Hey, there! Log in / Register
Walsh asks expected protests to end by 9:30 p.m. so people can comply with coronavirus curfew
By adamg on Wed, 11/04/2020 - 12:11pm
Mayor Marty Walsh said he expects protests and marches this week following the end of voting yesterday, but asked demonstrators to have their say early and break up by 9:30 p.m. so people can be home by the governor's 10 p.m. voluntary curfew.
"Remember the coronavirus," Walsh said at a City Hall press conference at which he said Boston's Covid-19 test positivity rate only dropped from 7.8% last week to 7.2% this week. ""Do not be marching around the streets of Boston at 11 o'clock tonight. We still have a pandemic."
Mixing national politics and Covid-19 - which he said were inextricably linked, in part because Covid-19 issues are one of the reasons the vote tallies in some states are so slow - Walsh acknowledged, that what Gov. Baker asked for earlier this week are tough requests, but necessary to bring infection rates down again, at least if people ever want to get back to nightlife and sporting events and to get kids back in schools.
Mask wearing, curfews and limiting the size of gatherings now will help break the spread and ensure the city and state don't have to make even tougher calls later, he said, noting Bostonians helped bring down Covid-19 rates from a May/June surge through such steps and they can do it again.
Returning to potential protests, the mayor said: "As of right now, I have no concern about violence in Boston."
Police Commissioner William Gross said Boston sent a message to the country yesterday about how to conduct an election peacefully. But he cautioned would-be miscreants to watch their steps: Boston and State Police and the National Guard are in constant contact and ready to roll out onto the streets should any trouble start.
Walsh declined to criticize Gov. Baker for blanking his ballot for president. The important thing, Walsh said, is that Baker voted - what somebody does once they have their ballot in front of them is their business.
Without naming him, though, Walsh criticized President Trump for calling for a premature end to the vote tallying and blathering about "fraud."
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
'Curfew' is not in effect until Friday
Even leaving aside that the state's 'curfew' is voluntary, it doesn't go into effect until Friday, and then it starts at 10 pm.
9:30 pm is the time when restaurants, zoos, and some other establishments are required to close (starting Friday).
(And I still don't understand why the virus would be more transmissible at 11 pm than it is at 9 pm.)
Don't expect logical explanations
When protesting a democratic election.
Protesting to ensure the election is democratic
Meaning, that all votes are properly counted.
Corrected that for you.
And
Needless to say they are not properly counted if the other candidate gets more. And if they're not properly counted there will be iPhone and Canada Goose reparations to pay.
Corrected that for you.
The looting was in reaction
The looting was in reaction to George Floyd killing not vote counts
Still, however, the looting was inexcusable,
and when something like that happens, it hurts the cause, rather than helps it. Sure, anger is understandable, but looting is not the way to go.
this is a knee jerk response
i haven’t yet heard anyone on this website articulate exactly *why* looting is wrong. i’m not necessarily saying that looting is right; but i am saying that maybe you should examine the attitudes that cause you to cape for large corporations when they lose what amounts to a minuscule portion of their profits.
tl;dr how is it that looting hurts the cause if you concede that you understand the anger behind the action?
I don't post often; however,
I don't post often; however, if you need someone to articulate why looting is wrong (I can't believe I'm using this phrase) "you are part of the problem". People should not steal. No more explaining should be necessary than that. By the way, my stomach is in knots b/c you made me type "you are part of the problem".
Police should not murder. Let
Police should not murder. Let’s start there first
perfect encapsulation of my point
your answer is “looting is wrong because it’s wrong.”
and it appears you’ve failed to engage on my broader point because there’s no thought going on here. it’s just a knee jerk reaction. read my post again if you’d like.
Should you follow a law that doesn't apply to your safety?
Of course stealing is wrong. But if the law doesn't keep you safe what are your responsibilities? If it is legal to shoot someone for not following police instructions, then why would you respect any law?
It's not just large
It's not just large corporations that are hurt by looting. It's also small corporations and family-owned businesses. In fact, the smaller businesses suffer more, since they don't have the major corporate backing to cover the loss.
"peaceful" (meaning the kind
"peaceful" (meaning the kind you can ignore) protest got jack shit done for police reform.
rioting and looting got results.
people ask politely in indoor voices until they get ignored and start yelling.
what kind of person thinks windows and sneakers are more important than human lives? seriously?
the real looting was the corporate pandemic handouts.
what's with people's priorities?
A couple of simple explanations
1. Less time that businesses will be open overall means less hours during the day that people will be exposed. Even if it results in a miniscule drop in positives, that's still beneficial in the aggregate. Less people out that late means less traffic stops, less last minute errands, less accidents etc. Every unnecessary human interaction that is reduced means one less avenue for spread.
2. People out after 10 at a restaurant are more likely to be drinking. Drinking impairs judgement, leads to motor vehicle accidents, and increases overall human to human interactions, especially when done publicly.
Baker is trying to preserve the economy's ability to function to some degree while curtailing the fringes. Those fringes are where unnecessary risks are coupled with the least necessity.
One could also argue
1. Less time for businesses to be open will result in businesses being more crowded, with longer lines, during their shorter opening hours. If we follow this logic to its ridiculous extreme, the safest choice would be to have businesses only open for a few hours a day. More people out on the roads during shorter hours makes accidents more likely -- otherwise rush hour would be the safest time to be on the road. A last-minute errand which must be postponed until the next day will still happen, so still not safer.
