How is that?

Let's say my significant other and I drove over an hour to that town to do grocery shopping for an older relative.

We enter the store together, and no signage is posted on the premises.

How could we be expected to know of the temporary local ordinance?

Federale01 said:

---

I don't think you will have much luck fighting it. It is pretty settled law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts

---

A challenge, sure, but that decision isn't overly broad and does say that things can't have an absurd consequence. That might be the case here.

Edited to finish my sentence.

aggie_bryan said:

---

GiveEmHellBill said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Weird to take your spouse to the store in these times unless there's extenuating circumstances.

And since they got the ticket I guess there wasnt.

---

My wife and I shop together all the time and haven't stopped during the end of the world.

In fact, we just got back from a trip to HEB in College Station. Glad I live in a reasonable town and not in 1940's Germany where we have to justify "extenuating circumstances."

---

I really wish people would stop comparing our current circumstances to 1940's Germany. It's ****ing dense and frankly insulting.

---

Ok, so pick a different example where the government gets to decide whether you are allowed to go to the store with your wife.

TxAG#2011 said:

---

Federale01 said:

---

I don't think you will have much luck fighting it. It is pretty settled law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts

---

But muh rights

---

So you're saying it's okay to give up our rights? Please also tell me how this law restricted people into the store. Tell me how it made others around safer.

agdaddy04 said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

Federale01 said:

---

I don't think you will have much luck fighting it. It is pretty settled law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts

---

But muh rights

---

So you're saying it's okay to give up our rights? Please also tell me how this law restricted people into the store. Tell me how it made others around safer.

---

Re your last question: If everybody brings their family the store is crowded. If families only have one shopper per family, the store is less crowded, and social distancing is more possible, everyone is safer. One shopper per family also means one person per family is exposed in the store, vs 2 or more.

It's not "giving up your rights" that is the issue here. The law allows for the community to take steps in a time of an emergency to protect itself from the actions of the few who would rather put the entire community at risk than follow the law. It means the government has the power to restrict our rights in certain cases. When governors or county leaders declared a public health emergency, the government assumed the power to protect the whole from the actions of the few.

While 1000 dollars is ridiculous and the problem likely could have been solved by a store employee not allowing couples into shop unless they had a reason, the law gives the government the power to take these steps. I am not arguing in favor of this particular rule or the fine imposed, but I don't understand people who are saying, "isn't this America?" This was settled over 100 years ago. Its acceptable for the government to curtail your individual liberties in the time of an emergency. No one is giving them up.

Quote:

---

But muh rights

---

Nice attitude about it. It's amazing how some of us seem to be almost celebrating all of this. None of us should. Whether you agree with the ordinance or not, it should be something that all of us should have a massive distaste of and if one feels that this ordinance is needed, it's with a "lesser of two evils" attitude about it with the absolute commitment to a return to normalcy ASAP. One shouldn't mock another American b/c they see a law forbidding something as mundane and reasonable as shopping with your spouse as being out of line. Maybe the law is needed (though I doubt it is in a town like Cleburne) but let's not celebrate it not a couple getting a ticket for it. A warning should have been enough. Maybe there was more to it. Maybe the couple mouthed off or whatever. Who knows. But from what I am seeing on the surface, this goes a little extreme.

SoupNazi2001 said:

---

88planoAg said:

---

agdaddy04 said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

Federale01 said:

---

I don't think you will have much luck fighting it. It is pretty settled law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts

---

But muh rights

---

So you're saying it's okay to give up our rights? Please also tell me how this law restricted people into the store. Tell me how it made others around safer.

---

Re your last question: If everybody brings their family the store is crowded. If families only have one shopper per family, the store is less crowded, and social distancing is more possible, everyone is safer. One shopper per family also means one person per family is exposed in the store, vs 2 or more.

---

What do single parents do?

---

I would assume they tell the store/officer.

That's not what this is, though. It amazes me when I see couples, especially elderly couples shopping together.

It is possible I am married to a Karen. We haven't reported anyone yet, however.

