Poll: Will you take shot or go to prison

[Dianne]

Let's try this again. Massachusetts has just passed a law that those refusing to take the swine flu shot will pay a $1,000. per day fine and face 30 days in jail. Here is the link:

http://rockthetruth2.blogspot.com/2009/08/swine-flu-shot-or-jail-in-massachusetts.html

I would like to know what you will do if and when your state imposes a similar law.


By the way Dr. 3D, thanks for your help !!

[olehounddog]

I ain't goin nowhere., I ain't gittin no shot, and I ain't goin to no damn jail. Fuk'um to hell. I fear no man, I fear no government, I fear not death for I am a FREE MAN.

[lynnf]

just say no



lynn

[Objectivist]

Interesting proposition when if you don't take the shot you can go to jail and get Hep-C, AIDS or TB from your fellow inmates.

I'm not taking the shot or paying a fine. You can find me with a few bullets in me from the assholes that will have to effect the arrest.

[Kludge]

I don't live in Massachusetts.

[Original_Intent]

Don't live in Mass, and not sure what I would do if I did.

[raystone]

I ain't goin nowhere., I ain't gittin no shot, and I ain't goin to no damn jail. Fuk'um to hell. I fear no man, I fear no government, I fear not death for I am a FREE MAN.



Interesting proposition when if you don't take the shot you can go to jail and get Hep-C, AIDS or TB from your fellow inmates.

I'm not taking the shot or paying a fine. You can find me with a few bullets in me from the assholes that will have to effect the arrest.



These

[Dianne]

Don't live in Mass, and not sure what I would do if I did.

The point is, what if the state you live in follows suit to implement the same law Massachusetts has just passed. What will you do?

I live in North Carolina and would not be a bit surprised to see this state require everyone to get a swine flu shot. It's a great way for them to generate revenue by fining 1,000. per day.

[hamilton1049]

You left out resist with every means at your disposal.

[Freedom 4 all]

Two words, New Hampshire.

[SovereignMN]

I honestly don't know what I would do.

[Pod]

It can be very complicated if you`re married and have a family. Taking your chances with the vaccine could very well be the most rational option.

If you`re single however it is a no-brainer. You either pack up or stock up.

[pcosmar]

Same answer as the other poll.

The poll is missing options. I am glad I am not in Mass., but I am sure that this will show up in other places.
I will not take the shot. I will resist.
Jail, maybe. I've been there before. I will organize resistance inside.
Death, maybe. That has been attempted before too. I will die when it is time.
I will resist.

[SovereignMN]

It can be very complicated if you`re married and have a family. Taking your chances with the vaccine could very well be the most rational option.

If you`re single however it is a no-brainer. You either pack up or stock up.

This is what I think about every day. Have 2 kids (ages 5 and 3) with another on the way. Obviously I'm no good to them in jail, dead or having them foricbly removed from my custody...yet how can I teach them about liberty if I don't set an example about resisting tyranny.

[Pod]

This is what I think about every day. Have 2 kids (ages 5 and 3) with another on the way. Obviously I'm no good to them in jail, dead or having them foricbly removed from my custody...yet how can I teach them about liberty if I don't set an example about resisting tyranny.

To resist tyranny you don`t have to resist it head on. Švejkism (http://www.amazon.com/Good-Soldier-Svejk-Fortunes-Twentieth-Century/dp/0140182748) can be as efficient as any stand off. Takes brains, a stomach and nerves of steel though.

[Elwar]

Cross posted from same other thread:

You know, this is an interesting question and I was up against a similar question a few years ago.

When I was born I was never vaccinated. My father is a Chiropractor and knew how harmful vaccines (especially back then) were for children.

I went without any vaccines my whole life...until a few years ago.

I had an opportunity to go work in Iraq doing the exact same thing I do right now, but making between $250k-$300k. Sure it was in Iraq and all that but as a computer geek I was just working at a desk there just as I would be here. I liked that my first $80k wasn't taxxed and I wanted to get ahead of things financially before our huge debt required higher income taxes (I figured if I paid off my house and car I could take a lower paying job under the table).

So, I'm getting ready to go to Iraq, I took the job and left my old job. They send me to get all of my gear and get my physicals etc.

Then I get hit with the biggy...I had to get my vaccinations up to date. I spoke with the nurse in charge of the shots and told her my situation and she hadn't ever run into someone who didn't want their shots but she was cooperative and let me put it off while she talked to the people above her. At the same time (for about two weeks) I checked into laws and ways to get around it. The military finally got back to me and said "No shots, no deployment". Then the VP of my company was on the phone with my boss's boss and then he was on the phone with my boss and finally my boss called me asking what was going on, saying I was refusing my shots.

