Fine and Jail time for not taking swine flu in MA????!!!

[tribalmax]

Is this for real??

http://thebirdflupandemic.com/archiv...-massachusetts


Oh my god....

[MittensKittens]

:::

[AllyRae]

That can't be real. It can't. I nearly vomited reading that...if it's true, then a lot of us have been right all along about it.

Must be nice to be a heartless greedy UAV of a drug company leader getting rich off all this. Buying the government's support of forced injection of known toxins into people without regards for pre-existing conditions that could be made worse or trigger bigger things. Or, like the last swine flu vax did, just kill off a bunch of people. And the government has granted them full immunity for any consequences arising from their rushed vaccination. And because of the politics involved, it makes me even more sure that our kids shouldn't be injected with any vaccine because it's all just money, greed, politics, and disregard for human life.

[KoalaMommy]

They can't force you to do something that's against your religious beliefs. I would be surprised if they had any way to track this. If they did pursue legal action, you could sue.

[tayndrewsmama]

I don't believe it. Anyone could have made that video. Maybe I'll believe it if I see it from a news source that is identifiable.

[beckyand3littlemonsters]

omfg thats shocking, are they seriousley doing that over there

[fruitfulmomma]

Yes, it is real. The Senator interviewed is Richard T. Moore. His official website links to the following document...

http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/sena...df/st02028.pdf

Page 18 starting at line 384

[laohaire]

It appears the law didn't pass. Yet.

I am trying to find out the actual bill number and text of the law. Anyone know? Until I read that, I'm going to actually assume this is conspiracy bunk. That's not to say I couldn't believe it, but I have to be rational and not jump off the deep end! If I can find it and if the wording is really that alarming, I'm going to have to make plans ASAP.

I hear Canada is beautiful....

ETA: Oops, had my window open for a while and posted before I saw fruitfulmomma's post. CRAP. I'm going to read now. CRAP.

[laohaire]

OK, hold on everybody. There is a lot of language I hate in this bill, but the fine and jail time does NOT refer to refusal to vaccinate.

Line 409 (page 19) addresses refusal to vaccinate thusly:

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 pursuant to section 96 of chapter 111 if his or her refusal poses a serious danger to public health or results in uncertainty whether he or she has been exposed to or is infected with a disease or condition that poses a serious danger to public health, as determined by the commissioner, or a local public health authority operating within its jurisdiction.

Now, I'm still reading, and I don't know what the details of the quarantine would be (whether they let you stay confined to your home or if they cart you off to the looney bin a.k.a. jail) but I wanted to post this clarifcation right away.

[fruitfulmomma]

OK, hold on everybody. There is a lot of language I hate in this bill, but the fine and jail time does NOT refer to refusal to vaccinate.

You are correct. It is not merely the refusal to vaccinate but refusal of the order they give you if they believe you pose a threat to the health of the community, whether or not that belief was erroneous.

[laohaire]

I looked up the relevant quarantine law:

Chapter 111: Section 96. Warrants to remove persons infected with dangerous disease


Section 96. A magistrate authorized to issue warrants may issue a warrant directed to the sheriff of the county or his deputy, or to any constable or police officer, requiring him, under the direction of the board of health, to remove any person infected with a disease dangerous to the public health or who is a carrier of the causative agent thereof, or to take control of convenient houses and lodgings, and to impress into service and use such convenient houses, lodgings, nurses, attendants and other necessaries. The removal authorized by this section may be made to a hospital in any town established for the reception of persons having diseases dangerous to the public health; provided, that the assent of the board of health of the town to which such removal is to be made shall first have been obtained.

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/111-96.htm

OK, so if you refuse they can lock you into a hospital. I don't like this.

The "ACT RELATIVE TO PANDEMIC AND DISASTER PREPARATION AND RESPONSE IN THE
COMMONWEALTH" also has a lot of language about officials being immune to any damage they cause. If you refuse to let an official come into your home and disinfect it or you, or destroy something, they can do the $1000/day fine and jail time WITHOUT A WARRANT. It specifically states that if the official is MISTAKEN about the need to do the disinfecting or whatever, it doesn't matter, you're still subject to the jail time and fine.

