Alabama football: At least five players have reportedly tested positive for the coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.
#401
#401
Col_Cathcart said:
The difference is that the thing they want to do is constitutionally protected. That makes them different activities so treating them differently isn’t really a double standard. I’ve seen some handwringing about post-protest spikes, but there’s nothing to be done about it. What’s the point? Plus there’s way “sexier” stories to report on, so you just see less of it making the front page. What drives more clicks? Is a pretty good indicator of what will get covered heavily and another “tut tut social distance” article isn’t going to get nearly as many clicks as “protesters clash with police”. Capitalism drives these decisions, not some media cabal.

Edit: just read a story In the Washington Post about a protester in Kansas who tested positive after not wearing a mask. They’re being written, they’re just not the top story of the day because it’s not a slow news day.
Click to expand...

". . . and the pursuit of happiness. . . " Where is that? Oh, yeah the preamble to the Constitution. Happiness to me is providing for my family, going to a game IF I SO CHOOSE, and staying home if I choose not to go. Poverty kills more than this virus ever will. Research it, just the facts. We will all be exposed at sometime or another and locking this country down with draconian measures is foolish beyond measure. If I could bet a successful life against a 0.004 chance of dying from one particular threat, I would do that every time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lifeisdeep
#403
#403
SKBubba said:
Seems like this ought to be in the politics forum.
Click to expand...
I agree. No matter how many links are passionately posted showing and supporting your take on the situation, bottom line is, nothing posted here will make a difference in how this plays out. Started with 5 sick Bama players. Could have been in the “around the NCAA” thread. These are tough days for the moderators I suppose.

As for the powers that be, peaceful protest is protected. I support that. People deciding their own risk and understand the consequences if wrong. Go for it. I’ll be in the stadium unless Phil Fulmer says no.
I will get a little political here. If these Governors give the protesters the ability to not social distance, I feel like a 77 year old barber in Michigan should also have the constitutional right to cut someone’s hair without getting his license revoked if he isn’t forcing himself to cut the guys hair. It’s no different to me. In each case people understand the risk before acting.

Theres a whole lot of cherry picking on what's constitutional. I think when the smoke clears, a lot of what has happened will be deemed over the top.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lifeisdeep, 0nelilreb, tbh and 1 other person
#405
#405
Col_Cathcart said:
The difference is that the thing they want to do is constitutionally protected. That makes them different activities so treating them differently isn’t really a double standard. I’ve seen some handwringing about post-protest spikes, but there’s nothing to be done about it. What’s the point? Plus there’s way “sexier” stories to report on, so you just see less of it making the front page. What drives more clicks? Is a pretty good indicator of what will get covered heavily and another “tut tut social distance” article isn’t going to get nearly as many clicks as “protesters clash with police”. Capitalism drives these decisions, not some media cabal.

Edit: just read a story In the Washington Post about a protester in Kansas who tested positive after not wearing a mask. They’re being written, they’re just not the top story of the day because it’s not a slow news day.
Click to expand...
Spoken like a true USSR politician.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lifeisdeep
#406
#406
SKBubba said:
Seems like this ought to be in the politics forum.
Click to expand...

I’m surprised it hasn’t made down to us yes . The minute they kick it down Dumbledore will stop spamming . He gets hammered in the PF
 
#411
#411
Col_Cathcart said:
... You can’t stop people from protesting. It’s a constitutional right ... Having football games just isn’t remotely the same thing apart from the numbers of people. What do these things have to do with each other?
Click to expand...
Col_Cathcart said:
The freedom of religion clause doesn’t allow anything someone wants to do for religion....
Click to expand...

It's not freedom of religion at issue so much as freedom of assembly. And that right applies whether the folks assembling want to engage in social protest, political activity, religious services, or a football game.

COL Cathcart, I'm confident you already know this, but for the folks reading who might not: the freedom to gather in groups (freedom of assembly) is one of the rights protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, along with speech, religion, the press, and the right of petition. "Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people peaceably to assemble...."

Over the years, the Supreme Court and lower courts have established a number of limits to the First Amendment's reach. For instance, free speech can be limited if it is poses a public danger, such as yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

A few limits apply to the freedom of assembly. One is explicitly mentioned in the First Amendment: the assembly has to be peaceful in nature. Other limits come from court cases. For example, a property owner has the right not to let you onto his property, even if you desire to peaceably assemble there. Another example: the police can break up your peaceful assembly (street party, whatever) if you're blocking traffic or making too much noise for the neighbors.

So the freedom of assembly isn't 100% absolute. But within those few limits, it's pretty darn close.

And so we're sure to see a number of significant court cases make their way through the system in coming months and years about whether the government was right to stop churches and even businesses from letting people in. From peacably assembling.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lifeisdeep, Wireless1 and PlanetVolunteer
#413
#413
Col_Cathcart said:
I keep seeing people saying this and it doesn’t make any sense to me. You can’t stop people from protesting. It’s a constitutional right. It may not be safe right now, but we will have to live with those consequences. I fully expect to see increased infection rates in a few weeks. Having football games just isn’t remotely the same thing apart from the numbers of people. What do these things have to do with each other?
Click to expand...
When people were protesting the lockdown or going to the beach in Florida and elsewhere, certain media companies like CNN or MSNBC only talked about how it was gonna kill people. Not that it wasn't a constitutional right.
Especially when it comes to the protests in Michigan when not nearly as many people participated compared to the current protests.

I mean it is shoulder to shoulder tbousands upon thousands of people protesting right now and nobody is condemning it!