In the end I sucked it up, I got my shots. So for me, it was worth $250k to get some poisons injected into me. Fortunately the nurse who had been very kind through the whole process only gave me the bare neccessity shots that they required (though that was 8 shots). I didn't have to take the Anthrax or smallpox.

So...if it came down to paying $1k a day or get the swine flu vaccine...I doubt I'd last long.

I mean, sure it's good to think you'll stand up for things you believe in...but when it comes down to it, you have to look at the bigger picture and weigh standing up for your principles with screwing up your life.

I mean...I pay my taxes even though I don't believe in them. That's basically accepting being a slave. The consequences of not paying them outweigh my willingness to stand up for my principles.

I give a lot of credit though to those principled people are willing to take a hit to take a stand.

Though most people are figuring that the government will be rounding us up like the jews in Germany, forcing us into hospitals like cattle. Which is when we would fight...but they wouldn't do that, they'll come up with better methods...something where you'll have to make that same choice I did. They'll probably outlaw people from being in public without vaccinations, including businesses and companies...and you'll have to choose between your job or getting vaccinated. It won't be about resisting...it'll be about you voluntarily going to get vaccinated as a choice between going bankrupt or taking the poison.

[newbitech]

what is this? Did this law really pass? WOW. I have no idea what will happen, but I will not be forced to inject something into my body. Let them fine me. If they want to send me to jail, then they have another problem.

[wsc321]

This is amazing... in an awful way. I guess Americans are just so indoctrinated to believe the State is always right.

[Elwar]

Something tells me that the path of resistance would most likely be through the court system on the Constitutionality of it.

[jmag]

The law(vid) says the commissioner/governor has the power to enact these things - not that they have enacted them. Just like emergency powers gives the president to do all kinds of scary things. Actually doing it is different. Scary though. Hard to believe the citizenry there let them pass it. I hope we don't have to face it in Co.

[mczerone]

I would go to the clinic, get the shot anonymously, and refuse to do so publicly.

I would have a claim filed in Federal District Court before they could drive me to a prison - forcing the State to prove (at least to the SCOTUS) that to infringe on my right to be free from physical penetration they must have a damned strong legitimate interest, and a hardly fatal disease isn't one, especially when a State could, rather than mandate the injection, offer to provide the injection as a public service for 'free'.

That would still be a tyrannical solution, IMO, but far preferable to being dragged away be men with guns rather than trust that the gov't is using a clean needle or that the vaccine is safe when provided by them.


* Refusal to interact with someone because they will not immunize themselves is a very effective way to deal with this, if you are so worried. Start a campaign to volunteer to wear "I've been immunized" patches for your various immunizations, and certify yourself or through your agents the veracity of the immunizations you trust and the fidelity of the certificate patches. You just can't trust gov't to do this effectively**.

**Maybe they will 'eradicate' one disease or another, but at what cost, and will they weaponize the remainder?

[Dr.3D]

It is my understanding, there will only be one vaccine and nobody will be charged any money for it other than having the cost come out of government taxes. It wouldn't matter if you went to a free clinic or got it from a government source at the grocery store, you will still get the same vaccine.

[mczerone]

The law(vid) says the commissioner/governor has the power to enact these things - not that they have enacted them. Just like emergency powers gives the president to do all kinds of scary things. Actually doing it is different. Scary though. Hard to believe the citizenry there let them pass it. I hope we don't have to face it in Co.

Conceding that they can do them is admitting your subjugation. There technically should be no 'emergency powers', only 'expediting rules' that allow faster reaction to an immediate situation: the powers claimed should be no broader than powers at any other time.

Them claiming that they have these powers now will be used as a "we told you we had these powers, you should have objected before we used them" defense.

[Reason]

Let's try this again. Massachusetts has just passed a law that those refusing to take the swine flu shot will pay a $1,000. per day fine and face 30 days in jail. Here is the link:

http://rockthetruth2.blogspot.com/2009/08/swine-flu-shot-or-jail-in-massachusetts.html (http://rockthetruth2.blogspot.com/2009/08/swine-flu-shot-or-jail-in-massachusetts.html)

I would like to know what you will do if and when your state imposes a similar law.


By the way Dr. 3D, thanks for your help !!