Under what circumstances might she be tempted to report? I'll try to keep her away from them, but working as a moderating influence can only be so successful.

The Karen urge is strong, and she is extremely opinionated.

Curious if anyone else has expertise here?

88planoAg said:

---

SoupNazi2001 said:

---

88planoAg said:

---

agdaddy04 said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

Federale01 said:

---

I don't think you will have much luck fighting it. It is pretty settled law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts

---

But muh rights

---

So you're saying it's okay to give up our rights? Please also tell me how this law restricted people into the store. Tell me how it made others around safer.

---

Re your last question: If everybody brings their family the store is crowded. If families only have one shopper per family, the store is less crowded, and social distancing is more possible, everyone is safer. One shopper per family also means one person per family is exposed in the store, vs 2 or more.

---

What do single parents do?

---

I would assume they tell the store/officer.

That's not what this is, though. It amazes me when I see couples, especially elderly couples shopping together.

---

In most of these ordinances, they allow parents and children. Don't know about Cleburn specifically but overall, the ones I've seen have exceptions for single parents or parents/family who are watching children.

As for being amazed when you see couples, I'm not following here. If there is no ordinance or a store imposed limit, they have every right to shop together. And elderly may need to go together especially if they can get in and out of the store faster and, many times, one spouse is there to help the other if they have any physical issues etc.

What if their shopping was something that could not be purchased by the spouse? Lord knows I'm no expert on the feminine products and heaven forbid you upset a a quarantined mother of two with PMS if you bring home the wrong box of tampons.

culdeus said:

---

T Boon Pickens said:

---

Where I'm at the Covid scare never took hold. Nobody follows any of the directives, because this is simply not a legitimate concern. We also have 0 reported deaths.

---

.

Cool, can we make out?

---

After I'm done beating you with an axe handle, my wife would probably join in

The law used at this Cleburne WalMart is a state aw that is backed by precedent. If they tear up the ticket, they are going to be seeing a warrant in their future. They need to hire a lawyer and hope the city judge sees it differently.

The Cleburne WalMart has been a zoo for weeks now, local folks are treating it like Six Flags. If people in this town are going to catch Covid, it is going to be from WalMart.

The city and its marshals have had it blasted all over the media for the last two weeks, Two weekends ago the marshals were at the local stores handing out warnings. Good for them if they do not read the news or use social media. I have not been to WalMart, but my understanding is that warnings are also posted at the entry of the store. I have seen this warning at HEB, Lowes, and Home Depot.

Single parents can bring small children. The issue is both parents or entire nuclear families coming together.

Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices.

All that having been said, while I understand this law I do not like this law and am glad that I won't be seeing these tickets in County or District courts. And yes, I go to stores alone to avoid getting a ticket.

The Shank Ag said:

---

AggieKatie2 said:

---

Cleburne

---

Of course in my hometown.

There are two groups on Facebook, "Cleburnites Talking" and "Cleburnites Talking (After Dark)" that have people complaining or defending themselves for going to the store with other people. Lot's of pearl clutching and saber rattlin'.



Side note to those groups, great drama reading if you are bored during quarantine

Best part is this one guy, a few years older than myself, that went to hollywood for a while a came back. Long story short, raised by grandmother who he calls his mom, was bullied for being gay in hs, changed schools, graduated and was a boy band impersonator for a while in New Orleans, moved to hollywood, was an extra or had tiny parts in a handful of nothing films, wrote a book full of typos that sold like 100 copies, moved back, and has become Mr. Social Justice of Cleburne while living with and off his grandmother who is currently hospice, wrote a follow up book and claimed to have a release party with a lot of celebs in Hollywood, gets exposed that he lied about it and was catfishing people (see https://pagesix.com/2019/11/15/phony-publicist-falsely-uses-paris-hilton-lisa-rinna-amazon-to-promote-book-party/). He starts all sorts of petitions, rally events, etc. Also goes on the attack of peoples looks and anything about them if they disagree with him. Really is a hate follow for me at this point, but highly entertaining

---

That guy. He needs the OB on his arse.

proc said:

---

The Shank Ag said:

---

AggieKatie2 said:

---

Cleburne

---

Of course in my hometown.

