of 4/16/20

With Smithfield Foods meat packing plant, mainly pork, shutting down, you have to start wondering about the ripple effect. 3500 workers furloughed or laidoff, a lot of them infected with COVID-19. You have to wonder if there are large pens of swine waiting for slaughter and that won't happen any time soon. They need to be fed, etc. Farmers will have to delay shipping hogs, etc.
.........
Click to expand...

We have had some cases in packing plants.
They are cleaning the facility, isolating positive workers, then changing procedures to allow distancing in the facilities to allow them to continue.
No closures, just modifications of the process.
I doubt they will be as efficient, but they will be producing.
 
New protocol at the range.

IMG_20200415_143609050.jpg
 
BRICKBURN said:
Do you clean each bullet so you won't infect the target? :)
Click to expand...

No, but some of my groups show that they are practicing social distancing. :E Rofl:
 
Last edited:
spike.t said:
Just wondering at the legality of governments destroying thousands of good businesses worldwide.....
.......
Click to expand...

eg. Texas Laws relating to Liability of Health Authorities in these situations (government)

Does the local health authority have any liability in civil court for
losses that persons or businesses suffer because of an order
imposing control measures?
Though the state has had little opportunity to use most of these laws,
if the health authority follows the procedures required by state law, the
authority’s liability should be nonexistent or nominal. The principle of
official immunity will protect governmental officials from lawsuit and
liability in many cases. Protection from liability is one of the important
reasons why the local health authority should ensure that he or she is
properly appointed as described above.

Two laws passed in 2003 may protect a health authority — a “state officer”
— from civil liability arising from the issuance of control measure orders
during an emergency or disaster.

Civil Practice and Remedies Code, §79.003, Disaster Assistance, was
enacted in Senate Bill 513 (Chapter 58, 78th Leg., 2003). It provides
immunity from civil liability for an act or omission when a person is
giving care, assistance, or advice with respect to the management of an
incident that is a man-made or natural disaster that threatens individuals,
property, or the environment and in which the care, assistance, or advice
is provided at the request of local, state, or federal agencies. The act
does not apply to persons who expect or receive compensation from, or
on behalf of, the recipient of the care, assistance, or advice in excess of
reimbursement for expenses. It also does not apply to reckless conduct or
intentional, willful, or wanton misconduct. A health authority issuing control
measure orders may be considered to be involved in “management of an
incident” and therefore covered by this provision.

Government Code, §421.061, Civil Liability, was enacted in House Bill 9
concerning homeland security. It pertains to officers or employees of state
or local agencies who are performing homeland security activities
or volunteers performing homeland security activities at the request or
under the direction of officers or employees of state or local agencies.
The act authorizes persons in either of those capacities to be considered
members of the state military forces and provides immunity from civil
liability while they are performing homeland security activities. For the
act to apply, the activity must be under the procedures or circumstances
described in the governor’s homeland security strategy and must be within
the course and scope of the person’s authority. The act does not apply to
willful or wanton negligence, conscious indifference, or reckless disregard
for the safety of others. Until the governor’s homeland security strategy is
issued, it is not yet clear what activities will be covered or whether health
authorities would be considered officers of the state under this provision.
Local health authorities should consult with the authority’s city or
county attorney on the protections within state law, including the Local
Government Code, and case law on local government liability and
immunity if more specific information is needed.


On the Other Side of the Equation. LIABILITY for Ignoring that Government Order.
(Too many damned jurisdictions to note here.)

A law firms initial take on the matter (USA)
Thinking about ignoring your state or local COVID-19 shutdown orders? Think again. Social-distance measures may create a new source of liability for businesses operating during the COVID-19 pandemic. Infection-based litigation is normally limited to businesses operating in the healthcare sector. But, social-distancing measures to stop the spread of infection may expand that litigation to other sectors.
State and local governments across the country are taking extraordinary measures to combat the spread of COVID-19, a novel coronavirus that can cause life-threatening respiratory illness. Those measures encourage and even mandate “social distance” between people to limit physical transmission of the virus.
Hard-hit states like New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and California have been aggressive in their responses, shuttering businesses, confining people to their homes, and requiring people to stay six feet apart. Common mandates include: quarantines, business and school closures, stay-home orders, curfews, travel restrictions, occupancy limits and physical-distance mandates, among other things.
Meanwhile, federal agencies, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), have been issuing extensive guidance on how to mitigate the spread of the virus.
What does this mean for businesses looking to minimize their liability? In many states, violation of a law can constitute “negligence per se.” What that means is that the law sets the standard of care, not the jury. To establish negligence, the plaintiff only needs to convince the jury that the defendant violated the law, i.e., the “stay-home” order. This essentially relieves a plaintiff from the burden of having to prove that the defendant failed to act reasonably under the circumstances. The court can adopt a law, such as a “stay-home” order, as the standard of care where the purpose of that law is:
  1. to protect a class of persons which includes the one whose interest is invaded, and;
  2. to protect the particular interest which is invaded, and;
  3. to protect that interest against the kind of harm which has resulted, and;
  4. to protect that interest against the particular hazard from which the harm results.
Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 286.