That bill is talking about quarantine.

Your interpretation of mandatory shots is WRONG.

Stop fear mongering.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2290776&postcount=27

[Dr.3D]

If they wanted to quarantine me to my own home, I wouldn't mind so much. I just have to wonder how long said quarantine would last.

[dannno]

That bill is talking about quarantine.

Your interpretation of mandatory shots is WRONG.

Stop fear mongering.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2290776&postcount=27

That is incorrect, they said that if you disobey them you can go to jail. One EXAMPLE was not following quarantine.

You obviously haven't been schooled in the ambiguity of writing laws, why and how it is done.

[Reason]

That is incorrect, they said that if you disobey them you can go to jail. One EXAMPLE was not following quarantine.

You obviously haven't been schooled in the ambiguity of writing laws, why and how it is done.

http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/users/06/adem/pictures/absolut/images/absolut%20conspiracy.jpg

[dannno]

That bill is talking about quarantine.

Your interpretation of mandatory shots is WRONG.

Stop fear mongering.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2290776&postcount=27

No.


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2290786&postcount=28

[Kludge]

That bill is talking about quarantine.

Your interpretation of mandatory shots is WRONG.

Stop fear mongering.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2290776&postcount=27 (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2290776&postcount=27)

The mechanisms are in place for the government to mandate vaccines and detain those who do not comply, at least, in Massachusetts, whether the CDC is stating they will be using those mechanisms for detaining those who don't comply with possible mandatory vaccination or not. This is not a power I believe any of us think the gov't should have. The fear is that the government is now legally justified in doing such a thing if it wanted, at least, in Massachusetts.

[dannno]

The mechanisms are in place for the government to mandate vaccines and detain those who do not comply, at least, in Massachusetts, whether the CDC is stating they will be using those mechanisms for detaining those who don't comply with possible mandatory vaccination or not. This is not a power I believe any of us think the gov't should have. The fear is that the government is now legally justified in doing such a thing if it wanted, at least, in Massachusetts.

Exactly.

CivilRadient, you are very naive. Stop swallowing the koolaid.

[Reason]

Exactly.

CivilRadient, you are very naive. Stop swallowing the koolaid.

This response is good enough for me for now.

Email I sent last night.

--

Have you heard anything about possible bills having anything to do with any attempt to make the H1N1 vaccine mandatory?

I ask you since I saw your article concerning the topic and thought you might know if the rumors are BS or not.

http://www.boston.com/news/health/ar..._campaign=8315 (http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2009/08/13/state_asks_volunteers_to_aid_flu_vaccinations/?s_campaign=8315)

Thank You!

--

28 August 2009
10:40 a.m.


Good morning, Mr. <removed> -- and thank you for writing.

As luck would have it, I was at the US Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention this week and pointedly -- and repeatedly -- posed this
question. And several officials said emphatically that there are no plans
for mandatory vaccinations, nor could they imagine a scenario under which
shots would be made mandatory.

Hope this helps.


Stephen Smith
Boston Globe

[dannno]

This response is good enough for me for now.

Email I sent last night.

--

Have you heard anything about possible bills having anything to do with any attempt to make the H1N1 vaccine mandatory?

I ask you since I saw your article concerning the topic and thought you might know if the rumors are BS or not.

http://www.boston.com/news/health/ar..._campaign=8315 (http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2009/08/13/state_asks_volunteers_to_aid_flu_vaccinations/?s_campaign=8315)

Thank You!

--

28 August 2009
10:40 a.m.


Good morning, Mr. <removed> -- and thank you for writing.

As luck would have it, I was at the US Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention this week and pointedly -- and repeatedly -- posed this
question. And several officials said emphatically that there are no plans
for mandatory vaccinations, nor could they imagine a scenario under which
shots would be made mandatory.

Hope this helps.


Stephen Smith
Boston Globe

Of course that's what they're going to say. Try thinking for yourself. If you don't like me, at least listen to Kludge, he's a smart kid.

[Reason]

Of course that's what they're going to say. Try thinking for yourself. If you don't like me, at least listen to Kludge, he's a smart kid.

I understand that if it was written ambiguously that might be cause to watch it closely but that is not what any of these thread titles state.

The way they are worded and setup makes it look like a bill was passed that makes it mandatory with clear and obvious punishment for non-compliance.

That irritates me to no end.

And you don't know jack about me if you think I would like the patriot act.

Let's stick to the issue and avoid the ad hominem's please.

