Another Covid Post

[Captain Bill Burt]

I have to admit, this whole mandating masks thing makes me more likely to not wear one.  

OTH, if they were saying masks weren't allowed, I would be more likely to go buy one and wear it.

Does that make me a contrarian?

[Birdgun Quail, SASS #63663]

Why do I have to worry about pointing my gun at you?  I know my gun's not loaded.  I don't like that rule.

 

 

 

.

[Utah Bob #35998]

1 hour ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

I have to admit, this whole mandating masks thing makes me more likely to not wear one.  

OTH, if they were saying masks weren't allowed, I would be more likely to go buy one and wear it.

Does that make me a contrarian?

Makes you an American pretty much.

[Utah Bob #35998]

6 hours ago, Roscoe Regulator said:

Oh well, how does that work? If you refuse or have no mask? Do you get arrested for disrespect? If I was an LEO, I think I would want some authority rather than be expected to be a bully.

Hard to say. If they refused to comply and went ballistic you might have a disturbing the peace charge. 
Some of these emergency orders they’re issuing may not have any legal teeth. Depends on how the state or county promulgated it.

Some officials think they have more power than they do. 

[Utah Bob #35998]

On 4/27/2020 at 9:32 PM, Yul Lose said:

So May 1st there is a county wide face mask requirement if you are out in public with any chance of coming within six feet of anyone. I’ve been wearing a bandana tied around my neck and if asked I’ll raise it up and wear it across my mouth. I won’t put it over my nose because I can’t breath with it like that. Anyway the wording of the notice by the county is pretty vague and I’m wondering how many citations are going to be issued for not wearing your mask in the proper fashion. I saw one woman the other day wearing a scuba mask with snorkel and I’m pretty sure there’s not a filter in the snorkel or mask so the protection factor with one of those would be pretty small, IMO, of course. It’s going to be interesting.

I exercise by walking laps around the parking lot here in the apartment complex. Just outside the fence is a trail that runs alongside the light rail tracks. It is heavily used by joggers and groups of strolling Millenials. There’s no way I’d go bare faced out there. But here in the parking lot I can easily keep away from the occasional dog walker.

(By the way, the first case of a Covid positive dog was here in Charlotte)   

[Tyrel Cody]

6 hours ago, doc roy l. pain said:

 He also said that businesses could refuse service or ask you to leave for non compliance. 

 

And I will promptly take my business elsewhere, just like I did last Saturday at Lowes

 

 

 

I do not plan to wear one unless

 

1) My fellow Church members ask me to at Church; I don't foresee that happening though.

 

2) My fellow shooters ask me to at a match so that they feel more comfortable attending.

 

[Captain Bill Burt]

1 hour ago, Birdgun Quail, SASS #63663 said:

Why do I have to worry about pointing my gun at you?  I know my gun's not loaded.  I don't like that rule.

 

 

 

.

LOL. Pointing your 'unloaded' gun at someone 'might' be perfectly OK.  Depends upon who you're pointing it at. 

 

Joking aside, you don't have a constitutional right to point your gun at whomever you please.  You do have a constitutional right to liberty unless it's removed through due process.   Have the citizens of states that are under lockdown been given due process?  Has their liberty been infringed upon?  I think the answers are no and yes, in that order. 

[Captain Bill Burt]

36 minutes ago, Utah Bob #35998 said:

Makes you an American pretty much.

One of the reasons I love this country.  It's full of ornery contrarian old farts who don't like being told what to do.

[doc roy l. pain]

17 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

One of the reasons I love this country.  It's full of ornery contrarian old farts who don't like being told what to do.

I look at wearing a mask like someone is trying to bully me. I don’t go for that crap. 

[Birdgun Quail, SASS #63663]

15 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

LOL. Pointing your 'unloaded' gun at someone 'might' be perfectly OK.  Depends upon who you're pointing it at. 

 

Joking aside, you don't have a constitutional right to point your gun at whomever you please.  You do have a constitutional right to liberty unless it's removed through due process.   Have the citizens of states that are under lockdown been given due process?  Has their liberty been infringed upon?  I think the answers are no and yes, in that order. 

No law, or right, but common sense tells me why I don't point even an unloaded gun at anybody.   I wear a mask for the same reason, even though I'm not sick.  It's for your well being, Capt Bill, not mine.