Bolding mine:

Section 95. (a) Whenever the commissioner, or a local public health 351 authority within its jurisdiction, determines that there is reasonable cause to believe that a disease or condition dangerous to the public health exists or may exist or that there is an immediate risk of an outbreak of such a disease or condition, and that certain measures are necessary to decrease or eliminate the risk to public health, the commissioner or local public health authority may issue an order. The order may be a verbal order in exigent circumstances, and in such case it shall be followed by a written order as soon as reasonably possible. The written order shall specify the reasons for it, and may include, but is not limited to:

(1) requiring the owner or occupier of premises to permit entry into and investigation of the premises;

(2) requiring the owner or occupier of premises to close the premises or a specific part of the premises, and allowing reopening of the premises when the danger has ended;

(3) requiring the placarding of premises to give notice of an order requiring the closing of the premises;

(4) requiring the cleaning or disinfection, or both, of the premises or the thing specified in the order;

(5) requiring the destruction of the matter or thing specified in the order.

The written order shall be delivered personally to the person to whom it is directed, but if that is not possible, it shall be delivered in a manner that is reasonably calculated to notify such person of it.

If a person does not comply with the order, and if the commissioner or the local public health authority determines that noncompliance poses a serious danger to public health,upon request or issuance of an order by the commissioner or local public health authority, an officer authorized to serve criminal process may arrest without a warrant any person whom the officer has probable cause to believe has violated such an order and shall use reasonable diligence to enforce such order.

If a person does not comply with the order within the time specified in the order, but the noncompliance does not pose a serious danger to public health, the commissioner or the local public health authority may apply to a judge of the superior court for an order requiring the person to comply with the order within the time specified in the order of the court; and to take whatever other action the court considers appropriate in the circumstances to protect the public health.

The law enforcement authorities of the city or town where the person is present shall enforce the court order.

Any person who knowingly violates an order, as to which noncompliance
poses a serious danger to public health as determined by the commissioner or the local public health authority, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 30 days or a fine of not more than one thousand dollars per day that the violation continues, or both. It shall not be a defense to a prosecution for this offense that the commissioner or the local public health authority erroneously determined that noncompliance would pose a serious danger to public health, if the commissioner or local public health authority was acting in good faith under color of official authority.

[savithny]

Prior to the availability of vaccination for many diseases, quarantine was widely used to limit the transmission. It was what people used to do!

My grandpa was a public health department employee prior to widespread vaccination, and one of his duties was issuing notices of quarantine to those with communicable diseases considered a threat to public health.

That's what the whole "Typhoid Mary" thing was all about:
http://www.wisegeek.com/who-was-typhoid-mary.htm

[tribalmax]

This is scary!!

[fruitfulmomma]

Prior to the availability of vaccination for many diseases, quarantine was widely used to limit the transmission. It was what people used to do!

I am not necessarily against quarantine, though preferably it would be self-imposed, but the language of this bill is just too much.

[momofmine]

That is very scary. But if they just require you to be quaratined in your own home, then I would just do that. When is this vaccine supposed to be issued anyway?

[momofmine]

Do you think that people working in health care settings will have stricter mandates because of all this,a s far as being required to get it?

[savithny]

Originally Posted by fruitfulmomma

I am not necessarily against quarantine, though preferably it would be self-imposed, but the language of this bill is just too much.

Self-imposed is like "voluntary reporting." Not enough people will do it to make a difference in transmission rates. everyone will be "Oh, but I need to go to work," "Oh, but I need to pick up a few things for the kids."

[ZoeyZoo]

I don't know how credible it is since I found it on a tin foily site and I didn't save the link... but there was a group trying to stop this bill. They said they stopped it for now but were expecting a fight in September right before the vax comes out.

[ZoeyZoo]

Originally Posted by momofmine

Do you think that people working in health care settings will have stricter mandates because of all this,a s far as being required to get it?

It looks like it's getting resistence in Canada among doctors but the CMA is still encouraging it.

http://www.theflucase.com/index.php?...id=105&lang=en

[Mosaic]

Per our recent announcement, please continue this conversation in the existing thread about mandatory swine flu vaccination news and information, found here.

Thanks!