[aravoth]

I'm not interested in me or my family getting Guillain-Barré Syndrome, or any other unseen side-effect, because of an improperly tested vaccination. So we will not be getting it, and we not be going to jail because of it.

It's that simple.

[Dianne]

That bill is talking about quarantine.

Your interpretation of mandatory shots is WRONG.

Stop fear mongering.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2290776&postcount=27



That's not true...

http://www.examiner.com/x-6258-Huntsville-Natural-Parenting-Examiner~y2009m8d28-Refusing-Swine-Flu-Vaccine-Quarantine-and-1000-per-day-fine

Refusing Swine Flu Vaccine? Quarantine and $1,000 per day fine




mzacha (stock exchg)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related Articles
Don't Inject Me (Swine Flu Vaccine Song) Music Video
Brittish actor in Swine Flu prevention ad catches Swine Flu
Swine Flu vaccine being administered without being tested in humans
Parents allow Swine Flu vaccines for their kids but say they wouldn't take the shot themselves
A bill that has recently passed the Massachusetts senate gives the government a little too much power. The bill is being hurried along due to fears of a Swine Flu pandemic this flu season.

According to the bill, if there is a Swine Flu pandemic and you don't get the Swine Flu vaccine, you can be ordered into quarantine. If you refuse the quarantine, you can face a fine of $1,000 per day that you resist.

This is the same Swine Flu vaccine that the government itself is unsure of the vaccine's safety, yet they are issuing penalties if it is not taken.

Government officials would also have the right to enter private property to asses the status of the pandemic.

[tremendoustie]

I would step up my plans to move to the free state (NH).

[2young2vote]

I think it completely depends on the circumstances. If Nearly everyone is getting one, and it wouldn't be very hard to find the people who haven't had it, then i might get one. But if there are millions who are refusing it, then I might refuse it. Basically, if the options are going to jail and getting raped and fined and missing out on my education and living in poverty for the rest of my life, or getting the shot, I would choose the shot.

Or i can get it and hope that I and many other people get sick from it so we can sue the **** out of the government.

[Elwar]

I understand that if it was written ambiguously that might be cause to watch it closely but that is not what any of these thread titles state.

The way they are worded and setup makes it look like a bill was passed that makes it mandatory with clear and obvious punishment for non-compliance.

That irritates me to no end.

And you don't know jack about me if you think I would like the patriot act.

Let's stick to the issue and avoid the ad hominem's please.

The bill basically says that they will force you to be quarentined if you aren't vaccinated. And then if you refuse then you are fined $1000 per day plus the jail time.

Basically like saying...if you don't pay your taxes, then you'll have to pay your taxes plus a fine. If you don't do that...then you go to jail. Which pretty much means, pay your taxes or go to jail.

[Flash]

I live in MA. I would take the shot since I can't make a move to New Hampshire anytime soon. And it beats going to jail.

[acptulsa]

I live in MA.

I'm sorry. :(

YouTube - Kingston Trio - M. T. A. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VMSGrY-IlU)

[dannno]

I dont' wanna be quantrantined!



We gotta quantrantine the plants!

-Rickyism


YouTube - Trailer Park Boys - Season 2 - Episode 4 - Part 2 (of 3) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liOlHprHmss)

[youngbuck]

How about none of the above? I'm not taking the shot, I'm not moving out of state, and I'm not going to jail either!

[acptulsa]

How about none of the above? I'm not taking the shot, I'm not moving out of state, and I'm not going to jail either!

Yeah, this is the really, really stupid part of self-protection laws. So, a person gets paranoid and feels the mandated 'for your own good' whatever is a threat to their health and safety. What then? Does one thing lead to another until he winds up getting shot dead? How does that help? Is it because he puts other people at risk? Even if they've had the vaccine?

Or is this all about keeping their statewide health care costs down? If so, the cop had better shoot to kill... :rolleyes:

[angelatc]

This is what I think about every day. Have 2 kids (ages 5 and 3) with another on the way. Obviously I'm no good to them in jail, dead or having them foricbly removed from my custody...yet how can I teach them about liberty if I don't set an example about resisting tyranny.

You are smart to consider that the state might take your kids. Mine are older. At this point I would sue, and after that I would go to jail.

If mine were still toddlers, I'd take the shot and pick a different battle.

[JK/SEA]

How about none of the above? I'm not taking the shot, I'm not moving out of state, and I'm not going to jail either!

