At a time when grocery store workers and truck drivers are putting in long hours and selflessly risking COVID-19 exposure to keep the shelves in our communities stocked, a "very twisted prank" just forced a supermarket in Pennsylvania to throw away practically their entire inventory of fresh produce.In this particular time, such "pranks" should be considered to be domestic terrorism and prosecuted as such.
...
The supermarket is now working with their local health inspector to ensure that they have identified and properly disinfected each of the areas that the woman potentially contaminated. They say, as a result, they have had to throw out more than $35,000 worth of food — a devastating thought at a time when many Americans are lining up to shop for necessities.
Thursday, March 26, 2020
Hopefully, Terrorism Charges Will Be Forthcoming
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Yes, definitely Domestic Terrorism charges.
But they could not just was much of the fruit? Soap and water or a bit of bleach would have sterilized the surface. Kinda harder to do with lettuce or cauliflower or such, but lots of that produce could have been saved.
Yes, I'd eat it once washed.
Deport her.
I think they should try and find the virus in her saliva,then charge her with attempted murder.
pigpen51
$35k is a felony any way you slice it. A very public Perp Walk seems called for, pour encourager les autres. Admiral Bing would agree.
The woman was apparently one of the mentally ill homeless well known to the local police department. Well, she's going to have a home now, at the Graybar Hotel, at taxpayer expense to the tune of $150K+ per year. Yay?
Which just goes to show that our insane notion of letting mentally ill homeless people just wander around muttering to their invisible friends is, well, more insane than the mentally ill homeless people in question. When will America start doing right by that population? Instead the lefties whine "it would be an infringement of their rights to involuntarily medicate or confine them!" while the righties whine "Socialism! Communism! Hiisssss!". Yeesh.
We used to keep the mentally challenged folks in homes to protect them from society and society from them.
Then the movie "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's nest came out and that system was deemed inhumane or something.
Since then they have been wandering the streets.
Well, B, I was around back then, and yes, the lefties whined "the mentally ill aren't sick, they're different!" as their excuse for turning the mentally ill loose on the streets, but the Republicans, led by Governor Ronald Reagan, just wanted to save money so they could cut taxes. It was a perfect storm of utter morons on the left and utter sociopathic cold-blooded lizard people on the right that led to the current situation.
That movie came out in 1975. Closing of institutions happened the most in the 1950’s and 1960’s. I find that explanation humorous.
Dale
B seems to have a problem with causality.
If you're going to point the finger at anyone point it at Geraldo Rivera smuggling a hidden camera into the Willowbrook institution, 1970 I think it was though DT is absolutely right, this dates to the fifties.
Yeah, but "deinstitutionalization" didn't become common until the mid to late '70's. You are correct that the phase out of such institutions began in the late 50's, but they were still common until after the 80's.
(look it up since one of us has an issue with causation).
in fact, there was a Supreme Court case in 1975 that really opened the doors. (BTW, the BOOK "One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest" came out in 1962)
Then, of course, the ADA really made it hard to institutionalize people with the rule that we hand to "accommodate", because mental issues were a "disability".
Have a nice day, stay safe
1967 - California's Governor Ronald Reagan signed the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act. It limited a family's right to commit a mentally ill relative without the right to due process. It also reduced the state's institutional expenses. That doubled the number of mentally ill people in California's criminal justice system the following year. It also increased the number treated by hospital emergency rooms. Medicaid covered those costs. Other states followed with similar involuntary commitment laws.
https://www.thebalance.com/deinstitutionalization-3306067
If you have better info than this B, now would be the time to assert it.
How about the AMA?
https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/deinstitutionalization-people-mental-illness-causes-and-consequences/2013-10
From the article you reference
8]. An even more egregious situation occurs when difficulty being admitted to a hospital leads to the homelessness of people with severe mental illness, who wander the streets in major cities, being arrested or dying. The term “dying with one’s rights on” was coined by Darold Treffert in 1973 to describe how the laws have gone too far in protecting the rights of individuals at the expense of their safety and well-being [14].
Hate to break it to you, but 1973 happened before 1975.
Not saying the movement hadn't started earlier, in fact, the article I posted explicitly stated that right at the top. I said the movement had greater public support after the movie, which it did.
You quote taken from my article is an opinion from an autism doctor, not a policy statement for the courts, nor from the AMA.
Why are you so stuck on refuting every detail?
Why are you so stuck on defending your original statement that there was little public awareness until the release of the movie in 1975?
I can say personally to get someone committed in NY was not easy by 75.
The major facility housed both voluntary, involuntary and the criminal
insane, Kings Park was quite large. By 1976 it was down to the criminal
insane and that was completely deserted soon after. I know as for curiosity
in mid 79 i toured the place, hallmark was bars on all windows any
balcony caged (aganist jumpers) and so on. It was a dark place that
could have been a set for Gotham.
Some of you are debating dates that are likely more specific to some
locale vs generally. I can't and will not speak for cali, they it was
the other side of somewhere. NY the deinstitutionalization of the mentally
ill and insane was largely over in the 70s the late 60s represented
the pivot point for that and it was a slow roll downhill.
When the state got out of the mental institution biz it was because they were barely housing them and new they didn't have to. the problem was no one else was available to step up and fill the gap unless they had money and it was kin.
The rest as they say is history, to be debated. Fixing the problem, I
should live so long.
Eck!
Enough of the rehashing of ancient history.
We're done.
Post a Comment