Local restaurant posts sign forbidding masks & social distancing

[Gutwrench]

This has been going on for months and months. And idea why the state or county or city hasn’t taken enforcement action?

 

[Eric]

This has been going on for months and months. And idea why the state or county or city hasn’t taken enforcement action?

I think there's some speculation as to when they knew they were violating as badly as they were. This was all legit, the state came in with a warrant from a judge and the restaurant owners still refused to let them in while the cops stood by and allowed it.

I didn't realize warrants were optional depending on whether the servee wants them, good to know.

 

[Gutwrench]

I think there's some speculation as to when they knew they were violating as badly as they were. This was all legit, the state came in with a warrant from a judge and the restaurant owners still refused to let them in while the cops stood by and allowed it.

I didn't realize warrants were optional depending on whether the servee wants them, good to know.

The state can step in any time they feel there’s a legally defensible violation. Further the (city) or county could revoke their license and permit to do business as a bonafide eating establishment as well. There‘s clearly unknown elements of the story.

Perhaps neither government body feels there is....or doesn’t want to risk bad case law.

 

[Eric]

The state can step in any time they feel there’s a legally defensible violation. Further the (city) or county could revoke their license and permit to do business as a bonafide eating establishment as well. There‘s clearly unknown elements of the story.

Perhaps neither government body feels there is....or doesn’t want to risk bad case law.

Your point is enforcement and as long as the local Sheriffs office refuses to enforce it the inspectors could not go in, even with a lawfully signed warrant and that's the bottom line. Sheriffs in rural areas all over the state are on record saying they will refuse to assist when it comes to this.

In fact, they do this all the times, with guns, squatters, etc. they flat out don't do a fucking thing which really begs the question, why are they even there? At the very least tax payers need to stop paying for their worthless asses.

 

[User.45]

Your point is enforcement and as long as the local Sheriffs office refuses to enforce it the inspectors could not go in, even with a lawfully signed warrant and that's the bottom line. Sheriffs in rural areas all over the state are on record saying they will refuse to assist when it comes to this.

In fact, they do this all the times, with guns, squatters, etc. they flat out don't do a fucking thing which really begs the question, why are they even there? At the very least tax payers need to stop paying for their worthless asses.

And maybe, just maybe they should not elect them?!

 

[Eric]

And maybe, just maybe they should not elect them?!

You bet, and maybe they shouldn't have voted for Trump either but it's a rural county that went for him by overwhelming numbers. Two things they love, spreading Coronavirus (up 127% in the last 14 days) and electing worthless Sheriff's.

 

[Thomas Veil]

The state can step in any time they feel there’s a legally defensible violation.

But you know what? There’s even repercussions to that. Ohio’s health director was harassed and threatened so bad she resigned. The governor is getting much the same treatment. Oh, and a motion to impeach him is in the works.

Stupid always finds a way.

 

[Eric]

But you know what? There’s even repercussions to that. Ohio’s health director was harassed and threatened so bad she resigned. The governor is getting much the same treatment. Oh, and a motion to impeach him is in the works.

Stupid always finds a way.

Or the plot to kidnap and murder Gov Whitmer, these people are dangerous on many levels. If you're not careful it'll end up like the Bundy standoff in Oregon so they chose to back off instead of upsetting the ignorant hillbillies.

It will be interesting to see how they choose to handle it going forward but one thing is clear, the law is not on the restaurant owners side. You can bet your ass that if someone were offended by a black man walking into a Starbucks that Cletus and his band of crack deputies would've summarily escorted him out and arrested him for trespassing.

 

[Gutwrench]

Your point is enforcement and as long as the local Sheriffs office refuses to enforce it the inspectors could not go in, even with a lawfully signed warrant and that's the bottom line. Sheriffs in rural areas all over the state are on record saying they will refuse to assist when it comes to this.

In fact, they do this all the times, with guns, squatters, etc. they flat out don't do a fucking thing which really begs the question, why are they even there? At the very least tax payers need to stop paying for their worthless asses.

This issue has been going on for months and in the few news articles I’ve found I can’t really get a good grasp of it. I suspect no one here has their arms around it to adequately understand so a lot of assumptions being tossed around.

I don’t have the interest to dig into this worm pile. What I did read is the CHP did a civil standby to keep the peace only. Pretty normal. If the business owner did not comply, the district attorney can easily file appropriate charges in muni or super court. Why hasn’t that been done, and why hasn’t the state filed any charges?

The bottom line is there are too many unknowns.

The decision to revoke a license to do business does not require LE.

 

[Eric]

This issue has been going on for months and in the few news articles I’ve found I can’t really get a good grasp of it. I suspect no one here has their arms around it to adequately understand so a lot of assumptions being tossed around.

I don’t have the interest to dig into this worm pile. What I did read is the CHP did a civil standby to keep the peace only. Pretty normal. If the business owner did not comply, the district attorney can easily file appropriate charges in muni or super court. Why hasn’t that been done, and why hasn’t the state filed any charges?