They'll hunt you down like a dirty dog and drag your ass to a 'secure' facility for your own good, and for the common good of the 'homeland'...you will then be ...assimilated...and become part of the collective.

Oh, and you will get your shot while you're still screaming on the gurney in your straight jacket.

Sounds like fun eh?

[acptulsa]

They'll hunt you down like a dirty dog and drag your ass to a 'secure' facility for your own good, and for the common good of the 'homeland'...you will then be ...assimilated...and become part of the collective.

Oh, and you will get your shot while you're still screaming on the gurney in your straight jacket.

Sounds like fun eh?

Well, this is not dissimilar to the line of reasoning that saw millions of undesirables (including but not limited to Jews) line themselves cooperatively up and march into gas chambers some sixty-eight years ago...

Just sayin'.

[pcosmar]

They'll hunt you down like a dirty dog and drag your ass to a 'secure' facility for your own good, and for the common good of the 'homeland'...you will then be ...assimilated...and become part of the collective.

Oh, and you will get your shot while you're still screaming on the gurney in your straight jacket.

Sounds like fun eh?

Or,,, Nevermind, it may be against forum rules. and against OPSEC.

Good luck dragging me out of the woods. Bring lots of help. And dogs, I like dogs. :D

[youngbuck]

They'll hunt you down like a dirty dog and drag your ass to a 'secure' facility for your own good, and for the common good of the 'homeland'...you will then be ...assimilated...and become part of the collective.

Oh, and you will get your shot while you're still screaming on the gurney in your straight jacket.

Sounds like fun eh?

They can try... but somewhere along the lines they'll fail.

[akihabro]

They know in my large state it will be hard to force everyone to take the shot. I won't take any shot or go to jail. Shoot me with a H1N1 vaccine and I'll shoot you with a hollow point.

[tmosley]

The point is, what if the state you live in follows suit to implement the same law Massachusetts has just passed. What will you do?

I live in North Carolina and would not be a bit surprised to see this state require everyone to get a swine flu shot. It's a great way for them to generate revenue by fining 1,000. per day.

Move.

Maybe an overnight reduction in population by 20% would convince them that they have made the wrong choice.

[Dark_Horse_Rider]

If they think that starting with Mass will give them an idea of how the rest of the country will respond, they may be very unpleasantly surprised down the line.

[Mini-Me]

I'm wary of vaccines, ESPECIALLY untested ones, but I'm not 100% opposed to taking them on principle. After all, I'm "up to date" on all of my shots anyway. I even went to take a flu shot once, although that was five years ago when I didn't know any better, and I've been avoiding them after since.

However, this particular vaccine scares the crap out of me. On the circumstantial level, the whole "swine flu pandemic" scare smells false to me, and the talk of mandatory vaccinations is raising red flags. At best, even if the virus itself is some accidental freak of nature, I think the scare has been cooked up to rake in money for big pharma, regardless of its effect on public health. I mean, the media was hyping up a pandemic back in March or so, when only a few people had even gotten the damn thing. At worst, this is a sudden "game-changer" or "final solution" that nobody (or very few) ever saw coming.

My mind is going to some dark places and wondering about possible conspiracies, no matter how far-fetched. On one hand, how many people would have to know if the swine flu were created on purpose, to be released later as a weapon to wipe out everyone who doesn't take the vaccine? On the other hand, how many people did it take to decide on squalene as an adjuvant (and the amounts used)? What if the squalene is being deliberately used to physically and mentally cripple the population as a whole? Hell, it's possible that the whole thing is a Xanatos gambit and BOTH could be true. In any case, if the latter is true, I see two major possibilities:
The most likely possibility is that "Gulf War syndrome" effects are intended to inflict a large portion of people, but not everyone. This would aid the establishment in putting the opposition in disarray, distracting the remaining population, and ramming through totalitarian measures to "save everyone" in the aftermath. Enough healthy(ish) people would remain to do physical labor, whereas everyone else would be crippled or dead. It's pretty much the wet dream of the "population control" nutcases.
Taking the "population control wet dream" idea farther, what if the entire American population has outlived its usefulness for the purposes of the globalist establishment? If there really is a plan to kill off 90% of the world's population, who says they're necessarily even planning on leaving any Americans anyway? "Whoops, all the Americans [and some others] 'accidentally killed themselves.' What a shame. We'll be sure to run a lot of sympathetic stories in the media everywhere else in the world and erect a huge memorial to make it look like we care, but hey, at least the world is less populated now. So, who among you poor and desperate third world citizens want to move to the newly empty land of opportunity, work in our factories, and farm the land for us? We promise, we'll give you more table scraps than you've ever gotten before."

