What are the arguments for not enforcing COVID restrictions?
November 15, 2020 10:12 PM Subscribe
I regularly see reports of flagrant violations of COVID public health restrictions, and there seems to rarely be a strong enforcement response. For example, even when fines are possible, they seem to be rarely issued. What is the reasoning/arguments for this kind of "non-punitive" response?
(I am thinking of reports mostly from the US and Canada, but I suspect this is also true in other countries)
Related to this, I hear government officials and policy-makers say things amounting to "we won't / it doesn't make sense to impose restriction <x> because it's not enforceable" when it's clearly possible to enforce <x> (for example, fine people for not wearing masks, exceeding gathering sizes) and what it seems they are really saying is that they don't want to prioritize resources in any way to enforce it. I never really hear the "why".
(I am thinking of reports mostly from the US and Canada, but I suspect this is also true in other countries)
Related to this, I hear government officials and policy-makers say things amounting to "we won't / it doesn't make sense to impose restriction <x> because it's not enforceable" when it's clearly possible to enforce <x> (for example, fine people for not wearing masks, exceeding gathering sizes) and what it seems they are really saying is that they don't want to prioritize resources in any way to enforce it. I never really hear the "why".
The public mask requirement here in Miami didn't last very long (in practice) because of malicious enforcement by the cops. Not necessarily racist, mind, just seeking out the most penny ante violations that posed zero risk to anyone, which quickly generated a bunch of bad press.
posted by wierdo at 10:44 PM on November 15, 2020 [2 favorites]
posted by wierdo at 10:44 PM on November 15, 2020 [2 favorites]
Well, here in the GTA, there were fines for Diwali celebrations...which is fair, people should know, but I also bet that a Christmas campaign will start weeks in advance and not with the kind of mess that launched the Peel Region restrictions. Also, in Toronto by Thanksgiving there had been In 1,517 tickets issued. So it may be observer bias.
I can say that a lot of businesses here are trying but the shifting rules make it difficult when it gets down to a very granular level - for example, spacing has been 2m apart but under the new code at some levels it will be 3m apart. At my business we have invested a fair amount of money and time in high-quality floor markings which are installed...2m apart. So I can see why officials might have a conversation over fines in that case.
For masks, in my area which is the only one I'm familiar with, most people are fine. Once or twice I've seen people put them on to go into a store and then kind of hang them off their face, until they see staff or security.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:40 PM on November 15, 2020 [1 favorite]
I can say that a lot of businesses here are trying but the shifting rules make it difficult when it gets down to a very granular level - for example, spacing has been 2m apart but under the new code at some levels it will be 3m apart. At my business we have invested a fair amount of money and time in high-quality floor markings which are installed...2m apart. So I can see why officials might have a conversation over fines in that case.
For masks, in my area which is the only one I'm familiar with, most people are fine. Once or twice I've seen people put them on to go into a store and then kind of hang them off their face, until they see staff or security.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:40 PM on November 15, 2020 [1 favorite]
not enforceable, 'we prefer to make recommendations', it's personal responsibility, it's not the role of government to mandate health rules, it's an infringement on freedumb.
alternatively, my impression of 'why no enforcement'...
occam's razor: it costs votez.
more: the PR battle was lost immediately, when the disease was minimized, and then when masks became a tribal signal. any enforcement is likely to be falsely perceived as political persecution.
even more: the long incubation and low ifr effectively disconnect consequence from action. with a distorted view of negative outcomes, effective enforcement seems draconian.
finally, we have no leaders. the head of state won't advocate for public health measures top-down. there is no consensus between peers at the state level; anyone who shows a spine will be out there on their own. everyone is hoping someone else will do something so they don't have to. (with a few exceptions, who get death threats).
posted by j_curiouser at 11:45 PM on November 15, 2020 [15 favorites]
alternatively, my impression of 'why no enforcement'...
occam's razor: it costs votez.
