This is a reasonable position, even if it is against the idea of contact tracing. We have had dozens of cases of police targeting protest attenders regardless of if they're not suspected of doing anything wrong,.

Was this taking place at the protests or at a later point in time? Anyway, those contact tracers are not cops, and I dont see a reason to assume that they would share their lists or database with cops. Hence, I see no reason why someone appearing on the covid contract trace list should have to fear being targetted by the police over it.

On a different note, isn't it curious how liberals were fine restricting constitutional rights, like free assembly and freedom of movement, as well as destroying the economic livelihood of millions of workers and small-business owners over this pandemic, but are willing to put the fight against the virus last compared to making a passive-aggressive, ideologically charged vote of distrust against the police?

The hypocrisy keeps piling on and on.

You might not see a reason, but each person who is interviewed as part of a CT investigation might feel differently. If the tracers start asking them questions they don't want to answer, it could make them act defensive and not want to cooperate with the process. This situation has become contentious, so it makes sense that people might not act completely rationally all the time.

If the governor thinks that abstaining from questions about protests will allow the investigations to produce more useful information than if those questions had been asked, then it makes sense why he'd rather they not be asked.

Like, totally radical dude

^Black XistenZ

Looks like our second wave is here. A few weeks ago you asked where the second wave was in Florida. The prediction of the second wave didn't take into account the lower spread of outdoor activities, like beaches, which is likely why the second wave took longer to take hold there.

A later point. Even if the contact tracers are not cops they are agents of the same government, which means it is plausible the cops could gain access to the list.

It's not curious at all. Protest against the government has always had the highest bar to pass for restrictions in America, and other more general rights like assembly to go to church where you have alternative methods of broadcasting the services, have a lower bar to clear before you can restrict them. There's also the issue of protests being outside and with mostly mask wearing attendees which greatly reduces the spread compared to sitting in a church pew indoors for 2 hours.

Peaking up again exactly two weeks after George Floyd became drug free. What a coincidence

this is the most brilliant and sentient virus ever. it knows to only target people based on political affiliation and religion, and it knows how to differentiate between wal-mart and other stores. in terms of large gatherings if anything is labeled a “protest” the virus avoids it, but a gathering known as a “cookout” outside with 5-6 people is where the virus will go

In my post that you quoted, I wasnt shitting on the protests themselves, I was criticizing the notion that cooperation with contact tracing efforts was of lower priority than acquiescing to some people's distrust of authorities (whether this distrust is justified or not).

Yes, these protests took place outdoors and a significant share of the attendees wore masks. But what we're talking about here is contact tracing, and contact tracing conducted by in person interviews (as opposed to e.g. cellphone apps) is only used in cases where there already was a confirmed infection. Nothing of what you wrote refutes the point I was making...



According to liberals, it was totally justified destroy millions of jobs and ruin the livelihood of hundreds of thousands of small-business owners in order to stop the virus. But now when we have confirmed infections, efforts to contain the spread from these confirmed infections are suddenly supposed to be optional - because in an outlandish scenario, vengeful cops might perhaps get access to this data and then perhaps use this info to target certain people? That's ridiculous if you ask me.

Generallsy speaking, I would say that a society with such a level of distrust between groups of citizen, and between citizen and its own government, is done for. Finished. End of the road. If that was really the state of things in the United States (which I dont believe), then there will be no more United States 20 years from now.

If you think contact tracing or keeping people safe from retaliation for protesting is more important depends on your values. When I said the position is reasonable I was just saying that there is an underlying justification based on a coherent set of values.

I don't think it's ridiculous. If you look into the history of policing in the United States it's actually expected. We have a very decentralized policing system that lends itself to repeat offenders and vengeful dickheads.

People in the United States are hugely distrustful of their government, and indeed every government. We are an incredibly individualistic society. That's why we can't respond adequately to a pandemic, and why the police get away with brutalizing people. It's why we have Donald "5 bankruptcies" Trump and you have Angela "Ph.D in Analytical Chemistry" Merkel. We are, as a society, fairly incapable of seeing the big picture.