There are two groups on Facebook, "Cleburnites Talking" and "Cleburnites Talking (After Dark)" that have people complaining or defending themselves for going to the store with other people. Lot's of pearl clutching and saber rattlin'.



Side note to those groups, great drama reading if you are bored during quarantine

Best part is this one guy, a few years older than myself, that went to hollywood for a while a came back. Long story short, raised by grandmother who he calls his mom, was bullied for being gay in hs, changed schools, graduated and was a boy band impersonator for a while in New Orleans, moved to hollywood, was an extra or had tiny parts in a handful of nothing films, wrote a book full of typos that sold like 100 copies, moved back, and has become Mr. Social Justice of Cleburne while living with and off his grandmother who is currently hospice, wrote a follow up book and claimed to have a release party with a lot of celebs in Hollywood, gets exposed that he lied about it and was catfishing people (see https://pagesix.com/2019/11/15/phony-publicist-falsely-uses-paris-hilton-lisa-rinna-amazon-to-promote-book-party/). He starts all sorts of petitions, rally events, etc. Also goes on the attack of peoples looks and anything about them if they disagree with him. Really is a hate follow for me at this point, but highly entertaining

---

That guy. He needs the OB on his arse.

---

He's going to get his one day, whether it's a Bubba that pops him upside the head, gets arrested for one of his scams, or someone just compiles a mountain of "evidence" on him and exposes him online.

I honestly have tried to be nice to the guy, but it has gotten to the point where I don't care anymore. Bring the OB pain

Quote:

---

I honestly have tried to be nice to the guy

---

Yeah, you seem genuinely nice.

proc said:

---

The law used at this Cleburne WalMart is a state aw that is backed by precedent. If they tear up the ticket, they are going to be seeing a warrant in their future. They need to hire a lawyer and hope the city judge sees it differently.

The Cleburne WalMart has been a zoo for weeks now, local folks are treating it like Six Flags. If people in this town are going to catch Covid, it is going to be from WalMart.

The city and its marshals have had it blasted all over the media for the last two weeks, Two weekends ago the marshals were at the local stores handing out warnings. Good for them if they do not read the news or use social media. I have not been to WalMart, but my understanding is that warnings are also posted at the entry of the store. I have seen this warning at HEB, Lowes, and Home Depot.

Single parents can bring small children. The issue is both parents or entire nuclear families coming together.

Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices.

All that having been said, while I understand this law I do not like this law and am glad that I won't be seeing these tickets in County or District courts. And yes, I go to stores alone to avoid getting a ticket.

---

"Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices."

Actually, freedom of assembly extends to anything and everything people choose to assemble for. That is why it is freedom of assembly and is a fundamental human right.

The argument here is that because of the emergency the government is suspending fundamental rights... but what constitutes an emergency that warrants a suspension of fundamental rights?

Johnson County has had 57 cases and 2 deaths as of the last update I saw.

How long can the government exercise limitless control over the lives of American citizens?

aggie_bryan said:

---

GiveEmHellBill said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Weird to take your spouse to the store in these times unless there's extenuating circumstances.

And since they got the ticket I guess there wasnt.

---

My wife and I shop together all the time and haven't stopped during the end of the world.

In fact, we just got back from a trip to HEB in College Station. Glad I live in a reasonable town and not in 1940's Germany where we have to justify "extenuating circumstances."

---

I really wish people would stop comparing our current circumstances to 1940's Germany. It's ****ing dense and frankly insulting.

---

You know, you're probably right. It's more like 1960-1980s East Germany. The Stasi targeted everyone, not just specific groups.

For everyone's sicherheit, of course.

Whether it is legal or not, giving out a $1,000 ticket to someone from another town that was unaware of the law is a d*** move.