2. If drinking at a restaurant after 10 pm is the concern, then a more tightly targeted limitation on restaurants serving alcohol is the answer, rather than a blanket statewide curfew. Why should restaurants which don't serve alcohol be forced to close by 9:30? Why should a socially-distanced event at a zoo close early? Are many zoo patrons sneaking in nips?
If business are following
If business are following whatever sector specific guidelines apply to them, then at worst, they would be at whatever was determined to be a safe max capacity for them while they were open. Assuming that those guidelines are rightly safe, wouldn't it be good for those businesses to be operating at capacity? No places should be "crowded" right now if they are following the guidelines.
Since you mentioned errands, the "essential" places like grocery stores, pharmacies, takeout food are all allowed to be open later, and the public is allowed to go to those places in the overnight hours.
Now to where I'll say there is a stupid impact to this: the Scouts can't go camping now (yes, we do camp in tents when its cold out, I'd prefer a cabin myself but those were off the table this year anyways). We can still do all of the normal camping activities, from 5AM to 10PM, but at the end of the day, we can't climb into single person tents and sleep at a place that isn't our home. That's how the local councils that govern us have interpreted the new rules and thus we will abide by it. But again, the only activity we are not allowed to do, which is absolutely critical to calling it "camping" is sleeping, by yourself, in a tent in the woods.
Is it perfect? No.
Will the new restrictions have negative impacts on people? Absolutely.
Is it the right thing to do for the safety of all of us? Beats me, but I hope so.
how is not letting scouts
how is not letting scouts sleep in a tent possibly keeping anyone safer?
this is a stupid, stupid, stupid law. why not just be more careful about how many people you're around, which would actually make a difference?
reducing the time a business
reducing the time a business can be open doesn't reduce demand. it just crams the same amount of people into a smaller space and makes things worse.
also what's wrong with drinking if you aren't acting stupid while you're drinking? fucking moralist bullshit.
demand isn’t really what’s in question here though
is it? considering there are also limits on how many people can be inside any particular building at one time.
that's assuming they are
that's assuming they are constantly at max capacity.
unless it's at full capacity
unless it's at full capacity all the time that shouldn't matter.
MBTA rules and policies
Does the curfew or mandatory mask rule have any effect on MBTA or are they still following the see something say nothing policies they now follow.
No
The Sons of Liberty didn't follow the curfew. Ignore your leaders, people. Do what you want to do.
Ineffectual
For heavens sake, even high school students don't pay attention to curfews, do you think worked up protestors will?
You don't have to
But you're either REALLY important or REALLY selfish if you feel like it doesn't apply to you.
Is there any evidence in favor of curfews?
It's not reasonable to ask people to observe them unless they are accompanied by a sensible explanation of how they are supposed to help control the virus.
how is ending extrajudicial
how is ending extrajudicial murder or electoral theft not important?
mass and cass
is it ok to be out there after 9:30 marty?
damn, this is a real gotcha
they really should go home
A government approved protest
A government approved protest is nothing more than a parade.
I thought the curfew didn't start until Friday
Just saying
Most have to be up bright and early for work
So I wouldn't worry, plus it's a bit chilly out.
Today's Boston Common protest started at 3:30 pm
I left at 4:30, but it only went on for a half hour after that. It was about as mainstream Democratic as one can imagine, so the large numbers of police on motorcycles nearby were totally unnecessary.
Another protest that I didn't attend today was scheduled for Nubian Square at 6 pm.
Hey, Marty!
Hey, Marty!
It's 9:30! Will you come by Columbia Road and tell all the street-racer mourners that it's time to go home for the evening?
I have sympathy that all those people are mourning - and that the crowds, loud music, roaring engines, squealing tires, and burning rubber are signs of that morning. But - sympathy has its limits.
It's been four days of it.
Are they all social distancing and masked?
What happens when you let this go on and somebody gets killed or hurt in a laying-rubber stunt?
How many people are gathered out there, Marty? To "mourn"? Our churches can't have more than 50 people. We've had people dead where we weren't allowed to have wakes or funerals. We've had wakes and funerals where we had to have sign-up lists.
We're not supposed to sing in our churches.
We're not supposed to greet each other in our churches.
---
Are the rules only for suckers who obey them? How very Trumpian of you, Marty.
Mourners?
Whom are they mourning for?
Somebody killed in a car
Somebody killed in a car wreck Sunday morning.
edit - To be clear, I'm not saying the victim was street racing. I didn't see the crash. I'm characterizing some of the mourners because of the type of cars the mourners have had at the scene, all the engine revving and burning rubber.
I don't know what caused the crash. When I asked him if he had heard any news of it, Adam found a twitter mention of the crash with a photo of a car with a badly smashed-in front end. I drove by during the day Sunday and saw that one of those big concrete, earth-filled planters on the median had been knocked out of place by several feet. To me, if the two are related, that adds up to high speed crash, but that doesn't necessarily mean street racing or other recklessness - something else could have caused the high speed. For example, driver could have had a heart attack or something and foot jammed against gas pedal.
more home partys
officials keep blaming positivity on illicit at home gatherings. yet are doing everything in their power to make going out in public worse, which will force more people to have,........ you guessed it, more at home gatherings.