The media was all about keeping people from the freaking park or anywhere. They had the pictures of people at the beach "not social distancing" saying how irresponsible it was.

It was STAY HOME STAY SAFE 24/7.

So now its okay to risk thousands upon thousands of peoples lives???? What in earth are you talking about? It was a life or death situation according to the media and this instance of police brutality literally threw all of that out the window.

I agree that its fine to protest, but you have to be unbelievably biased to not see the glaring hypocrisy here.

I'm actually glad they're protesting like this. It is the most anti-social distancing thing possible.

If we have a constitutional right to protest then everyone else should have a right to their own pursuit of happiness. Reopening a small business, going to a football game, going to a beach and seeing who we want to see. If you are at risk you can STAY HOME.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lifeisdeep, Wireless1, CaliVol2009 and 4 others
#414
#414
dobre_shunka said:
Has it been confirmed the infected protester contracted the virus at the protest? Or that he infected anyone else at the protests?
Click to expand...
How could you even determine that? Could've gotten it at the grocery store.
Thats also ONE person.

These protests are literally proving this isn't that big of a deal anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1, 0nelilreb, VolDave53 and 2 others
#415
#415
"According to Wes Rucker of GoVols247, details of the policy include what coronavirus is and how athletes can reduce the risk of catching it. Every athlete will undergo two tests upon returning to campus: a nasal swab and antibody blood test to determine if a person has it or if a person has already had it. Each athlete is also going to have to undergo a daily health screen.

Other parts of the release included how athletes who test positive will be isolated and which athletes will arrive and when. Football, basketball and women’s basketball players will be arriving on campus first. The document didn’t state when athletes in other sports would be able to return to campus.

Of course, there could be changes to the policies going forward depending on how things developing. If there’s a second wave, for instance, that may change all of this dramatically."
 
#418
#418
Dumbledorange said:
If you are Trey Smith, would you gamble your future?
Click to expand...
What about the other 84? I have no doubt Trey has better advice on how to proceed than reading this thread. He’s a bright young man and has the freedom to make that decision, with the help of the training staff. How many players in the whole NCAA are dealing with blood clots? OK , We probably have 100% of them on our team , and you keep wanting to put everybody into that category. It does make your case, but it’s a stretch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1
#420
#420
Dumbledorange said:
If you are Trey Smith, would you gamble your future?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. COVID is nothing compared to what he overcame. I don’t know how much more data you need to see to tell you this virus isn’t that big of a deal. We will likely see many, many more positive cases. And the death rate will continue to plummet. For the last time, this virus is not a big time killer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PlanetVolunteer
#421
#421
BigOrangeTrain said:
Absolutely. COVID is nothing compared to what he overcame. I don’t know how much more data you need to see to tell you this virus isn’t that big of a deal. We will likely see many, many more positive cases. And the death rate will continue to plummet. For the last time, this virus is not a big time killer.
Click to expand...
Anybody think Trey Smith is weaker than this 108 year old that survived Covid?
‘Feisty’ 108-year-old woman recovers from coronavirus: ‘I was determined to survive’
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeTrain
#422
#422
PlanetVolunteer said:
How could you even determine that? Could've gotten it at the grocery store.
Thats also ONE person.

These protests are literally proving this isn't that big of a deal anymore.
Click to expand...
That was my point. Contracting the virus outside appears to be highly unlikely because of the required virus load and the natural dissipation that occurs outside.

Here's how one race track got around the social distancing order here in NC. Two thousand people attended and not one arrest at this protest.

race photo.jpg

https://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article243341871.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: PlanetVolunteer, TrumpedUpVol and tbh
#423
#423
dobre_shunka said:
Has it been confirmed the infected protester contracted the virus at the protest? Or that he infected anyone else at the protests?
Click to expand...
From what I saw, he probably already had it before the protests so the concern was more about him infecting others.
 
#424
#424
BigOrangeFanatic said:
If its okay for thousands of people to gather together and protest (and I am totally fine with peaceful protesting) its also fine for people to make up their own mind about whether they feel comfortable attending a football game in the fall and being allowed to attend. Those that aren't comfortable can stay home. Those that want to attend, can show up and show out.
Click to expand...

These protests are going to be a great test of how effectively we can avoid spread at large outdoor gatherings. If the resulting spikes are small, that’s great news for football (and also just in general). People getting bent out of shape over media coverage are missing a giant silver lining. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised when vols fans are just looking for ways to be miserable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TrumpedUpVol, Ez_Vol and tricitiesvolsfan
#425
#425
Col_Cathcart said:
These protests are going to be a great test of how effectively we can avoid spread at large outdoor gatherings. If the resulting spikes are small, that’s great news for football (and also just in general). People getting bent out of shape over media coverage are missing a giant silver lining. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised when vols fans are just looking for ways to be miserable.
Click to expand...
If the "health experts" are saying the protests are okay and ten thousand people can gather together for their cause, then the virus is simply not that dangerous. Who cares what the statistics show. Because chances are, even with a big increase in cases, the vast majority of people are going to be asymptomatic and the virus is not going to affect them all that much.

The message is clear. And its what should have happened from the very beginning instead of shutting the economy down. If you are elderly, or immune compromised, stay home, social distance, and limit going out in to public. If younger healthy people are around elderly or immune compromised, keep safe distance, do whatever to protect those people. Use common sense. But something tells me we shouldn't even be that concerned with doing this if the so called "health experts" are okay with thousands gathering for protests.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PlanetVolunteer and TrumpedUpVol
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top