Poll of the Day > White person: *told to wear a mask*

(+) Yeah! (+)

White person:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/16/politics/barr-justice-department-speech/index.html

---

What, you DON'T have the liberty to murder your neighbours with biological weapons?

---

Lokarin posted...

What, you DON'T have the liberty to murder your neighbours with biological weapons?

Not on purpose. Although your whole post is a little bit of a stretch.

---

zebatov posted...

Not on purpose.

But not wearing a mask IS on purpose

---

i wouldn't trust society itself to regulate healthy vs sick, with ONLY healthy people going out and sick staying in. Nevermind a person can have covid and not display any symptoms for a few days.

You hear stories now of people who knowingly have covid and still go out.

Lokarin posted...

But not wearing a mask IS on purpose

Yeah and weve been over how ineffective they are hundreds of times.

argonautweakend posted...

You hear stories now of people who knowingly have covid and still go out.

These are bad people. I worked with a guy who bragged about never taking a sick day. So basically he would come in sick and get everyone else sick so they had to take time off.

---

zebatov posted...

Yeah and weve been over how ineffective they are hundreds of times.

They are 95% effective outgoing and 75% effective incoming last stats I had, so if both people are wearing masks and one is infectious then there's an approximate 98.75% effectiveness

(edit: That was was just for simple bandanas, not even a high grade mask)

---

Blightzkrieg posted...

White person:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/16/politics/barr-justice-department-speech/index.html

>Talks about wearing masks
>Links to article about business lockdowns, stay-at-home orders, and other things far bigger than wearing masks

Usual bligh troll topic.


---

"We have to give business people an opportunity, tell them what the rules are you know the masks, which rule of masks, you had this month...and then let them try to adapt their business to that and you'll have ingenuity and people will at least have the freedom to try to earn a living," he added.

Is the only comment about masks in the article and it looks like a comment taken out of context because I have no fucking clue what this is supposed to mean.

I came in here expecting to make a joking comment about no one having problems with "no shoes no shirt no service" signs and instead I leave confused.

He's such a piece of shit.

Fits in with all the other pieces of shit that work for President Piece of Shit's administration, who was voted in by dumbass pieces of shit, so I guess he's representative of the Piece of Shit constituency

---

Lokarin posted...

They are 95% effective outgoing and 75% effective incoming last stats I had, so if both people are wearing masks and one is infectious then there's an approximate 98.75% effectiveness

(edit: That was was just for simple bandanas, not even a high grade mask)

Ive seen a video of someone coughing with and without a mask. Theres no way its anywhere near 95%.

---

zebatov posted...

Ive seen a video of someone coughing with and without a mask. Theres no way its anywhere near 95%.

coughing? I'm just talking about regular breathing and talking, which IS a vector

---

BlackScythe0 posted...

Is the only comment about masks in the article and it looks like a comment taken out of context because I have no fucking clue what this is supposed to mean.

I came in here expecting to make a joking comment about no one having problems with "no shoes no shirt no service" signs and instead I leave confused.

Would you say it's the greatest confusion since slavery

---

zebatov posted...

Ive seen a video of someone coughing with and without a mask. Theres no way its anywhere near 95%.

I've shown you a video of a mask stopping well over 95% of the aerosol being used to test it. I'll link it again, though, to limit your ability to spread misinformation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6cTDGqcUpA

---

BlackScythe0 posted...

no one having problems with "no shoes no shirt no service"

Actually, some people do have problems with it. The reason most probably dont is because many people are already wearing shirts and shoes. Not everyone, of course. But most. And when someone is walking around without a shirt, and cant go into a store, they do usually throw a fit.

Then, you have some stores that dont care. Like stores in the beach and boardwalk and stuff. Where people regular walk in without shirts/shoes...
---

LinkPizza posted...

Actually, some people do have problems with it. The reason most probably dont is because many people are already wearing shirts and shoes. Not everyone, of course. But most. And when someone is walking around without a shirt, and cant go into a store, they do usually throw a fit.

Then, you have some stores that dont care. Like stores in the beach and boardwalk and stuff. Where people regular walk in without shirts/shoes...

And honestly, the "no shirt" part of the policy doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense anyway. It's like a "no hat, no service" rule, it doesn't really have a practical benefit and just seems like it's there for gate-keeping (specifically so they can refuse service on a grounds not protected by law because they can't refuse service on a grounds protected by law).


