A “pandemic response bill” currently making its way through the Massachusetts state legislature would allow authorities to forcefully quarantine citizens in the event of a health emergency, compel health providers to vaccinate citizens, authorize forceful entry into private dwellings and destruction of citizen property and impose fines on citizens for noncompliance.
If citizens refuse to comply with isolation or quarantine orders in the event of a health emergency, they may be imprisoned for up to 30 days and fined $1,000 per day that the violation continues.
This is on the bill: “An individual who is unable or unwilling to submit to vaccination or treatment shall not be required to submit to such procedures but may be isolated or quarantined.”
It hasn’t been approved by the House, but I imagine it will be inserted in another bill and passed that way.
The prevision is already in place, it’s called Marshal Law. The rights of an individual can be suspended in an event of an emergency.
This is rich: “In a study conducted at the University of Hong Kong, the British Medical Journal reported that less than half of 8,500 doctors and nurses in public hospitals will accept vaccination against the swine flu – even following increases in the World Health Organization’s pandemic alert level.” /// When the docs won’t take the vaccine, any doubt about what they are telling their patients?
Thanks Guilherme. Don’t you hate it when you click and think you did it?
Since this is in Massachusetts, I’m sure the legislature must be asking themselves WWTD (what would Ted do). Which is probably better than asking themselves WWBFD.
Sure, this would be a good thing if we had angels running the country, but with the criminals we currently have this power could be TOO EASILY ABUSED!
But I don’t expect a publicly schooled public to even have the slightest clue as to why power like this wasn’t given to the government in the original constitution.
A good rule of thumb for you liberal statists is to ask what you would think of an idea for increased government power if George Bush, Dick Cheney, Ronald Reagan and Pat Robertson demanded it.
Might allow you to see clearly for an instant.
Look, its Massachusetts. They are very progressive there. You probably can’t imagine how proud they are to be goose-stepping into the future just a bit ahead of the rest of us.
Sorry folks, States ALREADY have most of these options available to them through their Public Health Laws (at least in California). Basically, the local County Health Officer has the right to your body whether you are using it or not. This has been implemented numerous times for non-compliant TB cases over the years… including lock-up to take their meds or forced hospital care.
Maybe Massachusetts is behind the times..
(by the way..I’m a retired Public Health Lab Director and we’ve used the feature 2 times in the 20 years I was working)
#39 BFreeman said
“Basically, the local County Health Officer has the right to your body whether you are using it or not.”….
But not women’s bodies. We’ve already settled that.
Dear Editor;
Here’s your next story:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HzFvv0onPM
#37 I’m all for good ideas. This is a good public health oriented one.
A bad one > torture. Looks good on paper, but totally undermines what we stand for.
Another bad one > arrest and incarcerated without due process. Again, it seems OK but then that nasty Constitution problem raises it’s head.
It seems Liberals have the better ideas that have practical reasons yet balanced with the rule of law.
There’s a word for anybody who tries to enter my home without an invite or a warrant: DEAD.
Dear Editor;
Or this one:
http://cryptogon.com/?p=10751