more: the PR battle was lost immediately, when the disease was minimized, and then when masks became a tribal signal. any enforcement is likely to be falsely perceived as political persecution.
even more: the long incubation and low ifr effectively disconnect consequence from action. with a distorted view of negative outcomes, effective enforcement seems draconian.
finally, we have no leaders. the head of state won't advocate for public health measures top-down. there is no consensus between peers at the state level; anyone who shows a spine will be out there on their own. everyone is hoping someone else will do something so they don't have to. (with a few exceptions, who get death threats).
posted by j_curiouser at 11:45 PM on November 15, 2020 [15 favorites]
J_curiouser has it. I'd also add that, in my region, there's a real tension between law enforcement agencies and civil authorities. Seattle Police were not wearing masks consistently in May, contrary to messaging; the Lewis County Sheriff told people "don't be a sheep" when the state instituted a mask mandate in June; Spokane area police have a very broad interpretation of what consistent masking means.
I believe there is no push for enforcement because it would highlight the lack of control non-police institutions have over police behavior.
posted by VelveteenBabbitt at 12:16 AM on November 16, 2020 [9 favorites]
I believe there is no push for enforcement because it would highlight the lack of control non-police institutions have over police behavior.
posted by VelveteenBabbitt at 12:16 AM on November 16, 2020 [9 favorites]
In British Columbia, Canada, where the authorities are being questioned about why no mask mandate, the provincial government is not saying it’s unenforceable. It’s more that they think it won’t do more good than strong recommendations and encouraging people to do the right thing. As case counts rise in the southern half of the province, I am not so sure this is a good approach, but anyway, here’s their response:
...the province believes moving from a strong recommendation on masks to an actual provincial health order would cause more harm than good, and create more backlash and conflicts with people who aren't going to wear a mask no matter what the policies are.posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 12:21 AM on November 16, 2020
So do the leaders of various health authorities. It's one of the reasons Vancouver city council voted just last month against making masks mandatory in civic buildings, after hearing Patricia Daly, chief medical health officer of Vancouver Coastal Health, voice her opposition to it.
We refer to "Health & Safety" as if they are a single thing but they are not. What is in the best interests of public health may not be in the best interests of public safety. From a public health perspective, everyone should wear a mask and avoid public gatherings. From a public safety perspective, setting armed police on a group of un-masked, legally armed protesters on the steps of the state capitol building is an exceedingly bad idea.
posted by DarlingBri at 12:52 AM on November 16, 2020 [11 favorites]
posted by DarlingBri at 12:52 AM on November 16, 2020 [11 favorites]
I’m a contact tracer and when I call people to follow up on symptom reporting and quarantining I often don’t know anything about the person other than their name and phone number. They are telling me where they live / work / attend school. If we had cops going to people’s houses to enforce quarantine there wouldn’t be much motivation to share contact information in the future. We get more accomplished by not coming down with an iron fist. Additionally, it would take a lot of resources to go check in on all the people who are supposed to be quarantining.
I already have people on the phone who are crying because they understand how bad COVID is but also know that they can’t pay their bills if they don’t go to work for the week. Sending a cop to see if they’re staying home won’t fix that situation. Immediate cash transfers, eviction freezes and meal delivery do help some of that.
posted by raccoon409 at 4:20 AM on November 16, 2020 [18 favorites]
I already have people on the phone who are crying because they understand how bad COVID is but also know that they can’t pay their bills if they don’t go to work for the week. Sending a cop to see if they’re staying home won’t fix that situation. Immediate cash transfers, eviction freezes and meal delivery do help some of that.
posted by raccoon409 at 4:20 AM on November 16, 2020 [18 favorites]
Two UK-specific thoughts...