[Captain Bill Burt]

2 minutes ago, Birdgun Quail, SASS #63663 said:

No law, or right, but common sense tells me why I don't point even an unloaded gun at anybody.   I wear a mask for the same reason, even though I'm not sick.  It's for your well being, Capt Bill, not mine.

It's not really about the mask Birdgun.  It's about government officials exceeding their authority and issuing orders they shouldn't be issuing.  Like making it illegal to go to church and ticketing people for sitting in their cars at a church.  All that stuff is clearly unconstitutional.

 

Is it a good idea to wear a mask during this epidemic?  Maybe.  Does that mean the authorities have the right to order you to wear one?

 

It's a good idea to exercise three times a week, does that mean the government can order you to do that?

[Birdgun Quail, SASS #63663]

1 minute ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

It's not really about the mask Birdgun.  It's about government officials exceeding their authority and issuing orders they shouldn't be issuing.  Like making it illegal to go to church and ticketing people for sitting in their cars at a church.  All that stuff is clearly unconstitutional.

 

Is it a good idea to wear a mask during this epidemic?  Maybe.  Does that mean the authorities have the right to order you to wear one?

 

It's a good idea to exercise three times a week, does that mean the government can order you to do that?

Sigh.  Okay.  You win.

[Captain Bill Burt]

4 minutes ago, Birdgun Quail, SASS #63663 said:

Sigh.  Okay.  You win.

I'm not trying to win Birdgun.  I'm expressing my opinion on what's going on.  You're certainly entitled to feel differently about the situation with no hard feelings on my part. 

 

I guess I am a bit puzzled about what the 'sigh' is for though.  Do you disagree with the idea of constitutionality and believe these orders are perfectly legit, or are you of a mind that legit or not we should probably be doing it because you believe it's the right thing to do?

 

Again, I have no desire to be rude to you, I'm just respectfully (I hope) expressing what I think is going on here.

I think it's unconstitutional for a governor to dictate what can and can't be sold in a store because she has declared a state of emergency, ie you can sell alcohol, but not paint or seeds.

 

I think it's unconstitutional for a governor to order people to remain at home, or to order them to wear certain things.  

 

I think it's unconstitutional to forbid people to attend church, or to forbid them from assembling.

 

I don't see why you and I can't be in agreement here.  We both know there is a public health emergency.  Opinions may differ on the severity of the emergency, but we are in one beyond dispute.  I think you and I both agree on that.

 

I hope we can agree to nicely disagree about what that means for the government.  I remember a USSC ruling from way back that basically said emergencies allow the government to exercise powers that typically are dormant, but emergencies do not allow the government to create new powers for itself.

[Captain Bill Burt]

9 hours ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

Did some legislature somewhere pass a law mandating masks?  Or are elected officials just deciding they have the authority to tell citizens what they have to wear?

 

I question the legality of both the shelter in place 'orders' and the mandates requiring folks to wear masks. 

 

I plan on hitting the lake for some fishing tomorrow, without a mask.

[Cypress Sun]

18 minutes ago, Birdgun Quail, SASS #63663 said:

No law, or right, but common sense tells me why I don't point even an unloaded gun at anybody.   I wear a mask for the same reason, even though I'm not sick.  It's for your well being, Capt Bill, not mine.

 

I get it Birdgun, trust me I do. It's not about being subjugated into wearing a face mask. It's so that if someone is asymptomatic, they don't spread the virus and it could also protect the wearer from the virus. I personally don't view it as being subjugated or being forced to wear one. I'll do it for what little self protection if provides for me and for the protection that it provides others. Is it an inconvenience, yes, yes it is.

 

I wear my seat belt when driving. I keep my vehicle in good working order with good brakes and safety equipment. When I smoked cigarettes, I tried not to smoke near non smokers. I don't do this because some government asshole told me to. I do it for self preservation and to try to prevent others from incurring injury due to my negligent actions.  

[Warden Callaway]

I figure unless you're on a space mission or part of a scientific team in the Antarctic for 4 years,  you're going to get exposed to the virus.  

 

The mask is just another placebo and likely do more harm than good.  Inadequate home made mask not worn properly.  Sneeze or caugh into it. Or just breathing. It collects the virus.  You adjust or handle your mask then handle a jar of peanut butter.   Next guy picks up the jar and now he's got the virus. 

 

 

 

[Dirty Dan Dawkins]

13 hours ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

I plan on hitting the lake for some fishing tomorrow, without a mask.

 
Hit me up next time you need a fishing buddy....

