BRUCE WILLIS asked to leave store for ‘refusing’ to wear a mask

[Jack Reacheround]

This is the perfect narrative to control people

This is the dumbest shit I have ever read. What about wearing clothes? You have to do that in public places? Is that all about the gub’ment controlling us?

No, the perfect way to control people is facial recognition cameras everywhere, along with everyone willingly giving up any privacy they once had so they can unlock their phones with their faces, and get location specific search results. If anything, wearing masks gives the government less control over you because they don’t know where the fuck you are, even if they did have facial recognition surveillance cameras everywhere.

 

[fingercuffs]

This is the dumbest shit I have ever read. What about wearing clothes? You have to do that in public places? Is that all about the gub’ment controlling us?

No, the perfect way to control people is facial recognition cameras everywhere, along with everyone willingly giving up any privacy they once had so they can unlock their phones with their faces, and get location specific search results. If anything, wearing masks gives the government less control over you because they don’t know where the fuck you are, even if they did have facial recognition surveillance cameras everywhere.

Made me laugh. A guy at work had his truck done over in one of out parking garages overnight. They'd pulled their masks down so their mugs were caught on camera. If ever there's a time to wear a mask, right?

I wasn't laughing about guy's truck being done over, he's a really lovely guy, just funny about the masks. They got fingerprints all over everything in some dumpsters and then took it back, the twats.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Made me laugh. A guy at work had his truck done over in one of out parking garages overnight. They'd pulled their masks down so their mugs were caught on camera. If ever there's a time to wear a mask, right?

I wasn't laughing about guy's truck being done over, he's a really lovely guy, just funny about the masks. They got fingerprints all over everything in some dumpsters and then took it back, the twats.

Jesus. Yeah, if you have ever talked to a detective or a DA, if yo ask them how they catch criminals, they’ll all tell you “Criminals are dumb. They’re asking to be caught.”

My friend was on the jury for a murder trial. The murderers were on Instagram, posing with the exact guns used to kill the guy like a day before the murder.

 

[Halge]

This is the dumbest shit I have ever read. What about wearing clothes? You have to do that in public places? Is that all about the gub’ment controlling us?

No, the perfect way to control people is facial recognition cameras everywhere, along with everyone willingly giving up any privacy they once had so they can unlock their phones with their faces, and get location specific search results. If anything, wearing masks gives the government less control over you because they don’t know where the fuck you are, even if they did have facial recognition surveillance cameras everywhere.

Don't really know where to start with this. Feels like you might be deliberately focusing on a comparatively minute detail, not the point. But let's assume for a moment that you are an honest actor.

What I mean by "the narrative" is the narrative regarding the transmissibility of covid, not the practice of wearing a mask to prevent transmission. There are numerous practices suggested/proscribed/enforced when it comes to preventing transmission, and wearing a mask is just one of them.
I'm not saying a mask does not prevent transmission. I assume it does, to some extent. I also think that covid is practically harmless, and that trying to stop the spread is pointless because a: it can't be stopped with less than total isolation, and b: everyone has already gotten it ages ago. And even had I considered it a more severe risk than I do, I'd still think personal liberties weighs heavier in the balance.
But that is all beside the point.

The point regarding the narrative is that the powers that be would be inconvenienced by working from the perspective of "hey, I would like to severly limit your civil rights for a couple of years, and on top of it enact some laws that permanently extends the power of government at the expense of yours".
That would be to negotiate from a position of weakness.
Much better to push the narrative that "this is a super deadly virus and it is the duty of government to protect ̶o̶b̶e̶d̶i̶e̶n̶t̶ law-abiding ̶s̶e̶r̶f̶s̶ ̶u̶s̶e̶f̶u̶l̶ ̶i̶d̶i̶o̶t̶s̶ citizens from inconsiderate, disease-ridden criminals".
This works every time. Not only does it occlude the fact that liberties are being infringed upon (unprecedentedly so in this particular case), it also has the added benefit of appointing an Enemy (the non-compliants), which is always a vital part of quickly getting large masses of people to go along with extreme measures.