1. If policing is by consent of the population, and perceived consent around all of these prevention measures is iffy at best, then conspicuous enforcement is going to alienate people pretty fast
2. Dominic Cummings
I know which one I think is the bigger factor.
posted by rd45 at 4:36 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
1. If policing is by consent of the population, and perceived consent around all of these prevention measures is iffy at best, then conspicuous enforcement is going to alienate people pretty fast
2. Dominic Cummings
I know which one I think is the bigger factor.
posted by rd45 at 4:36 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
Most laws, and certianly laws that affect everyone, can only be enforced to the limits of your enforcement mechanism. When such a large percentage of your population is willing to be civilly disobedient actual enforcement becomes impossible. This is good when we are talking about lunch counters and bus seats but bad when we are taking global pandemic prevention measures.
Sadly a good chunk of US/Canada population has in this case been informed by the Cheeto in Chief and turned an issue that should be as apolitical as littering into a virtue signalling wedge issue about owning the libs. It will take a long time to bring most of the population around. See for example the backlash against mandatory seat belts or no-smoking restrictions.
posted by Mitheral at 6:10 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
Sadly a good chunk of US/Canada population has in this case been informed by the Cheeto in Chief and turned an issue that should be as apolitical as littering into a virtue signalling wedge issue about owning the libs. It will take a long time to bring most of the population around. See for example the backlash against mandatory seat belts or no-smoking restrictions.
posted by Mitheral at 6:10 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
Lots of good points above but one that I think hasn't been raised: it doesn't necessarily take perfect compliance for a rule to have an impact. For example, when Massachusetts started requiring a two-week quarantine from travelers from other states with higher COVID rates (but not enforcing it), there was a lot of skepticism around it having an impact. But I could see an impact just in travel forums I was browsing - people would bring up trips to Massachusetts and be met with the quarantine requirements. Some didn't care since it wasn't enforced, but many rethought their plans or shifted to a different state because of it. So there will always be rule-breakers, but you can get pretty far with even an unenforced rule.
posted by peacheater at 7:40 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
posted by peacheater at 7:40 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
what I see is a hesitance to enforce because not wearing a mask simply doesn't map to anyone's idea of what a punishable crime looks like.
I'll give you an example. Some years ago I lived in a condo complex and the asphalt needed resurfacing. For weeks the HOA did everything in its power to notify people and remind them and cajole them and HELP them (by finding alternative parking options) to not drive on (i.e. ruin) the paid-for-in-common wet asphalt. A stick was added to the carrots by announcing "if you disregard this and drive on the wet asphalt anyway, you're going to get a bill for the damage you cause."
Almost everyone remembered. There was one "I forgot and drove on it, because I can't be arsed to remember things" incident. The HOA would not fine the woman, because she whined and cried, and people "felt bad" for her, because what she did was not malicious, not intentional. We have an idea that penalties should only apply where there is "fault". This idea is not at all a politically conservative one: quite the opposite.
That, I think, is part of what's happening here. It doesn't look like a crime. It's just someone not wanting to cover their face.
Places like S Korea where the authorities grabbed positive-testing people from their homes and put them into government quarantine facilities have very different ideas about what kind of powers the government should have.
posted by fingersandtoes at 7:50 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
I'll give you an example. Some years ago I lived in a condo complex and the asphalt needed resurfacing. For weeks the HOA did everything in its power to notify people and remind them and cajole them and HELP them (by finding alternative parking options) to not drive on (i.e. ruin) the paid-for-in-common wet asphalt. A stick was added to the carrots by announcing "if you disregard this and drive on the wet asphalt anyway, you're going to get a bill for the damage you cause."
Almost everyone remembered. There was one "I forgot and drove on it, because I can't be arsed to remember things" incident. The HOA would not fine the woman, because she whined and cried, and people "felt bad" for her, because what she did was not malicious, not intentional. We have an idea that penalties should only apply where there is "fault". This idea is not at all a politically conservative one: quite the opposite.
That, I think, is part of what's happening here. It doesn't look like a crime. It's just someone not wanting to cover their face.