[Captain Bill Burt]

I'm always ready to fish Dan.  The lake is only a couple of minutes from the house, so I'm down there all the time.  Next time you're in the area let me know and we'll go catch some together!

[MizPete]

I figure a property owner has the right to say what happens on his premises.  That's why I carry the damn bandana.  If they want me to wear it to access the property, I'll tie it on.  Is it effective?  Irrelevant.  It doesn't cost me a thing.  Now Governors saying I have to stay home while the State economy tanks is a different situation altogether.

[Dubious Don #56333]

Oh. We lawyers now?

Most States seem to be relying on their "emergency" statutes, either listed in their State's Constitution or, laws passed by the legislature. NONE of those trumps the Constitutional protections of the enumerated rights listed. United States Code Title 18, section 242; Deprivation of rights under color of law. Its a felony. You use "The law" to deprive some hapless citizen of their civil rights, you can go to jail. The US AG has been very clear on this.

 

Of course they been using "reasonable" or "Common sense" to whittle away at our rights for some time now.

 

Penalties. Again, most of these penalties for violating masks, hold yer breath in public, stay at home, essential travel.....I bet you find as I did there are no such penalties listed under these statutes so police have reverted to "offenses against public order" laws. Citations issued would go in front of a judge. Under the current circumstances it would be a sucker bet to go against what a judge wouldn't or would do.

 

There's a difference between being right and being legal. You get the right sort of cop, you get one answer. You get the other sort....well, that's how YouTube keeps making money LOL. I think its all going to be a moot point here shortly. I'm sure they have a totally different and new crisis scheduled for June. Maybe July......
 

[Subdeacon Joe]

[Captain Bill Burt]

I think a big cowboy match would be the perfect venue to test the constitutionality of these edicts.

 

I can see it now. Governor of state X get’s a call from local LE.
 

‘Governor there’s going to be a big event held in defiance of your order’

 

’What? Well go arrest them Chief’

 

’Governor there will be about 200 of them’

 

’So a small crowd, should be easy Chief.’

 

’Governor they’re all Cowboys, all of them will have at least four firearms each and several hundred rounds of ammunition.’

 

’Chief don’t we have a nice Pride demonstration somewhere we can break up instead.’

[Subdeacon Joe]

5 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

Chief don’t we have a nice Pride demonstration somewhere we can break up instead.’

 

A governor would never dare face the political danger of breaking up a Pride event.  He'd juggle 5 live rattlesnakes and 2 full hornets nests before he would attempt such a thing.

[Utah Bob #35998]

I will wear a mask because it is my choice, whether or not the government has the authority to mandate it. I also don’t drive after I’ve been drinking. Not because it’s illegal but because it’s irresponsible and dangerous, both to myself and others.

Refusing to do something which is reasonably prudent just to protest the fact that the government has made it a requirement seems silly in my opinion.

Cutting off one’s nose to spite the face, as the expression goes.

[Chicken Rustler, SASS #26680]

I just don't get it. Why are so many people so eager to risk the lives of the ones they care about just to prove they're a tough guy and the government can't tell them what to do? Are they really taking away your freedom or are you just looking for something to whine about? Yes it's called a stay-at-home order, but you're not locked up in your house. There are limits but you can still go places and do things, the whole point is to keep everybody from going to the places where crowds gather. Do you protest when the Fire Marshal says you can't have as many people as you want in a building? Do you yell about your freedom when they cordon off a perimeter around a bomb threat? What's the difference between that and this? There are some specific instances in some places where they are going way overboard, but instead of protesting those particular instances people are using them as an excuse to protest everything. Everybody likes to say we're doomed because the new generations of kids are so entitled, but that's not what I'm seeing. My grandfather left his farm to grow wild during both World Wars, and he never questioned whether it was the right thing to do to sacrifice everything for the good of his country and his fellow Americans. If previous generations of Americans had been this unwilling to put up with a little inconvenience, much less a lot of hardship, we would be living in a very different world right now.

[Subdeacon Joe]

17 minutes ago, Chicken Rustler, SASS #26680 said:

I just don't get it. Why are so many people so eager to risk the lives of the ones they care about just to prove they're a tough guy and the government can't tell them what to do?

 

Here in Sonoma County, CA the population is around half a million.  We have had about 250 total cases, of which about half have recovered so far.  Maybe two dozen in the hospital, and two deaths.  We have had almost two months of house arrest, county mandates for "social distancing," masks required in buildings other than your home, parks closed, marijuana shops open, liquor stores open, churches closed, beaches closed.  