https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/resources-alerts-Is-Violation-of-a-COVID-19-Order-the-Basis-For-Civil-Liability.html
 
Royal27 said:
It was a joke. I went to Zim in 2014 during Ebola and people asked me when I got home was I scared. I had to explain to them that I was closer to Ebola at home in Atlanta than i was while in Zim. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Remember this picture?
The Geography Lesson.
imrs.png
 
TravisB said:
Oh well, I’m not sure what the answer is. I don’t condone the drastic measures that have been taken in some places, but the dreaded social media aside, there’s something to it when refrigerated trucks are being hauled in to store bodies because people are dying so fast. You have the liberal media on one side, and King Chump’s amateur hour Faux News on the other, and the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, where it usually is.
Click to expand...
Your obvious distain for the president aside for the moment, I tend to agree. Per King Chump, he is doing the best he can with what he has and dealing with the constant backbiting by the libs, the lamestream press, mostly libtards, and even from those of us who support him, like I do. He gets it from all sides.
It might pay for those with short term memory issues, just how well this country was doing for the last 3 years despite all the bogus attacks on Trump and attempts to get him out of office by any means possible, legal or not! I can think of no one better equipped to bring America back from this disaster perpetrated on the whole world for whatever reason, than President Trump, like his style or not.
I should think that during times like these we should stand by our president and dispense with the pettiness that occupies the time of so many under better conditions.
Your name calling remarks are most unworthy, unhelpful and very poorly timed.
 
I keep remembering that the alternative to "King Chump" was Crooked Hillary.
 
I am waiting for the Democrat leadership in a Congress to step up and contribute their help and solutions on how this pandemic can be better managed...let them roll up their sleeves and commit to beating this pandemic and put politics aside. What solutions have they provided? Where are they? How are they making an effort that we all need to beat this together? Obsessive compulsive behavior hating Trump and blocking every step possible to work together and undermining every attempt, criticizing every effort, demeaning every statement by the current administration is not the answer. I truly believe the Democratic leadership is so deep into destroying this administration and preventing any reelection of Trump that they see thousands of US deaths and collapse of the US economy as a small price to pay to regain control of the White House. In their mind it is just.....collateral damage.....all for the greater good..Democratic control of the a Congress and White House.
 
BRICKBURN said:
eg. Texas Laws relating to Liability of Health Authorities in these situations (government)

Does the local health authority have any liability in civil court for
losses that persons or businesses suffer because of an order
imposing control measures?
Though the state has had little opportunity to use most of these laws,
if the health authority follows the procedures required by state law, the
authority’s liability should be nonexistent or nominal. The principle of
official immunity will protect governmental officials from lawsuit and
liability in many cases. Protection from liability is one of the important
reasons why the local health authority should ensure that he or she is
properly appointed as described above.

Two laws passed in 2003 may protect a health authority — a “state officer”
— from civil liability arising from the issuance of control measure orders
during an emergency or disaster.

Civil Practice and Remedies Code, §79.003, Disaster Assistance, was
enacted in Senate Bill 513 (Chapter 58, 78th Leg., 2003). It provides
immunity from civil liability for an act or omission when a person is
giving care, assistance, or advice with respect to the management of an
incident that is a man-made or natural disaster that threatens individuals,
property, or the environment and in which the care, assistance, or advice
is provided at the request of local, state, or federal agencies. The act
does not apply to persons who expect or receive compensation from, or
on behalf of, the recipient of the care, assistance, or advice in excess of
reimbursement for expenses. It also does not apply to reckless conduct or
intentional, willful, or wanton misconduct. A health authority issuing control
measure orders may be considered to be involved in “management of an
incident” and therefore covered by this provision.

Government Code, §421.061, Civil Liability, was enacted in House Bill 9
concerning homeland security. It pertains to officers or employees of state
or local agencies who are performing homeland security activities
or volunteers performing homeland security activities at the request or
under the direction of officers or employees of state or local agencies.
The act authorizes persons in either of those capacities to be considered
members of the state military forces and provides immunity from civil
liability while they are performing homeland security activities. For the
act to apply, the activity must be under the procedures or circumstances
described in the governor’s homeland security strategy and must be within
the course and scope of the person’s authority. The act does not apply to
willful or wanton negligence, conscious indifference, or reckless disregard
for the safety of others. Until the governor’s homeland security strategy is
issued, it is not yet clear what activities will be covered or whether health
authorities would be considered officers of the state under this provision.
Local health authorities should consult with the authority’s city or
county attorney on the protections within state law, including the Local
Government Code, and case law on local government liability and
immunity if more specific information is needed.