Places like S Korea where the authorities grabbed positive-testing people from their homes and put them into government quarantine facilities have very different ideas about what kind of powers the government should have.
posted by fingersandtoes at 7:50 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
The sheriff in our county - which despite being blue the last couple of election cycles still has a very prominent conservative population - put out a statement of Facebook in May that had a combination of "reasons."
* Economic arguments: The sheriff's office wouldn't "victimize" residents who were "trying to put food on their children's table" and it's time to help people "get back on their feet."
* Resource arguments: "We are dealing with a serious rise in crime, new challenges in our correctional facility and a massive upsurge in our courthouse when everything opens back up," so charging people for violating the orders will unnecessarily add to that burden
* Appropriate Use of Police Authority arguments: he said that he is receiving a high volume of calls from "terrified citizens asking me if I'm going to arrest them" for seeking their livelihood or meeting with friends, and he said "we are not stormtroopers...we are peacekeepers."
* Mootness arguments: an argument that "community policing and education" have already achieved compliance and so police enforcement is unncessary.
* Political (but denying the political) argument: "I am not going to be anybody's boogeyman," and calling the rules "strange"
I have also seen strained legal arguments by some local politicians (e.g. a separation of powers argument that a governor's orders do not have the force of law and do not create any legal basis for a county sheriff to charge violators even if it wanted to, that the language doesn't technically extend to certain jurisdictions and so it fails as a whole, etc.)
You can debate whether any of those are good reasons, but they have had a clear effect in our county: businesses which choose to can openly flout the rules and operate freely. These tend to be restaurants and niche businesses that draw a right-leaning crowd who enjoy their "freedom" of instant mashed potatoes at a dimly lit buffet inside an old Pizza Hut.
By contrast, "big box" stores, grocery stores, and national brands rely on community policing to enforce the mask mandate regardless because they understand that there's a broad appetite for that among the general population.
posted by AgentRocket at 7:53 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
* Economic arguments: The sheriff's office wouldn't "victimize" residents who were "trying to put food on their children's table" and it's time to help people "get back on their feet."
* Resource arguments: "We are dealing with a serious rise in crime, new challenges in our correctional facility and a massive upsurge in our courthouse when everything opens back up," so charging people for violating the orders will unnecessarily add to that burden
* Appropriate Use of Police Authority arguments: he said that he is receiving a high volume of calls from "terrified citizens asking me if I'm going to arrest them" for seeking their livelihood or meeting with friends, and he said "we are not stormtroopers...we are peacekeepers."
* Mootness arguments: an argument that "community policing and education" have already achieved compliance and so police enforcement is unncessary.
* Political (but denying the political) argument: "I am not going to be anybody's boogeyman," and calling the rules "strange"
I have also seen strained legal arguments by some local politicians (e.g. a separation of powers argument that a governor's orders do not have the force of law and do not create any legal basis for a county sheriff to charge violators even if it wanted to, that the language doesn't technically extend to certain jurisdictions and so it fails as a whole, etc.)
You can debate whether any of those are good reasons, but they have had a clear effect in our county: businesses which choose to can openly flout the rules and operate freely. These tend to be restaurants and niche businesses that draw a right-leaning crowd who enjoy their "freedom" of instant mashed potatoes at a dimly lit buffet inside an old Pizza Hut.
By contrast, "big box" stores, grocery stores, and national brands rely on community policing to enforce the mask mandate regardless because they understand that there's a broad appetite for that among the general population.
posted by AgentRocket at 7:53 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
The top article in our local paper has an extensive example of the local police chief whining about how mask enforcement is too hard. Pretty sure the actual issue is that it's his friends and relatives he'd have to be fining, and the rally that was 50/50 Trump signs and Blue Lives Matter flags that he'd have to break up.
posted by restless_nomad at 8:04 AM on November 16, 2020 [2 favorites]
posted by restless_nomad at 8:04 AM on November 16, 2020 [2 favorites]
Here's a good reason that is dumb and also completely true, and should be feared by the reasonable:
This woman, Shelly Luthor owned a hair salon, and was fined in Dallas Texas, and then jailed for violating local and state quarantine ordinances and extreme contempt of court.
So what does she do? She becomes a martyr for crazy people and now is one election away from being a state senator, because a big portion of the population doesn't like masks and has the money to fight the government and the best way to fight is to become the government.
Is creating hundreds of martyrs like this worth it? No, it is not.
posted by The_Vegetables at 9:15 AM on November 16, 2020
This woman, Shelly Luthor owned a hair salon, and was fined in Dallas Texas, and then jailed for violating local and state quarantine ordinances and extreme contempt of court.
So what does she do? She becomes a martyr for crazy people and now is one election away from being a state senator, because a big portion of the population doesn't like masks and has the money to fight the government and the best way to fight is to become the government.
Is creating hundreds of martyrs like this worth it? No, it is not.
posted by The_Vegetables at 9:15 AM on November 16, 2020
My personal opinion is that the real, underlying reason is structural racism. The criminal justice system is designed to keep people of color in line. It was never meant to - indeed cannot - address systematic criminality of white people.
posted by medusa at 10:05 AM on November 16, 2020 [5 favorites]
posted by medusa at 10:05 AM on November 16, 2020 [5 favorites]
My concern is that if police in US did start enforcing these rules, it would be incredibly disproportionate, as policing always is here. Since Covid is occurring in higher percentages among people of color, would police use that as another excuse to bust Black teenagers for something? Would Black kids playing basketball get arrested and fined while white kids playing soccer are left alone?
I live in a historically Black, gentrifying neighborhood. There's a park near me where lots of older Black folks hang out. Early in the pandemic, one of my neighbors (no one I know) on Next Door said she was a nurse and her walk to work took her past this park; she complained bitterly about people not wearing masks and she delighted in having any excuse to call the cops on these folks. I want those folks at the park to be safe, and I would like it if they were wearing masks. I do not think calling the cops on them would get anything done other than ... more harassment of folks who have dealt with harassment from cops their whole lives.
I don't think this is the reason governments aren't enforcing these rules. But, it is a reason why I, a person who believes in science and wants people to follow these rules, don't think more enforcement is necessarily the answer.
We don't enforce all rules and laws. Think about speeding. We could install cameras on highways and enforce speeding laws pretty easily. We do not do that. Speeding is dangerous and contributes to an epidemic of traffic deaths (these are on the rise). I'm not saying we should or shouldn't enforce traffic laws, but pointing out that enforcement is always inconsistent.
posted by bluedaisy at 10:44 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
I live in a historically Black, gentrifying neighborhood. There's a park near me where lots of older Black folks hang out. Early in the pandemic, one of my neighbors (no one I know) on Next Door said she was a nurse and her walk to work took her past this park; she complained bitterly about people not wearing masks and she delighted in having any excuse to call the cops on these folks. I want those folks at the park to be safe, and I would like it if they were wearing masks. I do not think calling the cops on them would get anything done other than ... more harassment of folks who have dealt with harassment from cops their whole lives.
I don't think this is the reason governments aren't enforcing these rules. But, it is a reason why I, a person who believes in science and wants people to follow these rules, don't think more enforcement is necessarily the answer.
We don't enforce all rules and laws. Think about speeding. We could install cameras on highways and enforce speeding laws pretty easily. We do not do that. Speeding is dangerous and contributes to an epidemic of traffic deaths (these are on the rise). I'm not saying we should or shouldn't enforce traffic laws, but pointing out that enforcement is always inconsistent.
posted by bluedaisy at 10:44 AM on November 16, 2020 [3 favorites]
If you want the moral argument, it's pretty straightforward. Fixed fines are a regressive tax (i.e. they cost a poor person more than a rich person), enforcement is racially disparate when it happens, and any interaction with the police is dangerous for reasons that are obvious.