We are "eager to risk" because we see that the measures make no sense here.  Maybe in NY City and greater NY City Metro Area, maybe in Chicago or San Francisco, or Los Angeles, but, news flash!, our republic is not limited to those cities.  

Notice that just about all the horror stories are coming out of NY?  Why does NY have over 10% of the cases and deaths?  Why treat Modoc County, or Sonoma County, the same as NY City?

The Gav threatened to shut down all the beaches in CA because lots of people went to the beach on a hot weekend. Looking at the photos, yes, there were a lot of people there, but for the most part the small groups of friends or family were at least "socially distanced" from the other little clusters.  Why is it safe for them to be in a house, but not at the beach?

San Diego opened the beaches, but you can't sit down or sunbathe, you have to keep moving.  How does that make sense?  San Francisco opened golf courses to people for sitting and reading or sunbathing, but not for golf. Again, how does that make any sense?  Stores told "This you can still sell, but THESE packaged goods you may not."  Say  what?  I can buy the box of popsicles but not the frozen green beans just across the aisle?  

Random rule by caprice and whim are not conducive to effective government.  

[Chicken Rustler, SASS #26680]

23 minutes ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

 

Here in Sonoma County, CA the population is around half a million.  We have had about 250 total cases, of which about half have recovered so far.  Maybe two dozen in the hospital, and two deaths.  We have had almost two months of house arrest, county mandates for "social distancing," masks required in buildings other than your home, parks closed, marijuana shops open, liquor stores open, churches closed, beaches closed.  

We are "eager to risk" because we see that the measures make no sense here.  Maybe in NY City and greater NY City Metro Area, maybe in Chicago or San Francisco, or Los Angeles, but, news flash!, our republic is not limited to those cities.  

Notice that just about all the horror stories are coming out of NY?  Why does NY have over 10% of the cases and deaths?  Why treat Modoc County, or Sonoma County, the same as NY City?

The Gav threatened to shut down all the beaches in CA because lots of people went to the beach on a hot weekend. Looking at the photos, yes, there were a lot of people there, but for the most part the small groups of friends or family were at least "socially distanced" from the other little clusters.  Why is it safe for them to be in a house, but not at the beach?

San Diego opened the beaches, but you can't sit down or sunbathe, you have to keep moving.  How does that make sense?  San Francisco opened golf courses to people for sitting and reading or sunbathing, but not for golf. Again, how does that make any sense?  Stores told "This you can still sell, but THESE packaged goods you may not."  Say  what?  I can buy the box of popsicles but not the frozen green beans just across the aisle?  

Random rule by caprice and whim are not conducive to effective government.  

Subdeacon Joe good post but did you miss my statement a little later where I said we should be protesting the clear cases of overreach instead of using them as an excuse to protest the whole thing? I think our situation right now would be a lot different if we hadn't taken so long to get testing capability out there. We need enough testing in each area to be able to extrapolate enough data to be useful, and even in the areas where population density is not as high we need to monitor the data while we're opening stuff back up. That's just my opinion based on as much research as I've been able to do. 

[Captain Bill Burt]

40 minutes ago, Chicken Rustler, SASS #26680 said:

Subdeacon Joe good post but did you miss my statement a little later where I said we should be protesting the clear cases of overreach instead of using them as an excuse to protest the whole thing? I think our situation right now would be a lot different if we hadn't taken so long to get testing capability out there. We need enough testing in each area to be able to extrapolate enough data to be useful, and even in the areas where population density is not as high we need to monitor the data while we're opening stuff back up. That's just my opinion based on as much research as I've been able to do. 

I think your statement is similar to saying 'I'm a little bit pregnant'.  The government is either infringing upon your rights, or it isn't.  From my perspective a 'little infringement' is the camel's nose under the tent.  The next thing you know you're living in California. 

 

They can collect all the data they want, extrapolate all they want, and make whatever recommendations they want.  I might even trust them.  I recall, way back in the stone age, when we were told that masks were not needed, even counterproductive, but now in some places they're mandatory.  Why doesn't anybody question this sudden change?  Were they wrong when they said we shouldn't wear them, or are they wrong now.  They were certainly wrong in one of those two instances, so why exactly are they the experts who dictate what the rest of us can do?  Is it those shiny degrees from Ivy league colleges, or those wonderfully precise models that have predicted exactly what's going to happen?

 

We're at war with Eurasia, we've always been at war with Eurasia.   All the historical documents and experts agree.

 

I determine what risks my kids get to take, because I'm their dad and an adult.  I don't mind the government making recommendations about what is and isn't a good idea in this age of Covid, but I prefer to make my own decisions about what I do and don't do.  Old fashioned I guess, maybe stubborn, maybe even selfish, but there it is. 

 

Perhaps I'm related to Frank Sinatra, but without the talent.

[Subdeacon Joe]

40 minutes ago, Chicken Rustler, SASS #26680 said:

you miss my statement a little later where I said we should be protesting the clear cases of overreach instead of using them as an excuse to protest the whole thing?

 

I didn't miss it.  But I thought it irrelevant.  Sure, go ahead an lock down NYC, SF, LA, and Chicago.  But DON'T treat an entire state, or our entire republic, as if every corner were like those cities.  THAT is what is what those protests are about.  It looks like about 90%, or more, of what is being done by government is based on the WAG models made for NYC et al.  that is to say, overreach.

That is another issue - the near worship of the All Holy Model.  First WAG based Model - Oh!  The US will see at least TWO MILLION DEATHS!  We must Do Something NOW!  a few days later, Well, looks like we made a mistake, there will only be 200,000 deaths. But we still must Do Something NOW!  and a few days after that another downward revision .

According to the CDC the 2017/2018 flu season saw 80,000 deaths from flu.  Where was the panic?  And, what I think is partially driving the protests, this fall when we start seeing thousand of deaths from flu will we see the same random, draconian measures imposed?  

I know, "But is isn't like the flu!"  Well, the way I see it a respiratory viral infection is a respirator viral infection.  And a death from said viral infection is just as dead whether it be C-19 or whatever version(s) of flu that caused it.

On a personal level, I think it hit the US back in Nov. Not long after our boss got back from a long business trip to China.  A bunch of us at work had all the symptoms - the aches, the persistent cough, the extreme fatigue, the fever, the chills, the shortness of breath, the whole shootin' match.  Hung on for weeks.  Maybe started to get better than hit back harder.  We all shrugged it off as "just the flu."  

[Chicken Rustler, SASS #26680]

16 minutes ago, Captain Bill Burt said:

I don't mind the government making recommendations about what is and isn't a good idea in this age of Covid, but I prefer to make my own decisions about what I do and don't do.  Old fashioned I guess, maybe stubborn, maybe even selfish, but there it is.

This is exactly the part I don't understand. They're wrong to use the law to do things they shouldn't have the power to do, but you're wrong to use that as justification to endanger people who depend on you to not make things worse. You don't have to do the wrong thing just because somebody else does.

[Chicken Rustler, SASS #26680]

10 minutes ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

That is another issue - the near worship of the All Holy Model.  First WAG based Model - Oh!  The US will see at least TWO MILLION DEATHS!  We must Do Something NOW!  a few days later, Well, looks like we made a mistake, there will only be 200,000 deaths. But we still must Do Something NOW!  and a few days after that another downward revision .

Why didn't we have 2 million deaths? Is it because we did things to limit the spread and reduce the deaths? Why did we change estimates? Is it because we based it on data instead of on what we want? Are you saying we were wrong and didn't need to do it, or we were right so we don't need to do it now, cause I don't see how you get to either one of those conclusions?

[Warden Callaway]

All I know is that all this took billions of tax payer's money and will likely cause inflation for a good time to come.  And if we don't do some serious correction,  cost us our civil liberties.   

[Chicken Rustler, SASS #26680]

23 minutes ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

Sure, go ahead an lock down NYC, SF, LA, and Chicago.  But DON'T treat an entire state, or our entire republic, as if every corner were like those cities.  THAT is what is what those protests are about.  It looks like about 90%, or more, of what is being done by government is based on the WAG models made for NYC et al.  that is to say, overreach.

When this first started nobody really knew what to do so there was a lot of worst case scenario planning. That should have all changed as soon as data started coming in, and in some places it did. It's not only about differences between big densely populated cities and rural areas, there's also small towns like Gallup NM but that only proves that your point is correct and actions should be based on situations in each area. Not enough people are saying that.

[Subdeacon Joe]

10 minutes ago, Chicken Rustler, SASS #26680 said:

Why didn't we have 2 million deaths? Is it because we did things to limit the spread and reduce the deaths? Why did we change estimates? Is it because we based it on data instead of on what we want? Are you saying we were wrong and didn't need to do it, or we were right so we don't need to do it now, cause I don't see how you get to either one of those conclusions?

