• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Vaccine Poll

Will you take Covid vaccine shot(s)

  • I will not

    Votes: 255 50.7%
  • I would not but must in order to work - or other requirement

    Votes: 41 8.2%
  • I will of my own volition

    Votes: 185 36.8%
  • I will AND it is required of me for work - or other reason

    Votes: 22 4.4%

  • Total voters
    503

HuntMaine

NES Member
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
6,005
Likes
3,202
Location
2A Supporter
Is English your second language? They can FORCE you to either get it or pay $5 and not get it. IT IS EITHER / OR. There is a choice.
Again insults, fairly juvenile in my opinion. That being said if you do not see that indeed Mass can force them, you’re missing what has occurred in the past. The legislature will do what they did prior which was force them on you i.e. Smallpox vaccine.
 

Toast

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Messages
740
Likes
1,075
You might move on as your grasp of law is quite limited.
You may provide as many insults as you wish. What you clearly can't provide is any cite to an actual law to back up your increasingly untenable contention.

Come on, stand up to your bold talk. Provide a cite to an actual law that states that the Commonwealth can force me to take a vaccine.
 

HuntMaine

NES Member
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
6,005
Likes
3,202
Location
2A Supporter
You may provide as many insults as you wish. What you clearly can't provide is any cite to an actual law to back up your increasingly untenable contention.

Come on, stand up to your bold talk. Provide a cite to an actual law that states that the Commonwealth can force me to take a vaccine.
It’s not an insult, it’s an observation. They are quite different. You only need to look at the past actions by the state, should you want to take the stand of “I will never bow to the state etc..” you can surely do so. However as Massachusetts has proven time and time again the state has much more power than people are aware of, if you need proof of that just look around at the ghost town called Boston where the actions of one man have been able to crush entire businesses and lives. If you don’t think it’s easily done with vaccines you are kidding yourself.
 

babygorilla

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Nov 28, 2015
Messages
2,682
Likes
1,574
Location
South Shore of Massachusetts
Again insults, fairly juvenile in my opinion. That being said if you do not see that indeed Mass can force them, you’re missing what has occurred in the past. The legislature will do what they did prior which was force them on you i.e. Smallpox vaccine.
No, you were ASKED to show how they force it. They cannot, in the LAW you provided. You can be penalized for not getting it (taxed). Just admit you were wrong. CAN they in the future change the law, yes, but that is not what was asked. You are being intentionally obtuse because you are wrong and like a typical "respekt mah authoratay" won't admit it. I've got 5 cops in my family, soo it ain't an anticop thing, fyi....
 

SpaceCritter

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
18,567
Likes
16,676
Location
In Orbit
If they were able to pass the "upskirt bill" in an afternoon, they'll be able to pass a law (or simply amend the existing one) to jack this up $5,000 or $50,000 very quickly and very easily.

Anyone that thinks if they get a hard on for forcing vaccines they'll leave the $5 as the punishment is not very familiar with MA legislature.

Whether they get compliance or not is another matter.
The local health district's office may happen to catch fire (with or without occupants).
 

Toast

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Messages
740
Likes
1,075
It’s not an insult, it’s an observation. They are quite different. You only need to look at the past actions by the state, should you want to take the stand of “I will never bow to the state etc..” you can surely do so. However as Massachusetts has proven time and time again the state has much more power than people are aware of, if you need proof of that just look around at the ghost town called Boston where the actions of one man have been able to crush entire businesses and lives. If you don’t think it’s easily done with vaccines you are kidding yourself.
Really, it's a simple request. I don't know why you continue to avoid it if you're so certain of your position.

Provide a cite to an actual law that states that the Commonwealth can force me to take a vaccine.
 

HuntMaine

NES Member
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
6,005
Likes
3,202
Location
2A Supporter
Really, it's a simple request. I don't know why you continue to avoid it if you're so certain of your position.

Provide a cite to an actual law that states that the Commonwealth can force me to take a vaccine.
The simple answer is SCOTUS affirmed the right of the state to force vaccinations during a pandemic. That’s clear. So the state does not need a law on the books to do so they can mandate it at any time. Much like they mandate anyone going to school has to have a series of vaccines. Will they say just pay 5$ and you don’t have to get it? Not in today’s world. So when they start to mandate them in order for you to work or go to school , it’s a babystep for all as previously outline in the various actual laws on the books.
 

Racenet

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
4,254
Likes
3,398
Location
New Hampshire
I did read it. Again, here it is in its entirety:
"Boards of health, if in their opinion it is necessary for public health or safety, shall require and enforce the vaccination and revaccination of all the inhabitants of their towns, and shall provide them with the means of free vaccination. Whoever refuses or neglects to comply with such requirement shall forfeit five dollars."​

All the state can do to you is fine you. Period. It cannot force you to get a vaccination. It can prevent you from going to school, but most adults aren't effected by that. Your employer can impose all sorts of requirements on you, but that's your employer, not the state. All the state can do is fine you $5.

Seriously, this is the link YOU provided. Where does the link YOU provided to 181 say they can force you? Nowhere. You continue to be unable to provide a link to a law (note: a Wikipedia article is not a law) that says the state can force me to take a vaccination.

Your contention is that the state can force you. Prove it with a cite to that law or move on.

Don't you just love it when someone's own so called cite just crawls around and goes right up their own ass!

Well played Sir!
 

Racenet

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
4,254
Likes
3,398
Location
New Hampshire
I don't disagree thats what it says, but its naive to think the MA government will let people just pay $5 and be done with it. They'll start making new laws, or king charles will make a new decree saying the cattle must get their shots or something. Whatevers best for the Commonhealth of Massachusetts

That's what 2A is for.
 

HuntMaine

NES Member
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
6,005
Likes
3,202
Location
2A Supporter
Don't you just love it when someone's own so called cite just crawls around and goes right up their own ass!

Well played Sir!
Yet isn’t it funny how the Governor single Handedly mandated the Flu shot for all children over 6 months just a few months ago and crickets. Was it an existing law? No. Was it based on Jacobson vs Mass SCOTUS ruling? Yep just as I stated many times over. Why do you think they keep renewing the SOE? Sure partly for money but having that in place guarantees them the ability to mandate a vaccine for all

maybe you are mistaking my post for being pro vaccine , which I am not more professed to be. It’s instead to show those who lives in a bubble of idealism that the state has a lot more power than they think. It does and it’s happening. You only need to read the original SOE and the foundation is laid
 

namedpipes

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
36,867
Likes
25,288
Location
The foothills of Monadnock
You might want to read them again. Indeed they can force you. Schools and employers regularly do it and the State can during a pandemic.

You're a special kind of stupid. When the state literally starts strapping people to a table to vaccinate them, people will begin responding with lethal force.
 

Prepper

NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
22,230
Likes
11,694
The simple answer is SCOTUS affirmed the right of the state to force vaccinations during a pandemic. That’s clear. So the state does not need a law on the books to do so they can mandate it at any time. Much like they mandate anyone going to school has to have a series of vaccines. Will they say just pay 5$ and you don’t have to get it? Not in today’s world. So when they start to mandate them in order for you to work or go to school , it’s a babystep for all as previously outline in the various actual laws on the books.

A court case is still not a law. It is then up to the legislature to then pass a law that says something like "all subjects will be required to get the Covaids vaccine. There are no exemptions. People who refuse will be put in jail and or force vaccinated"
 

SpaceCritter

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
18,567
Likes
16,676
Location
In Orbit
A court case is still not a law. It is then up to the legislature to then pass a law that says something like "all subjects will be required to get the Covaids vaccine. There are no exemptions. People who refuse will be put in jail and or force vaccinated"
...at which time let the "Fiery But Mostly Peaceful Protests" commence.

iu
 

Sauer Grapes

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jul 14, 2013
Messages
5,369
Likes
6,365
Location
MetroWest
I agree with you 100% on this. Neither have I. However, you have to realize, the COVID vaccine is a completely different type of vaccine. It is the FIRST one of its kind, ever, with no track record. It isn't even approved, just has an emergency use approval. That, in and of itself, is what many have issues with.

The best of luck in whatever you decide.
There is a track record for laboratory use of mRNA vaccinations beginning in 1990 (mice not humans).
Fast forward to recent times, mRNA vaccines have been in clinical trials for Influenza, Zika, Rabies, and other diseases. They never made it past the early phase trials. These new vaccines for Covid 19 are much more advanced, but still not formally approved by the FDA.

As you wrote above, best of luck in whatever anyone decides, 🤞🤞🤞
 

HuntMaine

NES Member
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
6,005
Likes
3,202
Location
2A Supporter
A court case is still not a law. It is then up to the legislature to then pass a law that says something like "all subjects will be required to get the Covaids vaccine. There are no exemptions. People who refuse will be put in jail and or force vaccinated"
Incorrect a mandate does not need a law on the books to be enforced. Just asked Guns that are closed but Casinos open or similar examples. It’s a SOE and mandates can be extremely intrusive such as vaccine mandates.
 

Prepper

NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
22,230
Likes
11,694
Incorrect a mandate does not need a law on the books to be enforced. Just asked Guns that are closed but Casinos open or similar examples. It’s a SOE and mandates can be extremely intrusive such as vaccine mandates.

Not only can you not name the law, you can't name one person who was literally forced to take the vaccine. Minors excepted of course, since their parents, can basically force them. That time may come, but it hasn't happened yet.
 

HuntMaine

NES Member
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
6,005
Likes
3,202
Location
2A Supporter
Not only can you not name the law, you can't name one person who was literally forced to take the vaccine. Minors excepted of course, since their parents, can basically force them. That time may come, but it hasn't happened yet.
An entire population of young adults have and you somehow believe you are immune (pardon the pun). That’s hysterical. The laws are there, the precedence is there, the rulings are there, it’s already in place for certain populations but sure let’s go with “not me”. [rofl] [rofl] [rofl]
 

Climbnsink

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
7,080
Likes
6,936
Yet isn’t it funny how the Governor single Handedly mandated the Flu shot for all children over 6 months just a few months ago and crickets. Was it an existing law? No. Was it based on Jacobson vs Mass SCOTUS ruling? Yep just as I stated many times over. Why do you think they keep renewing the SOE? Sure partly for money but having that in place guarantees them the ability to mandate a vaccine for all

maybe you are mistaking my post for being pro vaccine , which I am not more professed to be. It’s instead to show those who lives in a bubble of idealism that the state has a lot more power than they think. It does and it’s happening. You only need to read the original SOE and the foundation is laid
That one ain't even worth 5 bucks. Religious and health exception. Try again.
 

Toast

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Messages
740
Likes
1,075
The simple answer is SCOTUS affirmed the right of the state to force vaccinations during a pandemic. That’s clear. So the state does not need a law on the books to do so they can mandate it at any time. Much like they mandate anyone going to school has to have a series of vaccines. Will they say just pay 5$ and you don’t have to get it? Not in today’s world. So when they start to mandate them in order for you to work or go to school , it’s a babystep for all as previously outline in the various actual laws on the books.
Your interpretation of SCOTUS rulings is not dispositive, as you have not cited the law upon which they ruled so that it can be seen if it applies. But, I'll save you the effort. The SCOTUS ruling was that 181 is not unconstitutional, specifically, that the plaintiff did need to pay the $5 fine. That's it. They did not rule that the vaccine could be forced upon the plaintiff. State actions imposing vaccine requirements on students are not relevant, as there is a law that says they can do that before providing a service to said students.

Again, provide a cite to an actual law that states that the Commonwealth can force me to take a vaccine.
 
Last edited:

Prepper

NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Apr 12, 2007
Messages
22,230
Likes
11,694
An entire population of young adults have and you somehow believe you are immune (pardon the pun). That’s hysterical. The laws are there, the precedence is there, the rulings are there, it’s already in place for certain populations but sure let’s go with “not me”. [rofl] [rofl] [rofl]

So how does this work exactly? Name someone who was sitting around home minding their own business. A cop knocks on the door. The cop says there is this 100 year old court case, grabs the arm, and slams a needle in it. Name one case where something like this happened.

What good is this so called "law" that doesn't exist that requires people get a vaccine, if it hasn't even been used.

Ststists are utterly disgusting and I have no respect for them. Who TF would be willing to let their own body be violated because some effing bureaucrat decided it should be done, when in their own mind they know this violation isn't something they would have chosen on their own. Disgusting! Politicians writing words on paper, with an army of enforcers behind it to inflict violence, does not make an action right. It is everyone's duty to resist anything like that.
 

meh

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
1,111
Likes
1,167
Location
Massachusetts
I'm not sure a mandate is very likely to be constitutional if the early data pans out, which is that the mRNA-based vaccines are virtually or actually 100% successful at preventing life-threatening illness even though they are "only" 95% successful at preventing infection. Those are early numbers, obviously, so we'll have to see how it goes. Anyway, with that kind of efficacy at preventing serious cases, you'd have to argue that the mandate was necessary on behalf of the subset of the population that could not receive the vaccine even if they wanted to. How big could that set be? If it's only in the hundreds of thousands, there could be monoclonal antibody treatments available for them if they were to become infected, not to mention other treatments that are showing some promise when used early. Plus the illness itself has an insignificant overall fatality rate compared to the pandemics of old, like smallpox. There's no accounting for the insanity of frightened Democrats who are hell-bent on totalitarian solutions to make themselves feel safer, given their obvious inability to put any risk in quantitative perspective, but hysterical totalitarians and big pharma are the driving forces behind the concept of forced vaccination, not science. Things would be different if the vaccine were only 70% effective at preventing life-threatening cases.

It doesn't mean they won't do it, and the courts are a joke now, so it could still happen. I just think you don't need anything close to libertarian ideology to conclude that forced vaccination is unjustified in a situation with this fact pattern.
 
Top Bottom