As to what government could do with a populace properly indoctrinated with the belief that invisible murderparticles are everywhere- well, like I've already said, they could do anything. Including (easily) making it give up all the privacy you mentioned in your post. Tracking down dissidents would be no problem, since useful idiots would consider it their civic duty to turn them in.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Don't really know where to start with this. Feels like you might be deliberately focusing on a comparatively minute detail, not the point. But let's assume for a moment that you are an honest actor.

What I mean by "the narrative" is the narrative regarding the transmissibility of covid, not the practice of wearing a mask to prevent transmission. There are numerous practices suggested/proscribed/enforced when it comes to preventing transmission, and wearing a mask is just one of them.
I'm not saying a mask does not prevent transmission. I assume it does, to some extent. I also think that covid is practically harmless, and that trying to stop the spread is pointless because a: it can't be stopped with less than total isolation, and b: everyone has already gotten it ages ago. And even had I considered it a more severe risk than I do, I'd still think personal liberties weighs heavier in the balance.
But that is all beside the point.

The point regarding the narrative is that the powers that be would be inconvenienced by working from the perspective of "hey, I would like to severly limit your civil rights for a couple of years, and on top of it enact some laws that permanently extends the power of government at the expense of yours".
That would be to negotiate from a position of weakness.
Much better to push the narrative that "this is a super deadly virus and it is the duty of government to protect ̶o̶b̶e̶d̶i̶e̶n̶t̶ law-abiding ̶s̶e̶r̶f̶s̶ ̶u̶s̶e̶f̶u̶l̶ ̶i̶d̶i̶o̶t̶s̶ citizens from inconsiderate, disease-ridden criminals".
This works every time. Not only does it occlude the fact that liberties are being infringed upon (unprecedentedly so in this particular case), it also has the added benefit of appointing an Enemy (the non-compliants), which is always a vital part of quickly getting large masses of people to go along with extreme measures.

As to what government could do with a populace properly indoctrinated with the belief that invisible murderparticles are everywhere- well, like I've already said, they could do anything. Including (easily) making it give up all the privacy you mentioned in your post. Tracking down dissidents would be no problem, since useful idiots would consider it their civic duty to turn them in.

This entire post is a great example of the slippery slope fallacy. If they want to limit our rights in any way, getting us to wear masks in public is hardly warming us up to the idea. The patriot act is a clear infringement upon a person’s right to privacy. And they passed that through without making us wear masks first. And the government isn’t even making you wear a mask in public. You can walk around all day with no mask on.

But you do have to wear clothes in public. You can’t walk around naked, and I don’t hear you bitching about that. The only place you have to wear a mask is in private businesses. And even then, you aren’t actually required to by our government. The businesses are requiring you to. The government requires they do in order for them to stay open. That is the only thing the government is requiring - that businesses that wish to stay open during the pandemic require customers to wear masks.

Is that impinging on your rights? What about the fact that they require food industry businesses to pass health inspection?
The irony is that none of this conspiratorial bullshit would even exist if Trump had simply, from the beginning, said “Everyone needs to wear a mask.” All you conspiracy theorists/convenient soldiers for fake liberty would have lapped it up and done exactly as he told you, even if there wasn’t a pandemic.

 

[fingercuffs]

Jesus. Yeah, if you have ever talked to a detective or a DA, if yo ask them how they catch criminals, they’ll all tell you “Criminals are dumb. They’re asking to be caught.”

My friend was on the jury for a murder trial. The murderers were on Instagram, posing with the exact guns used to kill the guy like a day before the murder.

Yup. I don't know if they've been caught or not, but if it was their first 'job', they didn't do a great job of it and will likely do the same again. Fingerprints are on file now so I don't much fancy their chances.

The guy who had some stuff nicked out of his truck? He said "well, they obviously needed it more than I do" so and in a roundabout way he said "God bless". Such a nice guy.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Yup. I don't know if they've been caught or not, but if it was their first 'job', they didn't do a great job of it and will likely do the same again. Fingerprints are on file now so I don't much fancy their chances.