As with many aspects of policing in the US and elsewhere, these are arguments for changing the penalties and the people doing the enforcement, not for making it legal. Why don't we do that? For the same reason we don't enforce speeding limits: it costs votes among boomer men.
posted by caek at 11:21 AM on November 16, 2020 [1 favorite]
As with many aspects of policing in the US and elsewhere, these are arguments for changing the penalties and the people doing the enforcement, not for making it legal. Why don't we do that? For the same reason we don't enforce speeding limits: it costs votes among boomer men.
posted by caek at 11:21 AM on November 16, 2020 [1 favorite]
Actual violent crime is way up in many cities, and both law enforcement and citizens probably feel that it should be prioritized.
Protests that started in June and are still continuing, and now election related protests, use up a lot of police funding while cities face massive debt problems that started in March. Overtime costs a lot of money that no one has anymore.
Police hiring and training have paused, so the normal amount of replacements have not arrived. I wouldn't be surprised if many older officers have taken earlier retirements instead of dealing with the new environment.
posted by meowzilla at 1:04 PM on November 16, 2020 [1 favorite]
Protests that started in June and are still continuing, and now election related protests, use up a lot of police funding while cities face massive debt problems that started in March. Overtime costs a lot of money that no one has anymore.
Police hiring and training have paused, so the normal amount of replacements have not arrived. I wouldn't be surprised if many older officers have taken earlier retirements instead of dealing with the new environment.
posted by meowzilla at 1:04 PM on November 16, 2020 [1 favorite]
the impression I have around here is that the mask mandate isn't enforced because the cops themselves refuse to wear masks.
the reason mandates on restaurant occupancy and indoor dining aren't well-enforced is because the city government knows that they have no way of bailing out these businesses and that ordering small business owners to go out of business is going to cost them votes. And, incidentally, they're also humans who have feelings and no desire to turn tens of thousands of workers out into the cold at Christmas, even if the election optics on that were fine.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 3:18 PM on November 16, 2020
the reason mandates on restaurant occupancy and indoor dining aren't well-enforced is because the city government knows that they have no way of bailing out these businesses and that ordering small business owners to go out of business is going to cost them votes. And, incidentally, they're also humans who have feelings and no desire to turn tens of thousands of workers out into the cold at Christmas, even if the election optics on that were fine.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 3:18 PM on November 16, 2020
The public mask requirement here in Miami didn't last very long (in practice) because of malicious enforcement by the cops. Not necessarily racist, mind, just seeking out the most penny ante violations that posed zero risk to anyone, which quickly generated a bunch of bad press.
DeSantis gutting enforcement of local restrictions, numbers are going up like crazy, but DeSantis is standing firm on refusing to shut things down or implement any mask guidelines. Plus the numbers produced by his DOH are suspiciously low. Plus he was talking about opening all the schools in late January last month though I’ve not heard any updates either way.
posted by tilde at 4:50 PM on November 16, 2020
Yeah it's almost always because you don't make a threat you can't follow through on. The police will not enforce it, and that will only expose your lack of control of your own police force.
posted by ctmf at 9:05 PM on November 16, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by ctmf at 9:05 PM on November 16, 2020 [1 favorite]
Back when we had lockdown in NZ, the police explicitly stated that they would take an "education first" approach, explaining to people how and why they were in breach of the regulations, and only using enforcement measures for repeat offenders.
A few prosecutions resulted, in the main it worked very well.
Arguably a factor was the very clear and regular updates provided by the government and the Ministry of Health, which resulted in widespread support for the measures that were taken.
posted by HiroProtagonist at 6:25 PM on November 17, 2020
A few prosecutions resulted, in the main it worked very well.
Arguably a factor was the very clear and regular updates provided by the government and the Ministry of Health, which resulted in widespread support for the measures that were taken.
posted by HiroProtagonist at 6:25 PM on November 17, 2020
« Older What is this European kids' movie I saw in the mid... | I'm 39, and my boyfriend has just told me he won't... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by metahawk at 10:29 PM on November 15, 2020 [7 favorites]