The bottom line is there are too many unknowns.

The decision to revoke a license to do business does not require LE.

But the ability to get in and inspect with a lawful warrant certainly does if the party refuses. It's like saying they can come to my door with one signed by a judge and I can tell them to fuck off, will they turn around and leave?

I love how all these people tout "law & order!!" until they try to enforce it against something they believe in, then start poking holes.

 

[Gutwrench]

But the ability to get in and inspect with a lawful warrant certainly does if the party refuses. It's like saying they can come to my door with one signed by a judge and I can tell them to fuck off, will they turn around and leave?

I love how all these people tout "law & order!!" until they try to enforce it against something they believe in, then start poking holes.

Inspection orders are different matter. There is clearly missing information or it would make more sense. In the absence of it we just make assumptions and cast blame. Too bad there isn’t one article that describes the entire saga. It would probably help us all.

 

[Eric]

Inspection orders are different matter. There is clearly missing information or it would make more sense. In the absence of it we just make assumptions and cast blame. Too bad there isn’t one article that describes the entire saga. It would probably help us all.

It's cut and dry.

1) Judge signs a warrant to let state inspectors in to inspect the restaurant
2) State inspectors bring LE to enforce said warrant
3) Restaurant is bound by law to allow them access

Not seeing that is allowing a point of view to fog it. Under any normal circumstances this would never be an issue but since it's a bunch miltia-minded hillbillies they didn't want to cause a scene and that's the bottom line. The question is how they choose to enforce going forward

For the record every other restaurant up there is complying without any issues.

 

[Gutwrench]

It's cut and dry.

1) Judge signs a warrant to let state inspectors in to inspect the restaurant
2) State inspectors bring LE to enforce said warrant
3) Restaurant is bound by law to allow them access

Not seeing that is allowing a point of view to fog it. Under any normal circumstances this would never be an issue but since it's a bunch miltia-minded hillbillies they didn't want to cause a scene and that's the bottom line. The question is how they choose to enforce going forward

For the record every other restaurant up there is complying without any issues.

Why hasn‘t the state or county/city or taken enforcement action? Clearly it isn’t that cut and dry.

 

[Eric]

Why hasn‘t the state or county/city or taken enforcement action? Clearly it isn’t that cut and dry.

What would you have had them do, pull out their guns and create a scene during business hours in a packed restaurant? I'll concede this, the willingness to comply with a lawful warrant was not cut and dry on the part of the hillbillies, we agree on that.

 

[SuperMatt]

Why hasn‘t the state or county/city or taken enforcement action? Clearly it isn’t that cut and dry.

The sheriff has publicly stated he won’t enforce the law. I don’t know if somebody can overrule the sheriff to force his hand, but it doesn’t seem so.

 

[Eric]

The sheriff has publicly stated he won’t enforce the law. I don’t know if somebody can overrule the sheriff to force his hand, but it doesn’t seem so.

"Now now you listen here, we aint' enforcin' no masks orders in MY county"

 

[Gutwrench]

What would you have had them do, pull out their guns and create a scene during business hours in a packed restaurant? I'll concede this, the willingness to comply with a lawful warrant was not cut and dry on the part of the hillbillies, we agree on that.

What would I have “them” do? As in LE on scene? Nothing. Just as they did.

What I would expect, if it was cut and dry: (1) the district attorney file charges against the owners, (2) the AG file charges (3) city/county to revoke their business license.

The apparent fact none of those seemed to have happened indicates it isn’t cut and dry. Hence, my point there are too many unknowns here to draw much of a conclusion.

 

[Eric]

What would I have “them” do? As in LE on scene? Nothing. Just as they did.

What I would expect, if it was cut and dry: (1) the district attorney file charges against the owners, (2) the AG file charges (3) city/county to revoke their business license.

The apparent fact none of those seemed to have happened indicates it isn’t cut and dry. Hence, my point there are too many unknowns here to draw much of a conclusion.

Yeah, keep twisting that around to suit your point of view if it makes you happy. The bottom line is it was all legal and on the up and up, the fact that they refused to abide legally is not "unknown" it's a fact.

 

[Gutwrench]

Yeah, keep twisting that around to suit your point of view if it makes you happy. The bottom line is it was all legal and on the up and up, the fact that they refused to abide legally is not "unknown" it's a fact.

I’ve twisted nothing. I’ve been completely consistent from my first post to this one.

This saga has been going on for months. As I understand it the business claims they are not in compliance because their rights are being violated.

The state and local governments have legal options to pursue but apparently have not done so.

This all boils down to missing information to fully appreciate the entire situation or to draw conclusions.

 

[User.45]

I’ve twisted nothing. I’ve been completely consistent from my first post to this one.

This saga has been going on for months. As I understand it the business claims they are not in compliance because their rights are being violated.

The state and local governments have legal options to pursue but apparently have not done so.

This all boils down to missing information to fully appreciate the entire situation or to draw conclusions.

You're probably right here, but it would be interesting to learn why this isn't cut and dry.