@Shop-et-al wrote:
The founders probably would have disagreed vehemently, but hopefully not with a duel, regarding masking.
Nonetheless, I also intensely dislike beating, shooting, and otherwise dissing the messenger that we have in today's world.
To me, I think it probably reflects a degree of mental instability in many who commit the violence.
Surely, it can't be just about "rights" can it? ...We don't see people who smoke go out and shoot, stab, beat, or verbally abuse those who ask them to smoke outside of a non-smoking establishment. (Although, we never had a President or government say smoking didn't cause cancer and was a hoax, etc.) You won't see people beating bar tenders for asking for ID to be served alcohol. ...etc.
It's a curious thing this mask wearing and violent confrontations. With so many dead in America already, you'd think we'd have much more sympathetic people. With smoking, second hand smoke takes a longer time to kill you. It's been bizarre as heck.
Another factor might be the lockdowns. We didn't have lockdowns when smoking got banned. etc. I sort of have a sneaking suspicion that a segment of the anti-maskers (not necessarily the violent ones) may have economic motives tied into their response. Maybe their business/jobs have been hurt (which I am very sympathetic to) and combined with misinformation about COVID or how the economy will be affected***, they've fought against it. Of course, there are probably some who also just have strong libertarian type of views undergirding their positions too.
***And, on this point, I think they are wrong and don't realize that reopening without squashing COVID will HASTEN business bankruptcies as I've argued and posted about elsewhere. Fighting the virus and protecting the economy are intertwined and one and the same to a large degree. The problem is, our stupid response sort of lends credence to some of these views possibly. We didn't bail out all businesses and we didn't fully, effectively lockdown.