ADVERTISEMENT

Wisconsin event

Duck_walk

Well-Known Member
Oct 17, 2002
23,081
4,231
113
Seventy-two individuals who tested positive for Covid-19 in Wisconsin recently attended a “large-gathering” before their diagnosis.

The state's Department of Health Services (DHS) confirmed that they had gathered tracing data on a number of people who had contracted the virus.

“We were able to pull some limited data—out of 1,986 cases with onset/diagnosis on or after 4/26, there were seventy-two cases who reported attending a large gathering," DHS spokesperson Jennifer Miller

That large gathering? A protest at the Wisconsin capitol of 1,500 people protesting the state’s stay at home order.

They cannot prove the 72 people were infected at the event. But they were all there. So you make the call.
 
Seventy-two individuals who tested positive for Covid-19 in Wisconsin recently attended a “large-gathering” before their diagnosis.

The state's Department of Health Services (DHS) confirmed that they had gathered tracing data on a number of people who had contracted the virus.

“We were able to pull some limited data—out of 1,986 cases with onset/diagnosis on or after 4/26, there were seventy-two cases who reported attending a large gathering," DHS spokesperson Jennifer Miller

That large gathering? A protest at the Wisconsin capitol of 1,500 people protesting the state’s stay at home order.

They cannot prove the 72 people were infected at the event. But they were all there. So you make the call.

1. 72/1500 that's .05% of the entire crowd.

2. If they can't prove that's where they got it you're dealing with correlation not causation. Wouldn't hold up in court.
 
Duckles...You misspelled "Thank you for schooling me Veerman_12, and I most humbly beg your pardon for spewing my constant stream of braindead proglefticommie nonsense...Sir".

HTH

I don’t know how I survive this. :eek:

It won’t stand up in court!!!!
Where did that come from?
What does that have to do with my post?
were we talking about the law? Bahaha

72/1500 =. xx%. Yes. What does that have to do with anything I posted in this thread?
This isn’t a math contest. I posted an FYI.

This wasn’t intended to provoke an argument nor a debate. Simply my joyous feelin that maybe to a small degree Karma does exist.
 
And if you think I was “schooled” by anything in this thread. You might be a dumbass.
 
The most famous one later hung his head and apologized before going home and getting B-slapped by his grandma.
 
Wisconsin, now Known as Florida of the North.

Wisconsin Supreme Court reverses governor’s stay-at-home mandate — in a hearing held remotely so the justices wouldn’t run the risk of getting ill by meeting together. #CovidIrony
 
Take it up with Wisconsin's Supreme Court. I'm sure you know more case law than they do...
They are interpreting the law of one state. There's loads, loads, loads of case law on this in Federal and state courts, and they've generally ended the other way.
 
FYI. This is more dickish than most of my responses, little guy. And really advances the dialogue.

Not really. I didn't name call (like you), I didn't cuss (like you) I was mildly passive aggressive, but nothing I said was inherently wrong.

If NM knows more about Wisconsin state law than the Wisconsin Supreme Court justices, then he REALLY should be doing something other than hanging out being the smartest guy in a MoSports discussion board.
 
It's not about knowing the law of 50 states, it's about knowing enough about how these cases have been decided for years and years and years across the country.

Why aren't you doing something more productive with your time since you know more than the Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices?

I understand your argument and your point and IF it gets heard at the Federal level and they overturn it, fine. End of the day, these justices decided on their ruling for their state. Yet you know better...incredible ego.
 
Why aren't you doing something more productive with your time since you know more than the Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices?

I understand your argument and your point and IF it gets heard at the Federal level and they overturn it, fine. End of the day, these justices decided on their ruling for their state. Yet you know better...incredible ego.
Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices can't use the state of emergency law from, say, Massachusetts or Federal law to decide their cases. What they are saying is their law is different than the norm in the US (according to their view) and it led to this specific ruling.
 
Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices can't use the state of emergency law from, say, Massachusetts or Federal law to decide their cases. What they are saying is their law is different than the norm in the US (according to their view) and it led to this specific ruling.

Duh. Prove it isn't.
 
Why aren't you doing something more productive with your time since you know more than the Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices?

I understand your argument and your point and IF it gets heard at the Federal level and they overturn it, fine. End of the day, these justices decided on their ruling for their state. Yet you know better...incredible ego.
Kettle...Pit
 
Why aren't you doing something more productive with your time since you know more than the Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices?

I understand your argument and your point and IF it gets heard at the Federal level and they overturn it, fine. End of the day, these justices decided on their ruling for their state. Yet you know better...incredible ego.
You really do get intimidated when trying to communicate with someone smarter than you. However that must mean you are in a state of intimidation.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT