Sticky Post

Forced Vaccinations In Massachusetts (H1N1)

Doesn’t look like anything is holding this back from becoming law.  I hope the people will resist this strongly.

Andrew Says:

Wrong.

Did they read the bill?

http://www.mass.gov/legis/billsrch.htm
Senate No. 2028

It has nothing to do with H1N1. The flu is 3x more dangerous than H1N1. H1N1 would not cause a state of emergency. People can only be isolated or quarantined IF “his or her refusal [to vaccination or treatment] 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.”

2028 does not authorize police to vaccinate people. The bill authorizes a “local public health authority” as defined in Section 1 of Chapter 111 (or page. 8, section 3 of 2028). The police cannot arrest people because they refuse vaccination. If someone refuses vaccination, they would be given the option to be isolated or quarantined (IF they pose a serious danger to public health). If (and only if) they refuse either option, then they can be arrested without a warrant.

Nobody has a “great big list” of everybody that had a flu shot. And, well, I would hope neighbors would report other neighbors that are causing other people to die.

Again, this is for serious health emergencies. Fox News is just playing on people’s fears of H1N1 and combining it with people’s hate for the government to make what they think is a news story. It’s just bad marketing to gain rating.

Dave Says:

You are right that is isn’t just H1N1 but that is the the fear they are playing on to advance the bill and that may be used to enact a state of emergency.

“People can only be isolated or quarantined IF “his or her refusal [to vaccination or treatment] 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 commission or a local public health authority operating within its jurisdiction.”

– This is still the government making the decision and not yourself. It is also very broad. To me this reads as follows: they can quarantine you if you are suspected to have been exposed to a disease that may be a public hazard.

I am not sure what you would consider mandatory.

“If someone refuses vaccination, they would be given the option to be isolated or quarantined (IF they pose a serious danger to public health)”

– A serious danger to public health is subjective. The media and government are freaked out about H1N1 but as you have already stated is it not as dangerous as the regular flu.

“If (and only if) they refuse either option, then they can be arrested without a warrant.”

-Again this is mandatory in my book. Options: get a shot, become quarantined/isolated or get arrested.

“2028 does not authorize police to vaccinate people. The bill authorizes a “local public health authority” as defined in Section 1 of Chapter 111 (or page. 8, section 3 of 2028).”

– Judge Andrew said “non-health care licensed personnel which we read as being police.” – I admit I could not find this wording in the bill when I did a quick search. I will email him about this.

What are your thoughts about it?

This is a guest note by SkinStore.