Giving one out at all is a dick move. Warn them about the stupid, freedom limiting ordinance and move on

Fizban said:

---

proc said:

---

The law used at this Cleburne WalMart is a state aw that is backed by precedent. If they tear up the ticket, they are going to be seeing a warrant in their future. They need to hire a lawyer and hope the city judge sees it differently.

The Cleburne WalMart has been a zoo for weeks now, local folks are treating it like Six Flags. If people in this town are going to catch Covid, it is going to be from WalMart.

The city and its marshals have had it blasted all over the media for the last two weeks, Two weekends ago the marshals were at the local stores handing out warnings. Good for them if they do not read the news or use social media. I have not been to WalMart, but my understanding is that warnings are also posted at the entry of the store. I have seen this warning at HEB, Lowes, and Home Depot.

Single parents can bring small children. The issue is both parents or entire nuclear families coming together.

Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices.

All that having been said, while I understand this law I do not like this law and am glad that I won't be seeing these tickets in County or District courts. And yes, I go to stores alone to avoid getting a ticket.

---

"Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices."

Actually, freedom of assembly extends to anything and everything people choose to assemble for. That is why it is freedom of assembly and is a fundamental human right.

The argument here is that because of the emergency the government is suspending fundamental rights... but what constitutes an emergency that warrants a suspension of fundamental rights?

Johnson County has had 57 cases and 2 deaths as of the last update I saw.

How long can the government exercise limitless control over the lives of American citizens?

---

First, no, this isn't an assembly, it's an errand. If we could go back in time, I bet every single founder would agree. Their intent was to allow fringe political and religious groups to assemble freely without getting stamped down by the government.

Second, if folks assembled in the middle of I-45, they would be dispersed and those who refused would be arrested and rightly so. This is a similar case on obviously a lesser scale.

Does the risk posed by a second potentially infected person in the same public space justify the law? I don't know. I'm inclined to think it's not.

But this law isn't infringing any rights.

deadbq03 said:

---

Fizban said:

---

proc said:

---

The law used at this Cleburne WalMart is a state aw that is backed by precedent. If they tear up the ticket, they are going to be seeing a warrant in their future. They need to hire a lawyer and hope the city judge sees it differently.

The Cleburne WalMart has been a zoo for weeks now, local folks are treating it like Six Flags. If people in this town are going to catch Covid, it is going to be from WalMart.

The city and its marshals have had it blasted all over the media for the last two weeks, Two weekends ago the marshals were at the local stores handing out warnings. Good for them if they do not read the news or use social media. I have not been to WalMart, but my understanding is that warnings are also posted at the entry of the store. I have seen this warning at HEB, Lowes, and Home Depot.

Single parents can bring small children. The issue is both parents or entire nuclear families coming together.

Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices.

All that having been said, while I understand this law I do not like this law and am glad that I won't be seeing these tickets in County or District courts. And yes, I go to stores alone to avoid getting a ticket.

---

"Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices."

Actually, freedom of assembly extends to anything and everything people choose to assemble for. That is why it is freedom of assembly and is a fundamental human right.

The argument here is that because of the emergency the government is suspending fundamental rights... but what constitutes an emergency that warrants a suspension of fundamental rights?

Johnson County has had 57 cases and 2 deaths as of the last update I saw.

How long can the government exercise limitless control over the lives of American citizens?

---

First, no, this isn't an assembly, it's an errand. If we could go back in time, I bet every single founder would agree. Their intent was to allow fringe political and religious groups to assemble freely without getting stamped down by the government.

Second, if folks assembled in the middle of I-45, they would be dispersed and those who refused would be arrested and rightly so. This is a similar case on obviously a lesser scale.

Does the risk posed by a second potentially infected person in the same public space justify the law? I don't know. I'm inclined to think it's not.

But this law isn't infringing any rights.

---

No, if we could go back in time we could bet every single founder would agree that their intent was for people to be free. That means they get to decide if they go to the store and who they go with. They can go with a neighbor but not a spouse? Because the government said so? You honestly believe the founding fathers would have agreed with that?