 

I'm suggesting that the "experts" saw something and went running around like beheaded chickens before they had any clue what they were doing, and therefore setting off an unnecessary panic and political solution to a problem that we ignore every year.  

Once it went into the political arena it went out of control, and even as the numbers, other than in a few very small area, high population density cities, didn't match any of the predictions the controlling powers still kept piling on restriction after restriction, with no evidence one way or the other.  Again, look at Sonoma County.  Heck, look at all of CA.  Even before the lockdown our rate didn't come close to any of the predictions as to what would happen.  Also Los Angeles extrapolates that rather than a few tens of thousands of cases they have close to half a million people who are or have been infected.  Santa Clara County is saying that instead of ~4,500 they may have ~50,000 cases.  Somewhere in FL has a similar study. If this is so, and the trend is nationwide (and this is just as much of a WAG as any of the models) then the mortality rate gets slashed dramatically.  Like from somewhere between 1.5% to 5% depending on which expert you listen to, to well under 0.5%  

I guess that you suggest that during flu season we all shelter in place, wear masks, avoid social contact, don't go to work.  

[Subdeacon Joe]

https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2020/05/01/modoc-county-defies-newsom-coronavirus-reopen/?fbclid=IwAR3mgDVW3hJjv37AFej5DbOHN4SAqENMzwrBZg-YPn-d3xUJP4ARwbKI3_o#.XqxkWlDTPz0.facebookModoc

 

Quote

SACRAMENTO (AP) — A rural California county allowed nonessential businesses to reopen and diners to eat in restaurants on Friday, becoming the first to defy Gov. Gavin Newsom’s statewide orders barring such moves during the coronavirus pandemic.

Modoc County is “moving forward with our reopening plan,” Modoc County Deputy Director of Emergency Services Heather Hadwick said in an email to The Associated Press.

She said the county of about 9,000 in the state’s far northeast corner next to Oregon has had no COVID-19 cases.

Hadwick said the county had not heard back from the governor about its reopening plan, but asserted it aligns with Newsom’s indicators for reopening.

“We are utilizing his guidance of those plans and we have zero cases,” she wrote. “Our residents were moving forward with or without us. We really needed to create guidelines for them so that they could do this in the safest way possible.”

At the Country Hearth Restaurant and Bakery in the small town of Cedarville, three customers came in for breakfast, owner Janet Irene said.

Irene said her regular customers had been very cooperative with orders that had allowed her to only serve takeout since late March.

She said she remained concerned that the county did not have the governor’s stamp of approval.

 

https://abc7news.com/health/i-will-not-enforce-it-humboldt-sheriff-says-ca-beach-closure-violates-rights/6140197/

 

Quote

SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- Even if Gov. Gavin Newsom ordered the closure of California beaches, Humboldt County isn't planning on making any changes.

"As Sheriff, I am the protector of constitutional rights in Humboldt County, and if an order is issued that I believe violates our constitutional rights, I will not enforce it," said Sheriff William Honsal.

 

News broke Wednesday night that Gov. Newsom was considering closing all beaches statewide after photos of crowded Southern California beaches over the weekend showed people violating social distancing guidelines. On Thursday, he clarified he would only be closing beaches in Orange County.

"Those images are an example of what not to see, what not to do if we're going to make the meaningful progress we've made the past couple of weeks," the governor warned in a press conference earlier this week.

A memo from the California Police Chiefs Association obtained by our sister station KABC indicated the order is expected to go into effect Friday, May 1.

"The governor is a smart man," Honsal said in a statement. "I hope he follows sound advice. It is not okay to punish Northern California for Southern California's mistake, and I hope he hears that loud and clear."

Editor's note: This story originally reported Gov. Newsom would close all beaches in California and has been updated to reflect his clarification in a press conference Thursday afternoon. Sheriff Honsal issued a statement following the governor's press conference, saying in part, "I'm grateful the governor didn't move forward with a plan that would have unnecessarily and arbitrarily restricted access to our coastline. ... Closing beaches in areas where people weren't following social distancing is a more appropriate response than a statewide closure."

 

Newsom had also promised to "punish" the people of CA if they didn't do as he commanded.   "Punish" an entire state.  Uncle Joe and Lavrenti Pavlovich would be proud of him.