On the Other Side of the Equation. LIABILITY for Ignoring that Government Order.
(Too many damned jurisdictions to note here.)

A law firms initial take on the matter (USA)
Thinking about ignoring your state or local COVID-19 shutdown orders? Think again. Social-distance measures may create a new source of liability for businesses operating during the COVID-19 pandemic. Infection-based litigation is normally limited to businesses operating in the healthcare sector. But, social-distancing measures to stop the spread of infection may expand that litigation to other sectors.
State and local governments across the country are taking extraordinary measures to combat the spread of COVID-19, a novel coronavirus that can cause life-threatening respiratory illness. Those measures encourage and even mandate “social distance” between people to limit physical transmission of the virus.
Hard-hit states like New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and California have been aggressive in their responses, shuttering businesses, confining people to their homes, and requiring people to stay six feet apart. Common mandates include: quarantines, business and school closures, stay-home orders, curfews, travel restrictions, occupancy limits and physical-distance mandates, among other things.
Meanwhile, federal agencies, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), have been issuing extensive guidance on how to mitigate the spread of the virus.
What does this mean for businesses looking to minimize their liability? In many states, violation of a law can constitute “negligence per se.” What that means is that the law sets the standard of care, not the jury. To establish negligence, the plaintiff only needs to convince the jury that the defendant violated the law, i.e., the “stay-home” order. This essentially relieves a plaintiff from the burden of having to prove that the defendant failed to act reasonably under the circumstances. The court can adopt a law, such as a “stay-home” order, as the standard of care where the purpose of that law is:
  1. to protect a class of persons which includes the one whose interest is invaded, and;
  2. to protect the particular interest which is invaded, and;
  3. to protect that interest against the kind of harm which has resulted, and;
  4. to protect that interest against the particular hazard from which the harm results.
Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 286.

https://www.whiteandwilliams.com/resources-alerts-Is-Violation-of-a-COVID-19-Order-the-Basis-For-Civil-Liability.html
Click to expand...

Thanks....
 
Chago said:
USA now has tested over 3 million people which is 1% of the population. Remember when fake news posts number of tests. It's number of results. So there are days worth of tests that have been taken on top of that. So based on your data above USA is at 10,000 per million after 2 weeks!!!! Those above countries are less than that after months of testing. Key piece of data here is timing.

If I test my entire countries population in 1 week. Or 1 month. Which is more accurate? Entire population tested for a contagious virus with a 10 day incubation period. Which is more accurate? The answer is the one week, because people are going to further spread the virus. So the shorter the time period the tests are done the more accurate it is. So again. To the original point I made. The USA cases are far higher then other countries. Because they are mass testing aggressively.

Other countries are testing for example 100 people per day. And if it shows only 20 new cases today. We will report that. And tomorrow we will test another 100. The USA has conducted millions of tests in a 14 day window. Get a real snap shot or as close as they could to what this virus is actually doing. I would bet my house.
Click to expand...

On March 28 the USA had done 672,449 but you said I was talking garbage and the US had tested over 3 million and were testing millions of tests in a 14 day window as it is important to get test a lot in a short time.
Now almost 3 weeks further they've barely done 2,5 million tests more (3,262,921 as of 15:12 ET 04/16). So they didn't even do close to 3 million tests 19 days days ago and they are certainly not getting that snapshot to see what the virus is actually doing.
 
cpr0312 said:
View attachment 342555
Click to expand...
Not sure which side of the border you're on, but those of us north of the border find that Crown Royal seems to be more popular in the US rather than in Canada.

Personally, I live north of the boarder but prefer south of the border whiskies.

IMG_0146.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 1060 more.
Total: 17,796 (members: 1,110, guests: 16,686)

Forum statistics

Threads
54,066
Messages
1,144,780
Members
93,532
Latest member
Donnie58Q
 

 

 

Proudly sponsored by

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

HENRY GRIFFITHS SAFARIS
HENRY GRIFFITHS SAFARIS
impala hunt!
•••
HENRY GRIFFITHS SAFARIS
HENRY GRIFFITHS SAFARIS
Black wildebeest hunted this week!
•••
C
Cwoody wrote on Woodcarver's profile.
Shot me email if Beretta 28 ga DU is available
Thank you
•••
P
Pancho wrote on Safari Dave's profile.
Enjoyed reading your post again. Believe this is the 3rd time. I am scheduled to hunt w/ Legadema in Sep. Really looking forward to it.
•••
HENRY GRIFFITHS SAFARIS
HENRY GRIFFITHS SAFARIS
check out our Buff hunt deal!

Buffalo Hunt with Henry Griffiths Safaris $10000

Here with is our offer for a hunt of a...
www.africahunting.com www.africahunting.com
•••

Share this page

 
Top