People assembling in the middle of a highway would be obstructing others from exercising their rights. (their own freedom to use the roads and travel) This is not at all a similar case because someone who goes to a store isn't preventing anyone else from going to a store.

Any law that claims the power to tell you who you may or may not associate with is an infringement of your rights.

TxAG#2011 said:

---

Love this rule. People loading up the family minivans to Walmart like it's a vacation are ridiculous

---

You and the 41 CoronaBros that starred your post baffle me. What a weird post. Tells me a lot about you guys.

Fizban said:

---

deadbq03 said:

---

Fizban said:

---

proc said:

---

The law used at this Cleburne WalMart is a state aw that is backed by precedent. If they tear up the ticket, they are going to be seeing a warrant in their future. They need to hire a lawyer and hope the city judge sees it differently.

The Cleburne WalMart has been a zoo for weeks now, local folks are treating it like Six Flags. If people in this town are going to catch Covid, it is going to be from WalMart.

The city and its marshals have had it blasted all over the media for the last two weeks, Two weekends ago the marshals were at the local stores handing out warnings. Good for them if they do not read the news or use social media. I have not been to WalMart, but my understanding is that warnings are also posted at the entry of the store. I have seen this warning at HEB, Lowes, and Home Depot.

Single parents can bring small children. The issue is both parents or entire nuclear families coming together.

Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices.

All that having been said, while I understand this law I do not like this law and am glad that I won't be seeing these tickets in County or District courts. And yes, I go to stores alone to avoid getting a ticket.

---

"Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices."

Actually, freedom of assembly extends to anything and everything people choose to assemble for. That is why it is freedom of assembly and is a fundamental human right.

The argument here is that because of the emergency the government is suspending fundamental rights... but what constitutes an emergency that warrants a suspension of fundamental rights?

Johnson County has had 57 cases and 2 deaths as of the last update I saw.

How long can the government exercise limitless control over the lives of American citizens?

---

First, no, this isn't an assembly, it's an errand. If we could go back in time, I bet every single founder would agree. Their intent was to allow fringe political and religious groups to assemble freely without getting stamped down by the government.

Second, if folks assembled in the middle of I-45, they would be dispersed and those who refused would be arrested and rightly so. This is a similar case on obviously a lesser scale.

Does the risk posed by a second potentially infected person in the same public space justify the law? I don't know. I'm inclined to think it's not.

But this law isn't infringing any rights.

---

No, if we could go back in time we could bet every single founder would agree that their intent was for people to be free. That means they get to decide if they go to the store and who they go with. They can go with a neighbor but not a spouse? Because the government said so? You honestly believe the founding fathers would have agreed with that?

People assembling in the middle of a highway would be obstructing others from exercising their rights. (their own freedom to use the roads and travel) This is not at all a similar case because someone who goes to a store isn't preventing anyone else from going to a store.

Any law that claims the power to tell you who you may or may not associate with is an infringement of your rights.

---

To the political board.

proc said:

---

Fizban said:

---

deadbq03 said:

---

Fizban said:

---

proc said:

---

The law used at this Cleburne WalMart is a state aw that is backed by precedent. If they tear up the ticket, they are going to be seeing a warrant in their future. They need to hire a lawyer and hope the city judge sees it differently.

The Cleburne WalMart has been a zoo for weeks now, local folks are treating it like Six Flags. If people in this town are going to catch Covid, it is going to be from WalMart.

The city and its marshals have had it blasted all over the media for the last two weeks, Two weekends ago the marshals were at the local stores handing out warnings. Good for them if they do not read the news or use social media. I have not been to WalMart, but my understanding is that warnings are also posted at the entry of the store. I have seen this warning at HEB, Lowes, and Home Depot.

Single parents can bring small children. The issue is both parents or entire nuclear families coming together.

Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices.

All that having been said, while I understand this law I do not like this law and am glad that I won't be seeing these tickets in County or District courts. And yes, I go to stores alone to avoid getting a ticket.

---

"Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices."

Actually, freedom of assembly extends to anything and everything people choose to assemble for. That is why it is freedom of assembly and is a fundamental human right.