Leaving my wild imagination behind, there are still much less speculative reasons to fear these vaccines. At the very least, making an untested vaccination mandatory requires astounding and unconscionable stupidity. Even if there's no deliberate conspiracy to do anything except rake in big pharma profits, these vaccines are still going through only a few months of testing at best, and that's hardly adequate. Who knows what could happen? On top of that, regardless of WHY it was put in, the vaccines still apparently have squalene in them. There was another thread here with a Youtube video where a woman (a doctor supposedly?) mentioned they contain one MILLION times the amount of squalene in Vaccine A. Considering the effects of squalene on mice and Vaccine A's suspected role in Gulf War syndrome, that's nothing short of terrifying if true. That said, I read some mentions of several other untested adjuvants being used in these vaccines. I don't know if that means squalene is only in some of them, if more than one adjuvant is being used in each (is that normal?), or if some reports are just incorrect...but in any case, none of it bodes well for the safety of this vaccine.

This is an extremely difficult dilemma. On one hand, maybe this vaccine will kill or cripple a significant portion of those who take it. On the other hand, maybe our fears are overblown. Are we sure that squalene is in all of the shots, or is it only in certain batches? What if squalene has nothing to do with Gulf War syndrome anyway, and its effects on mice are not reproducible in humans? For all we know, mass vaccination could have no adverse effects, but any resistors will be financially ruined, if not raped and/or shivved in prison. Then again, the vaccine could potentially destroy the entire population. That's a pretty high stakes gamble. For anyone who knows: Other than the vaccine given to Gulf War soldiers, do we know of any other popular vaccines that have ever used squalene?

As 2young2vote said, my reaction to mandatory vaccination would depend on the circumstances. In order, my options are:
If enough people are resisting to cause a disruption and avoid taking the shot or paying the rolling fine (and going to jail), I will certainly be among them. At the very least, it would be very difficult to imprison millions of people for avoiding a vaccination.
If I can continue living in my state without getting the shot, and the only condition is being quarantined at home for some finite [and reasonable] length of time, I'll do that.
Also, what I do depends on how the shots are being administered and accounted for. I mean, in a mandatory vaccination scenario, who gives out the shots? Do family doctors give out the shots? Are militarily "assisted" clinics set up? Is a door-to-door campaign possible? How will the government keep track of who got the shot and who didn't? Depending on the answers to these questions, there may be various ways to inconspicuously slip through the cracks of the system. That said, posting here might make all of us a bit more conspicuous anyway.
If none of those are an option and it looks like everyone's going to roll over in my state (or if my family needs/wants my help to escape the shot as well), I'll see if the situation is any better in nearby states and possibly make a temporary move if so.
If the shot is completely mandatory pretty much everywhere and there's not enough resistance to oppose it, I might try becoming too difficult to find for a while to be worth the effort. I seriously doubt anyone is going to invest the resources for some huge manhunt or plaster my image all over the news. That would certainly be some bad publicity for their tyranny: "Anti-vaccination fugitives wanted dead or alive," lol. If they DID try to hunt me down, that would be another indication that something is extremely fishy about the shot, giving me another incentive to stay low and wait it out. If we're lucky, maybe the whole scare will eventually blow over and life will get back to normal, eliminating the need to hide (I'd still probably have to worry about my accumulated fines though...). If we're halfway lucky/halfway unlucky, a whole lot of people will die or become crippled within months, but society will go on. The resulting uproar would end the mandatory vaccination program, eliminating the need to hide (and I probably wouldn't have to worry about enormous fines, either). In the worst case scenario, the vaccine will completely wreak havoc on the population and change everything, and in that case, I'll be glad I didn't take it anyway.
With all my other available options, I can't really imagine taking the shot...but if I did, I'd definitely follow the advice in this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=206180).

Hopefully it won't come to this.

[GunnyFreedom]

N-O-T-A: if they come after me with a needle, then I'm backing up behind sandbags and ammo cans, with a quick and sure escape route to the wilderness. NFM thank you vry much.

[InterestedParticipant]

What is this with all the polls on the swine flu garbage... have we become a data collection & polling service for the social planners feedback loops?

Hey, you Rand Corporation weenies reading this, your simulations are breaking down because your core assumptions were bogus. But I guess your personality types would have never allowed you to know this in advance. Good luck spinning the results in the conference rooms. You can't hide reality from the reality makers for ever. Maybe it's time to get real jobs before the technocracy eats itself.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Let's bring some sanity to this thread. Here are some excerpts of the legislation with a link to the entire text.