---

this is my favorite video about wearing masks
https://i.imgur.com/SeRHDSE.mp4

How the fuck did Barr actually have a semi-decent reputation before he joined the Trump admin? The guy seems to always take an extreme amount of care to make sure his viewpoints are the exact opposite of a sensible opinion.

---

Good to know that Barr thinks Japanese Internment and the Indian Removal Act weren't a big deal.
Or the civil asset forfeiture his own office reinstated after Obama discontinued it (federally, of course; states do it, too). Being forced to wear a mask for the health and safety of other people is totes more oppressive than having all your money and possessions confiscated on a whim without you ever needing to even be charged w/ a crime, and then having to go to court to get it back, guilty until proven innocent.

I really hope the Dems have a fucking spine this time and press charges against all the Trump cretins. They should all be in jail for the crimes they commit.

LaggnFragnLarry posted...

this is my favorite video about wearing masks
https://i.imgur.com/SeRHDSE.mp4

The fact that Larry was the one to post it makes it even funnier! :D

Zeus posted...

And honestly, the "no shirt" part of the policy doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense anyway.

I'd guess it's mostly a modesty/appearance thing. Male public toplessness is a whole lot more socially acceptable than female, but there are still plenty of people who find it trashy or feel uncomfortable about it, so the businesses in question rule it out preemptively.

---

Lokarin posted...

coughing? I'm just talking about regular breathing and talking, which IS a vector

It was all of the above, but coughing alone is enough to do it.

---

zebatov posted...

Ive seen a video of someone coughing with and without a mask

Shut down all science-based policy ppl, this guy's seen a video

---

Clench281 posted...

Shut down all science-based policy ppl, this guy's seen a video

The video would be science and evidence enough. I could say I havent watched anything at all? Thanks for also saying something about what adjl posted.

adjl posted...

I've shown you a video of a mask stopping well over 95% of the aerosol being used to test it. I'll link it again, though, to limit your ability to spread misinformation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6cTDGqcUpA

Lol. They dont stop enough to make them worth while. Wear a respirator or get a portable supplied air system if youre that worried.

---

I'd ask you to propose how much the mask would have to stop in order for it to be worth while, but unfortunately I think we both already know you're not really able to give a meaningful answer to that question.

---

i think the biggest problem with this pandemic is that everyone has watched too many fucking movies and think pandemics are only to be taken seriously when there are literal zombies walking around

who am I kidding? these redcaps still wouldnt believe it

---

You're talking about people who literally fantasize about the idea of murdering hordes of people they don't like

They would LOVE a zombie apocalypse

---

Clench281 posted...

I'd ask you to propose how much the mask would have to stop in order for it to be worth while, but unfortunately I think we both already know you're not really able to give a meaningful answer to that question.

100%? Like a respirator or supplied air would? Is that not a meaningful answer? Anything less than 100% is basically pointless.

---

zebatov posted...

Anything less than 100% is basically pointless.

If somebody offers to shoot you on the spot or let you flip a coin and only get shot if you get heads, which option would you choose?

---

zebatov posted...

100%? Like a respirator or supplied air would? Is that not a meaningful answer? Anything less than 100% is basically pointless.

That's not how disease transmission works dude

---

zebatov posted...

Anything less than 100% is basically pointless.

why? I could just as easily say that anything above 0% effectiveness is worth wearing.

---

zebatov posted...

Anything less than 100% is basically pointless.

So you don't wear a seat belt then

---

zebatov posted...

Anything less than 100% is basically pointless.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKjxFJfcrcA

---

zebatov posted...

Anything less than 100% is basically pointless.

This is impossibly dumb. Even Trudeau is smarter than this

---

Zeus posted...

And honestly, the "no shirt" part of the policy doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense anyway. It's like a "no hat, no service" rule, it doesn't really have a practical benefit and just seems like it's there for gate-keeping (specifically so they can refuse service on a grounds not protected by law because they can't refuse service on a grounds protected by law).

so, you're okay with women walking into stores topless?

zebatov posted...

100%? Like a respirator or supplied air would? Is that not a meaningful answer? Anything less than 100% is basically pointless.