The argument here is that because of the emergency the government is suspending fundamental rights... but what constitutes an emergency that warrants a suspension of fundamental rights?

Johnson County has had 57 cases and 2 deaths as of the last update I saw.

How long can the government exercise limitless control over the lives of American citizens?

---

First, no, this isn't an assembly, it's an errand. If we could go back in time, I bet every single founder would agree. Their intent was to allow fringe political and religious groups to assemble freely without getting stamped down by the government.

Second, if folks assembled in the middle of I-45, they would be dispersed and those who refused would be arrested and rightly so. This is a similar case on obviously a lesser scale.

Does the risk posed by a second potentially infected person in the same public space justify the law? I don't know. I'm inclined to think it's not.

But this law isn't infringing any rights.

---

No, if we could go back in time we could bet every single founder would agree that their intent was for people to be free. That means they get to decide if they go to the store and who they go with. They can go with a neighbor but not a spouse? Because the government said so? You honestly believe the founding fathers would have agreed with that?

People assembling in the middle of a highway would be obstructing others from exercising their rights. (their own freedom to use the roads and travel) This is not at all a similar case because someone who goes to a store isn't preventing anyone else from going to a store.

Any law that claims the power to tell you who you may or may not associate with is an infringement of your rights.

---

Those same founders passed Federal quarantine legislation in 1878.

---

The same founders passed legislation a hundred years after they wrote the constitution?

Edit: 91 years

Wycliffe_03 said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

Love this rule. People loading up the family minivans to Walmart like it's a vacation are ridiculous

---

You and the 41 CoronaBros that started your post baffle me. What a weird post. Tells me a lot about you guys.

---

Judging by your almost exclusively F16 post history it must be really strange seeing some differing opinions I imagine

proc said:

---

Fizban said:

---

deadbq03 said:

---

Fizban said:

---

proc said:

---

The law used at this Cleburne WalMart is a state aw that is backed by precedent. If they tear up the ticket, they are going to be seeing a warrant in their future. They need to hire a lawyer and hope the city judge sees it differently.

The Cleburne WalMart has been a zoo for weeks now, local folks are treating it like Six Flags. If people in this town are going to catch Covid, it is going to be from WalMart.

The city and its marshals have had it blasted all over the media for the last two weeks, Two weekends ago the marshals were at the local stores handing out warnings. Good for them if they do not read the news or use social media. I have not been to WalMart, but my understanding is that warnings are also posted at the entry of the store. I have seen this warning at HEB, Lowes, and Home Depot.

Single parents can bring small children. The issue is both parents or entire nuclear families coming together.

Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices.

All that having been said, while I understand this law I do not like this law and am glad that I won't be seeing these tickets in County or District courts. And yes, I go to stores alone to avoid getting a ticket.

---

"Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices."

Actually, freedom of assembly extends to anything and everything people choose to assemble for. That is why it is freedom of assembly and is a fundamental human right.

The argument here is that because of the emergency the government is suspending fundamental rights... but what constitutes an emergency that warrants a suspension of fundamental rights?

Johnson County has had 57 cases and 2 deaths as of the last update I saw.

How long can the government exercise limitless control over the lives of American citizens?

---

First, no, this isn't an assembly, it's an errand. If we could go back in time, I bet every single founder would agree. Their intent was to allow fringe political and religious groups to assemble freely without getting stamped down by the government.

Second, if folks assembled in the middle of I-45, they would be dispersed and those who refused would be arrested and rightly so. This is a similar case on obviously a lesser scale.

Does the risk posed by a second potentially infected person in the same public space justify the law? I don't know. I'm inclined to think it's not.

But this law isn't infringing any rights.

---

No, if we could go back in time we could bet every single founder would agree that their intent was for people to be free. That means they get to decide if they go to the store and who they go with. They can go with a neighbor but not a spouse? Because the government said so? You honestly believe the founding fathers would have agreed with that?