The guy who had some stuff nicked out of his truck? He said "well, they obviously needed it more than I do" so and in a roundabout way he said "God bless". Such a nice guy.

They probably did need it more than he did. I doubt any of them are smart enough to hold down a steady job.

 

[Halge]

This entire post is a great example of the slippery slope fallacy. If they want to limit our rights in any way, getting us to wear masks in public is hardly warming us up to the idea. The patriot act is a clear infringement upon a person’s right to privacy. And they passed that through without making us wear masks first. And the government isn’t even making you wear a mask in public. You can walk around all day with no mask on.

Are you kidding? Mask wearers love masks. They love complaining about how indisposed they are by wearing them. They love feeling like everyday heroes for it. They love exhibiting the latest designer masks made in Wuhan, China. They love the camaraderie with other ̶t̶r̶i̶b̶e̶s̶m̶e̶n̶ mask-wearers. They love the sense of adversarialism towards The Others. The masks are just another example in a long line of products (blm shirts, che guevara shirts, rainbow scarves, maga hats, nikes...) people imbue with symbolic meaning in order to distinguish themselves, feel belonging et cetera.

The patriot act is a clear infringement upon a person’s right to privacy. And they passed that through without making us wear masks first.

I don't know how your Patriot Act could in any way be considered an argument against what I'm saying.

But you do have to wear clothes in public. You can’t walk around naked, and I don’t hear you bitching about that.

Paragraph ignored on the grounds of it's retarded.

The only place you have to wear a mask is in private businesses. And even then, you aren’t actually required to by our government. The businesses are requiring you to. The government requires they do in order for them to stay open. That is the only thing the government is requiring - that businesses that wish to stay open during the pandemic require customers to wear masks.

To put it mildly, this varies from time to time, state to state, nation to nation. Generally speaking places where masks are potentially mandated include private businesses, which includes both where you shop and where you work. And, naturally, some/all of the public sector, public gatherings, mass transit, et cetera.

But seriously guy, I just wrote a lengthy post about how masks are one of many restrictive measures, and anyway not even relevant to the point I was making. I feel like I'm trying to tug a bone from a stubborn rottweiler here.

The irony is that none of this conspiratorial bullshit would even exist if Trump had simply, from the beginning, said “Everyone needs to wear a mask.” All you conspiracy theorists/convenient soldiers for fake liberty would have lapped it up and done exactly as he told you, even if there wasn’t a pandemic.

I'm from Sweden...


I'm really not trying to be snarky here but; I don't think you've actually read and understood what I've previously written. If I dumb it down (which I don't really want to do), my point was about how there are many mechanics driving society towards perpetuating restrictions, and about how authorities (including media and corporate PR departments) choose to frame the restrictions. As for all the rest, you're in the weeds arguing about things not relevant to my point.

 

[fingercuffs]

They probably did need it more than he did. I doubt any of them are smart enough to hold down a steady job.

At least their prints and mugshots are on record, they'll likely offend again and get caught, if they haven't already.

 

[tripleo]

You know what they say about old habits.

die soft

 

[HaulParris]

I'm not impressed with his performance

 

[FightsFTW]

Fucking cry babies everywhere lol.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

I don't know what you meant. And I am neither hostile nor smug nor condescending nor over the top nor a conspiracy theorist nor superior, nor any other thing you've so far told me I am that I may have missed.

I am asking you why you conflate a statement about the perfect storm of social dynamics that makes covid restrictions so alluring and disproportionate, and ultimately runs a great risk of becoming permanent, with conspiracy theories. It is a virtual cheatcode to make the entire populace do anything, at any time. People don't understand the details of virology, or statistics, and anyway statistics are easily both misrepresented and outright falsified, and everyone from politicians and healthcare services to big tech, ideological activists and foreign blocs stands to benefit from continued restrictions. And to top it off, the narrative* that it is not a question of personal freedom, but a responsibility not to infringe on the freedom of others by infecting them, is oh-so-easily available. There is even a growing incentive to wear a mask etc for pure social standing- compliance will make you Better, and more eligible for jobs etc, than those that don't. And people always look for those opportunistic edges, even if they try to deny it.