It's is an extremely meaningless answer that shows you have put no critical thought into the topic. Preventative measures aren't worth it unless the protection rate is 100%? That's so ridiculous I'm having a hard time you could suggest that with a straight face. Even a moderate reduction, well below 100%, would spell the difference between a disease that spreads like wildfire and one that dies out on its own without a vaccine. That's not even getting to the argument that even minor reductions would have tangible impact on reduced case load and deaths, even if not bringing the disease to extinction, meaning less suffering until a vaccine is delivered.

Thank you for confirming that we should ignore your opinion on the matter.

---

OP, you're a racist.

---

Fenrir-Juubi, you're a racist.

---

zebatov posted...

100%? Like a respirator or supplied air would? Is that not a meaningful answer? Anything less than 100% is basically pointless.

So basically condoms and birth control pills are completely pointless. Why bother trying to stop spread of STDs and unwanted pregnancies when it's not 100% effective?

Lmao what a dumb take

GastroFan posted...

so, you're okay with women walking into stores topless?

Tbh, I think many people would be ok. Even I like lady boobs. But aside from that, I dont think they should have even made them hide them on the first place. I think the reason certain body parts have been sexualized is because they hid them...
---

zebatov posted...

Anything less than 100% is basically pointless.

Im not sure many, if any, safety precautions are 100%. You should know that, as well...
---

Clench281 posted...

Even a moderate reduction, well below 100%, would spell the difference between a disease that spreads like wildfire and one that dies out on its own without a vaccine.

Heck, even a 5% reduction would become significant in the long run, due to the exponential nature of viral spread. A 5% reduction per iteration turns into a 40% reduction by the time you reach 10 iterations (0.95^10=0.5987), which for this virus would be approximately 2-3 months. That's huge (at current US death rates, a 40% reduction over 2-3 months would save ~10 times as many lives as were lost in 9/11), and 5% is well below what empirical data (i.e. people actually looking at what's happening and not just watching one video that shows that sneezes leak around the edges) indicates masks are able to do.

Quite simply, the notion that anything less than 100% protection is pointless is insanely idiotic. No protective measure can ever provide 100% protection, short of completely avoiding the thing you're trying to be protected from. Protective measures exist to reduce risks to acceptable levels such that we can conduct the corresponding activities in reasonable safety, not to eliminate those risks entirely. Masks are no different: the only way to truly be 100% protected from Covid is to stay away from all people and never do anything, but wearing masks and maintaining distancing while in public can provide enough safety to allow people to not be hermits indefinitely.

---

Even vaccines aren't 100% effective

---

Even brakes aren't 100% effective. Better stop putting them in cars, I guess.

---

Even locks arent 100%. So, I guess we stop locking stuff...
---

Apparently Canada's education system isn't 100% effective

---

LinkPizza posted...

Even locks arent 100%. So, I guess we stop locking stuff...

To be fair, watching lockpickinglawyer kinda makes it seem pointless.

---

YoukaiSlayer posted...

To be fair, watching lockpickinglawyer kinda makes it seem pointless.

Probably. That being said, not every knows how to, or has the right tools, or could do it without being suspicious or being caught... For most people, locks are a deterrent from stealing... to a degree... So, Id still rather lock stuff then letting anybody in to take whatever...
---

I know I just kinda wanted to highlight how surprisingly easy it is to pick really heavy duty seeming locks in like 10 seconds with pretty basic tools.

---

White people, white people, white people, it's always white, white, whitey, to not say of the times when we're called crackers. How can this be allowed to continue?

---

YoukaiSlayer posted...

I know I just kinda wanted to highlight how surprisingly easy it is to pick really heavy duty seeming locks in like 10 seconds with pretty basic tools.

It's why I kind of have to laugh at the paranoia surrounding smart locks and whatnot. People freak out that anyone with access to $50 software can intercept the bluetooth transmission while the lock is being opened and use that information to break in, while ignoring that anyone with access to a $20 set of lockpicks and a bit of practice can already get into a tumbler lock just as easily. That's been true for literally centuries. Yes, the two aren't completely comparable, particularly in that it's generally a bit easier to crack a smart lock without drawing attention to yourself, but the extent to which people act like smart locks aren't secure at all while cowering behind tumbler locks is still pretty silly.

---