People assembling in the middle of a highway would be obstructing others from exercising their rights. (their own freedom to use the roads and travel) This is not at all a similar case because someone who goes to a store isn't preventing anyone else from going to a store.

Any law that claims the power to tell you who you may or may not associate with is an infringement of your rights.

---

To the political board.

---

Lol, you get fact checked so you edit your post to this?

TxAG#2011 said:

---

Wycliffe_03 said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

Love this rule. People loading up the family minivans to Walmart like it's a vacation are ridiculous

---

You and the 41 CoronaBros that started your post baffle me. What a weird post. Tells me a lot about you guys.

---

Judging by your almost exclusively F16 post history it must be really strange seeing some differing opinions I imagine

---

Hey I'm not the one that LOVES the rules barring families from shopping together. So weird.

Fizban said:

---

proc said:

---

Fizban said:

---

deadbq03 said:

---

Fizban said:

---

proc said:

---

The law used at this Cleburne WalMart is a state aw that is backed by precedent. If they tear up the ticket, they are going to be seeing a warrant in their future. They need to hire a lawyer and hope the city judge sees it differently.

The Cleburne WalMart has been a zoo for weeks now, local folks are treating it like Six Flags. If people in this town are going to catch Covid, it is going to be from WalMart.

The city and its marshals have had it blasted all over the media for the last two weeks, Two weekends ago the marshals were at the local stores handing out warnings. Good for them if they do not read the news or use social media. I have not been to WalMart, but my understanding is that warnings are also posted at the entry of the store. I have seen this warning at HEB, Lowes, and Home Depot.

Single parents can bring small children. The issue is both parents or entire nuclear families coming together.

Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices.

All that having been said, while I understand this law I do not like this law and am glad that I won't be seeing these tickets in County or District courts. And yes, I go to stores alone to avoid getting a ticket.

---

"Banning entire families from WalMart is not a Constitutional violation. Freedom of assembly does not extend to shopping for the low low prices."

Actually, freedom of assembly extends to anything and everything people choose to assemble for. That is why it is freedom of assembly and is a fundamental human right.

The argument here is that because of the emergency the government is suspending fundamental rights... but what constitutes an emergency that warrants a suspension of fundamental rights?

Johnson County has had 57 cases and 2 deaths as of the last update I saw.

How long can the government exercise limitless control over the lives of American citizens?

---

First, no, this isn't an assembly, it's an errand. If we could go back in time, I bet every single founder would agree. Their intent was to allow fringe political and religious groups to assemble freely without getting stamped down by the government.

Second, if folks assembled in the middle of I-45, they would be dispersed and those who refused would be arrested and rightly so. This is a similar case on obviously a lesser scale.

Does the risk posed by a second potentially infected person in the same public space justify the law? I don't know. I'm inclined to think it's not.

But this law isn't infringing any rights.

---

No, if we could go back in time we could bet every single founder would agree that their intent was for people to be free. That means they get to decide if they go to the store and who they go with. They can go with a neighbor but not a spouse? Because the government said so? You honestly believe the founding fathers would have agreed with that?

People assembling in the middle of a highway would be obstructing others from exercising their rights. (their own freedom to use the roads and travel) This is not at all a similar case because someone who goes to a store isn't preventing anyone else from going to a store.

Any law that claims the power to tell you who you may or may not associate with is an infringement of your rights.

---

To the political board.

---

Lol, you get fact checked so you edit your post to this?

---

If you want to be an argumentative asshat, we can discuss the smallpox quarantines enacted during the colonial era by Massachusetts and South Carolina on the politics board. This is rapidly devolving into that kind of crap.

Do you really want to compare COVID-19 to smallpox?

One had a case fatality rate over 30% overall, 50% for babies, and left survivors disfigured and in a third of cases, blind.

GAC06 said:

---

Do you really want to compare COVID-19 to smallpox?

One had a case fatality rate over 30% overall, 50% for babies, and left survivors disfigured and in a third of cases, blind.

---

Leave the prosecutor alone. He has already said he would not want to prosecute it. He just gave his opinion on it's legality.