It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by DevilJin
What most concern you should have is the fact that the vaccines are not even tested to work. I've never heard of a vaccine being put out without being approved to be effective.
Originally posted by jtma508
There's a good deal of good thought in this thread but I have to tell you there is a huge amount of ignorance and hyperbole. Nowhere does the bill say that quarantine means hauling you off to some detention facility. The way that this has been handled historically is to qurantine people in their homes. EXACTLY as they did when it broke out originally.
The seasonal flu shot IS a vaccine.
The vaccine (as is the case will all vaccines) stimulates your immune system to isolate and destroy organisms with certain marker proteins. The whole idea of vaccinated a population is to slow the spread of the organism by providing fewer hosts. The smaller pool of hosts reduces the probability that the organism will recombine into something more dangerous. It's a numbers game. More opportunity = greater probability.
I understand all the big brother concerns, etc. But I'll ask the same question that I did before:
You can ascribe any conspiracy angle you want tyo this but the fact is H1N1 is virulent and there is a very real POTENTIAL risk of a very dangerous (1918esque) pandemic. You are the legislator of your own private Idaho. An outbreak occurs and people start getting sick and dying at an alarming rate.
What do you do? What's your response to the situation?
Originally posted by huntergatherer
#### them all
What bull####
You got shots for us,.....We got shots for you
######RETARDS
such individual may be isolated or quarantined pursuant to section 96 of chapter 111 if his or her refusal to submit to decontamination or diagnosis procedures 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.
Originally posted by merkaba93
Dang whoever owns those is paying some serious federal reserve notes on a yearly basis to the BATFE for the suppressors and SBR's.
www.nfafirearms.com...
All machine guns, suppressors, SBR and SBS not in the possession of the United States government must be registered. The firearm must be registered (entered into a database maintained by the BATFE) and a ONE-TIME $200.00 federal excise tax must be paid to BATFE only when the weapon is transferred to a different owner. This tax is not an "annual" tax, it is simply an excise, or "sales" tax. If the weapon is re-sold two months or twenty years later, there is still only the one time $200.00 excise tax at the time of each sale. There is no "license" one must possess from the federal government to possess NFA weapons.
Originally posted by huntergatherer
Let's use MASS. as the testing state for the H1N1 vaccine
if the residents all die or morph into zombielike entities well then we know
maybe not a bad idea after all
Originally posted by jtma508
There's a good deal of good thought in this thread but I have to tell you there is a huge amount of ignorance and hyperbole. Nowhere does the bill say that quarantine means hauling you off to some detention facility. The way that this has been handled historically is to qurantine people in their homes. EXACTLY as they did when it broke out originally.
restricting a person from being present in certain places including but not limited to school or work; confinement to private homes; confinement to other private or public premises; or isolation or quarantine of an area.
Originally posted by jtma508
reply to post by lucentenigma
And should they allow you to travel home infecting everyone as you go? What about homeless people? Or people living in public shelters? Should they just be allowed to go wherever they like or infect everyone else in the shelter?
Just asking.