Man refusing to wear mask breaks arm of Target employee

Well. I'm on the fence about this. common sense tell me this....... I get it if they want the guy to wear a mask. following him around and getting close enough to make contact is obviously ill advised. looks like they got what they were looking for a forced situation. One that was gonna go one of 2 ways. it went the wrong way for the security guard that got his arm broke.Looks like the guy touched the security guard first but leave the guy alone and call the cops. Zero arms would have gotten broken. This is getting out of hand. Comply or be forced is gonna be a problem.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

quite predictable - utter bollox but predictable

the issue of this thread is simple :

if target store says " waear mask " - you wear the mask or piss off

are you capable of comprehending this simple fact

you enter a store - by invitation - not as a right - and thus must asbide by store rules

originally posted by: opethPA
Regardless of where you fall on wearing masks infringes on your personal freedom (that isnt said in a sarcastic or snarky manner) or it's the right of a store to enforce their rules I'm hard pressed to think how anyone, based off the video shown, doesn't hold the people without the masks as responsible for the outcome here.

Agreed.

At this point I almost wonder , until the world calms down, if you don't need to segregate shopping scenarios in some way. Until such a time as when masks are no longer a question the hostility seems to keep growing for a small % of people. Logically you could see that trend continue...

Agreed again.

...so maybe solutions , again until masks are no longer a thing, could be:

1. First 6 hours of the business days are no masks , final 6 business hours of the day are mask only. The other hours run over night where just by nature things are slower paced.

2. Rotate in 2 hour blocks. Not sure if this is logistically or tactically possible.

Thank you for trying to be part of the solution. I appreciate that. We need more of that.


I think offering specific shopping times for those who choose to wear masks is very reasonable and do-able on both sides, and businesses certainly have every right to do so. It's in their own best interests to balance the wants and needs of their customers. I can't see where it would be a problem for non-mask wearers to shop with mask-wearers. Just vice versa. And it might take some tweaking to get the specific hours set depending on how many want to shop during mask-only hours.

And any customers that aren't happy can shop elsewhere if they so choose.

a reply to: American-philosopher

should we all wear a mask>??

I suppose, that is if you want to shop where a mask is required. It's a private business, much like my house..my rules, don't like it..beat it!

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: burdman30ott6

quite predictable - utter bollox but predictable

the issue of this thread is simple :

if target store says " waear mask " - you wear the mask or piss off

are you capable of comprehending this simple fact

you enter a store - by invitation - not as a right - and thus must asbide by store rules

Accurate, except for the little sticky wicket of antidiscrimination laws. That makes the question of "Does an American have the right to decline wearing a mask in public?" valid.

ETA: Do they even have Target stores in the UK?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

The "open face" group is a protected class now in American law?

C'mon Burd.

At least be consistent in your own arguments.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: burdman30ott6

The "open face" group is a protected class now in American law?

C'mon Burd.

At least be consistent in your own arguments.

Actually it could well be, Gryph. ADA forbids discriminating based on any health condition. A lot of folks who aren't wearing masks aren't wearing them due to health conditions. If you've got some condition that leads to you being short on O2 under normal conditions, those masks can be dangerous to you... or how about someone prone to panic attacks? Are we going to say we're doing all this Unconstitutional bull# in the name of panic while simultaneously telling the people who spaz out when their mouths are covered "Tough crap, your fears aren't the fears we're pandering to today?"

a reply to: burdman30ott6
Shop somewhere else if you don't like it..spend your money elsewhere.

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: burdman30ott6
Shop somewhere else if you don't like it..spend your money elsewhere.

ADA doesn't work that way.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

From what I'm seeing in my area the stores are making statements, but not actually enforcing it.

There will be lawsuits filed for the ones enforcing it, which will place the company in a compromised situation. They will have to determine if its worth winning a lawsuit to keep an ailing person from patronizing their business.

Depending on the complainants condition it could be bad for public perception. Even if they were to win they still may lose.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: burdman30ott6
Shop somewhere else if you don't like it..spend your money elsewhere.

ADA doesn't work that way.

Sure, and thats a good thing, personally I think the argument is a stretch, but if a person has a doctor that says its dangerous for him to wear a mask..that should be an exception.

I still think a private business has a right to determine things..like "no shoes, no shirt..no service"

a reply to: vonclod

They cant ask about medical conditions for your patronage. The doctor has no say in it.

No shoes, no shirt, no service is an entirely different arena.

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: vonclod

They cant ask about medical conditions for your patronage. The doctor has no say in it.

No shoes, no shirt, no service is an entirely different arena.

I dunno, it's a rule based on health, same as a mask.

The people that work at places like this appreciate when you wear a mask. They are some of the most exposed folks in the country. Hundreds or thousands of people pass through those stores every day. Some of these open stores have had to close to decontaminate when an employee tests positive. Same with production facilities, etc.
You want to open things? Be respectful. It matters.

Some are just afraid it makes them look weak, it doesn’t.
Just foolish and selfish, when you choose not to do so.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

this is the problem i face.

the minions will gleefully welcome in dystopia.
then the cops will enforce dystopia.
celebrities and politichans will get rich off dystopia.
and internatiionalists will rule in dystopia.

the problem is the ten percenters who want liberty and freedom, even tho the minions are going along with the internatiionalist protocols.

This should be called "Psyop-19" not Covid-19

a reply to: spacedoubt

The same masks that we were told as recently as late March did nothing and shouldn't be worn? Told that by the same people the stores are presently taking advice from as those same people now say masks should be worn?

Foolish... somebody looks foolish here, but it isn't the people who actually question advice that changes 180-degrees based not on science, but on feeding the incessant human need to constantly believe there must be some "going through the motions" exercise they can do in the face of any adversity to make them at least feel like they're doing something.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

oh FFS - is your only " tactic " - throwing out utterly spurious bollox ?

no - there are no tarrget stores in the UK - but so what - whats your point ??

as for anti dircrimination laws - you are pulling crap out your arse now

jews and moslems - can claim dircrimnation - if they are demandedto waer pigsakin gloves

shieks can claim discrimination if they are demandeed to remove thier turban

merkins who wont wear a mask - for reasons - are just laughted at - and told to fook off

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
Sounds like the mask militia better recruit tougher people to enforce their authoritarian ways. Just give it another month and stories like these will be child’s play.

I wonder if you would say the same about people not wearing shoes to a store. Where the employees would tell them they need to wear shoes and ask them to leave.

Damn shoe enforcment fascists.

We should tar, feather and hang 'em, yeah?

a reply to: vonclod

I'm not positive but surely that would violate some kind of hippa statute. As i said I dont see anyway they can defend themselves from someone who says they get panic attacks from it.

The way health had been re-defined for the purpose of late term abortions, the doctor almost has to take your word on hardship that may be caused. People tried to warn about this kind of thing. They may have some type of public health clause companies can use to fight it, but there will certainly be lawsuits, and they may very well have legal standing.