*It has been deliberately used to justify seat belt laws, smoking bans, hate speech laws, blasphemy laws, et cetera.

How are they benefitting from it though?

Also how are seat belt laws and smoking bans a bad thing?

 

[Dizzy]

Do the little dinky cloth and surgical masks really stop viruses from passing through, in or out?

Since COVID is spread primarily through respiratory droplets, yes, yes it does.

 

[Halge]

How are they benefitting from it though?

Also how are seat belt laws and smoking bans a bad thing?

As to benefits, well, just to spitball:

Police likes covid restrictions because it essentially slows down society. Nightclubs and pubs are shut down, no large concerts, fewer demonstrations, less people on mass transit, less people leaving their homes in general. Also increased jurisdiction et cetera.

Big tech likes covid because people use social media, amazon et cetera more.

Media likes covid because people have more time to consume media, and media has something to continually produce material about.

Enviromentalists like it because modern society essentially shutting down is pretty much their end goal.

Governments like covid because they can use it to enact just about any law they want, and because it alleviates them of many of the normal problems of day-to-day running of society. Plus it more or less simplifies political discourse to just one question- how do we deal with covid? Oh, and you can easily persecute political opposition. Doesn't even have to be people who oppose restrictions- you can go after people on the grounds that they simply don't support restrictions draconian enough, or on the grounds that they somehow failed to comply with the restrictions, and so on.

There's any number of things a compliant population can be used for. Which is kind of the core of my point. Covid can be used for anything. If authorities wanted people to go out and buy pink underpants and wear them on their heads, a sufficiently compliant population would do so.

As to seat belt laws and smoking bans:

You can't drive without a seat belt and you can't smoke, which is bad if you like those things. Plus bans like that can be misused (cops who happen to not like you can pull your licence for not wearing your seat belt et cetera). Said bans being good or bad wasn't the point though.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

As to benefits, well, just to spitball:

Police likes covid restrictions because it essentially slows down society. Nightclubs and pubs are shut down, no large concerts, fewer demonstrations, less people on mass transit, less people leaving their homes in general. Also increased jurisdiction et cetera.

Big tech likes covid because people use social media, amazon et cetera more.

Media likes covid because people have more time to consume media, and media has something to continually produce material about.

Enviromentalists like it because modern society essentially shutting down is pretty much their end goal.

Governments like covid because they can use it to enact just about any law they want, and because it alleviates them of many of the normal problems of day-to-day running of society. Plus it more or less simplifies political discourse to just one question- how do we deal with covid? Oh, and you can easily persecute political opposition. Doesn't even have to be people who oppose restrictions- you can go after people on the grounds that they simply don't support restrictions draconian enough, or on the grounds that they somehow failed to comply with the restrictions, and so on.

There's any number of things a compliant population can be used for. Which is kind of the core of my point. Covid can be used for anything. If authorities wanted people to go out and buy pink underpants and wear them on their heads, a sufficiently compliant population would do so.

As to seat belt laws and smoking bans:

You can't drive without a seat belt and you can't smoke, which is bad if you like those things. Plus bans like that can be misused (cops who happen to not like you can pull you licence for not wearing your seat belt et cetera). Said bans being good or bad wasn't the point though.

I think it's silly to think Big Tech would want long term lockdowns. Why would Instagram, Snapchat etc want them when most of their traffic is driven by people posting pictures of experiences?

Why would the police want less of a job to do, less of a budget and less manpower.

Why would the government want less people to have money to drive the economy?



And you're not banned from smoking, you're just banned from doing it around other people, which is definitely not a bad thing.

Seatbelt laws for the driver I can give or take if people want to die then whatever, but if a passenger behind the driver isn't wearing a seatbelt, that endangers the life of the driver, so I can see why it's mandatory.