(c) During such public health emergency or state of emergency, any person who renders assistance or advice during the emergency as provided in section 1 of chapter 258 shall be protected from liability to the extent provided by chapter 258.

...the commissioner shall have and may exercise, or may direct or authorize other state or local government agencies to exercise, authority relative to any one or
more of the following if necessary to protect the public health during an emergency declared...

(1) to require the owner or occupier of premises to permit entry into and investigation of the premises;
(2) to close, direct, and compel the evacuation of, or to decontaminate or cause to be decontaminated any building or facility, and to allow the reopening of the building or facility when the danger has ended;
(3) to decontaminate or cause to be decontaminated, or to destroy any material;
(4) to restrict or prohibit assemblages of persons;
(5) to require a health care facility to provide services or the use of its facility, or to transfer the management and supervision of the health care facility to the department or to a local public health authority;
(6) to control ingress to and egress from any stricken or threatened public area, and the movement of persons and materials within the area;
(7) to adopt and enforce measures to provide for the safe disposal of infectious waste and human remains, provided that religious, cultural, family, and individual beliefs of the deceased person shall be followed to the extent possible when disposing of human remains, whenever that may be done without endangering the public health;
(8) to procure, take immediate possession from any source, store, or distribute any antitoxins, serums, vaccines, immunizing agents, antibiotics, and other pharmaceutical agents or medical supplies located within the commonwealth as may be necessary to respond to the emergency;
(9) to require instate health care providers to assist in the performance of vaccination, treatment, examination, or testing of any individual as a condition of licensure, authorization, or the ability to continue to function as a health care provider in the commonwealth;
(10) to waive the commonwealth’s licensing requirements for health care professionals with a valid license from another state in the United States or whose professional training would otherwise qualify them for an appropriate professional license in the commonwealth;
(11) to allow for the dispensing of controlled substances by appropriate personnel consistent with federal statutes as necessary for the prevention or treatment of illness;
(12) to authorize the chief medical examiner to appoint and prescribe the duties of such emergency assistant medical examiners as may be required for the proper performance of the duties of the office;
(13) to collect specimens and perform tests on any animal, living or deceased;
(14) to exercise authority under sections 95 and 96 of chapter 111;
(15) to care for any emerging mental health or crisis counseling needs that individuals may exhibit, with the consent of the individuals.

Any person who knowingly violates an order of the commissioner or his or her designee, or of a local public health authority or its designee, given to effectuate the purposes of this subsection shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 6 months, or by a fine of note more than one thousand dollars, or both.

(e) Whenever a person required to report learns of a case of a reportable disease or health condition, an unusual cluster, or a suspicious event, that he or she reasonably believes may have been caused by a criminal act, in addition to his or her other reporting responsibilities, he or she shall immediately notify the state police................No person making a report under this section shall be liable in any civil or criminal action by reason of such report if it was made in good faith.
Any person required to report who refuses to file a report required 240 by this section shall be subject to a fine of not more than one thousand dollars.

Section 25M. (a) The governor may declare that a supply emergency exists, after conferring with the attorney general and the director of consumer affairs and business regulation, as a result of a natural disaster, military act, civil disorder, terrorist act, 307 bioterrorist act or other extraordinary circumstance.

If a person does not comply with the order, and if the commissioner or the local public health authority determines that noncompliance poses a serious danger to public health,upon request or issuance of an order by the commissioner or local public health authority, an officer authorized to serve criminal process may arrest without a warrant any person whom the officer has probable cause to believe has violated such an order and shall use reasonable diligence to enforce such order.

Here is a big one....

It shall not be a defense to a prosecution for this offense that the commissioner or the local public health authority erroneously determined that noncompliance would pose a serious danger to public health, if the commissioner or local public health authority was acting in good faith under color of official authority. This kind of legislation always cites is constitutional authority as protecting the general welfare.


copy of legislation here: http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/senate/186/st02pdf/st02028.pdf


They know how to write this kind of legislation. It is all about transferring unconstitutional power to government in order to authorize the use of force, eliminate liability, and remove legal defenses of dissenters. This kind of legislation always cites its authority as protecting the general welfare of the public premised on the notion government knows best.

[InterestedParticipant]

Holy tyranny, Batman! .....OMFG



to require the owner or occupier of premises to permit entry into and investigation of the premises;


to close, direct, and compel the evacuation of, any building or facility;


to restrict or prohibit assemblages of persons;


to control ingress to and egress from any stricken or threatened public area;


to waive the commonwealth’s licensing requirements for health care professionals;


an officer authorized to serve criminal process may arrest without a warrant any person whom the officer has probable cause to believe has violated such an order;


Any person who knowingly violates an order of the commissioner or his or her designee shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 6 months, or by a fine of note more than one thousand dollars, or both;


It shall not be a defense to a prosecution for this offense that the commissioner or the local public health authority erroneously determined that noncompliance would pose a serious danger to public health.



We need to stop this and stop this now! These are words of war.

[Icymudpuppy]

I am allergic to eggs, and therefore can't get flu vaccinations.

[Deborah K]

This is what I think about every day. Have 2 kids (ages 5 and 3) with another on the way. Obviously I'm no good to them in jail, dead or having them foricbly removed from my custody...yet how can I teach them about liberty if I don't set an example about resisting tyranny.

Have you ever watched the movie 'The Patriot'? Sounds like you're in the same position he was in.....my heart goes out to you.

YouTube - the patriot trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjt0jc3za5o)

[Deborah K]

Let's bring some sanity to this thread. Here are some excerpts of the legislation with a link to the entire text.



They know how to write this kind of legislation. It is all about transferring unconstitutional power to government in order to authorize the use of force, eliminate liability, and remove legal defenses of dissenters. This kind of legislation always cites its authority as protecting the general welfare of the public premised on the notion government knows best.

Sending this to Beck, et al.

[Deborah K]

Actually I want to change my vote now that I've given this some thought. I voted to go to jail, but it probably wouldn't be jail, if ya know what I mean.....

1. Review ditch bag contents - check
2. Guns and ammo - double check

[BCR_9er]

Where's the "Revolt" option?

[Mini-Me]

Actually I want to change my vote now that I've given this some thought. I voted to go to jail, but it probably wouldn't be jail, if ya know what I mean.....

1. Review ditch bag contents - check
2. Guns and ammo - double check

Even aside from the possibility that jail "probably wouldn't be jail," I agree that the jail option is no "out." Should a quarantine option be offered in lieu of vaccination, I'd only consider it an "out" if you just had to stay at home for a short while.

From what I can tell, the Massachusetts law doesn't say, "Go to jail for 30 days and you don't have to take the shot." It pretty much says that if you resist orders, you go to jail for 30 days, and you rack up a $1000 fine for every day you dodge taking the shot. I assume that the moment you're booked in the jail, they'll force the shot on you anyway. Odds are, if Massachusetts officials make these vaccinations mandatory, anyone they can get their hands on WILL get the shot.

[Reason]

That's not true...

[/URL][URL="http://www.examiner.com/x-6258-Huntsville-Natural-Parenting-Examiner%7Ey2009m8d28-Refusing-Swine-Flu-Vaccine-Quarantine-and-1000-per-day-fine"]http://www.examiner.com/x-6258-Huntsville-Natural-Parenting-Examiner~y2009m8d28-Refusing-Swine-Flu-Vaccine-Quarantine-and-1000-per-day-fine (http://www.examiner.com/x-6258-Huntsville-Natural-Parenting-Examiner%7Ey2009m8d28-Refusing-Swine-Flu-Vaccine-Quarantine-and-1000-per-day-fine)

Refusing Swine Flu Vaccine? Quarantine and $1,000 per day fine




mzacha (stock exchg)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related Articles
Don't Inject Me (Swine Flu Vaccine Song) Music Video
Brittish actor in Swine Flu prevention ad catches Swine Flu
Swine Flu vaccine being administered without being tested in humans
Parents allow Swine Flu vaccines for their kids but say they wouldn't take the shot themselves
A bill that has recently passed the Massachusetts senate gives the government a little too much power. The bill is being hurried along due to fears of a Swine Flu pandemic this flu season.

According to the bill, if there is a Swine Flu pandemic and you don't get the Swine Flu vaccine, you can be ordered into quarantine. If you refuse the quarantine, you can face a fine of $1,000 per day that you resist.

This is the same Swine Flu vaccine that the government itself is unsure of the vaccine's safety, yet they are issuing penalties if it is not taken.

Government officials would also have the right to enter private property to asses the status of the pandemic.

examiner.com is essentially a blog; they let pretty much anyone post "articles" :rolleyes: