Help a Small Business - Order to Close Immediately!

mitzi

Well-Known Member

So the SMCHD can go in person to "inspect" Ridge Hardware to ensure "compliance" but at a nursing home they did a virtual inspection and basically took their word for it? UFB!

Unbelievable :mad:. Corporate always blames it on a unhappy former employee.
 

TPD

the poor dad

So the SMCHD can go in person to "inspect" Ridge Hardware to ensure "compliance" but at a nursing home they did a virtual inspection and basically took their word for it? UFB!
When this was pointed out to me earlier today - I WAS LIVID! People are dying in nursing homes but, knocking on wood, no one has died in my store yet. I would like virtual inspections - wonder what the fee is for that...
 

stgislander

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
When this was pointed out to me earlier today - I WAS LIVID! People are dying in nursing homes but, knocking on wood, no one has died in my store yet. I would like virtual inspections - wonder what the fee is for that...
But are you open yet?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TPD

Bobwhite

Well-Known Member
When this was pointed out to me earlier today - I WAS LIVID! People are dying in nursing homes but, knocking on wood, no one has died in my store yet. I would like virtual inspections - wonder what the fee is for that...
I found this in Hogan's December 17 Press Conference:

As part of our relief initiative, we are providing another $5 million to help socially or economically disadvantaged businesses, specifically in our rural counties.

I wonder if this applies to businesses who have been socially and economically disadvantaged by the Health Department shutting them down.
 

kom526

They call me ... Sarcasmo

Attachments

  • 1608297392256.png
    1608297392256.png
    85.4 KB · Views: 109
Last edited:

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...

When this was pointed out to me earlier today - I WAS LIVID! People are dying in nursing homes but, knocking on wood, no one has died in my store yet. I would like virtual inspections - wonder what the fee is for that...
So, the latest rundown. The good doctor herself, (being paid in excess of $160K per year), because of an anonymous tip, paid you a personal visit at your small family run hardware business? Then on another later day at least two other of her minions, clipboards in hand, ID's of authority hanging around their necks, stopped on by and paid you a visit? Then on an early Saturday morning the good doctor sent armed goons to deliver a cease and desist/shut the store down, order? And yet, Discovery Senior Living, "with a flourishing portfolio of more than 8,500 existing and under development homes for seniors ...", with locations in Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia, also with alleged COVID violations because of former employees, (would seem to have more credence), whistle blowing with far more egregious and serious allegations, gets only a virtual visit, wink and a nod, pass?

I really think there is a lawsuit in here somewhere. Really wish you'd setup a gofundme account or something for financial assistance. This County, (Which is, correct me if I'm wrong, Maryland's first?), really needs a shake up. Hell, you might be able to get a class action suit by just asking any other small business owners that have been harassed, or shut down, by these feminist Bolshevik tyrants to join you.
 

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
I really think there is a lawsuit in here somewhere.
One might think so, but on what grounds? The legislature has given the Governor extreme power during a declared emergency and the Governor has given these local "health officials" extreme power through his emergency orders.

Paragraph IV d. of the order shows the extremity of what the legislature has allowed -
Emergency Order said:
d. The effect of any statute, rule, or regulation of an agency of the State or a political subdivision inconsistent with this order is hereby suspended.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...

One might think so, but on what grounds? The legislature has given the Governor extreme power during a declared emergency and the Governor has given these local "health officials" extreme power through his emergency orders.

Paragraph IV d. of the order shows the extremity of what the legislature has allowed -
It's in the application. If, if these petty tyrants are going to inspect, cite, shutdown, etc., they must do so with a 100% standard and be 100% consistent in their application. All must be treated the same, regardless. This is where they intentionally fail. There must be equal application of "health code orders". Anything else is discriminatory, arbitrary and capricious.

Also, the legislature has never passed a law that says the Governor can shut down businesses nor define who or what is essential. All these edicts are arbitrary and capricious. Without merit, and no scientific peer reviewed verifiable evidence that the flu renamed COVID is the killer that it is made out to be.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
The legislature has given the Governor extreme power during a declared emergency and the Governor has given these local "health officials" extreme power through his emergency orders.


I don't think that gives the the right to deny 1st Amendment Protections of a Right to Peaceably Assemble - In a Church, in a local business, in the local strip club



Also, the legislature has never passed a law that says the Governor can shut down businesses nor define who or what is essential. All these edicts are arbitrary and capricious. Without merit, and no scientific peer reviewed verifiable evidence that the flu renamed COVID is the killer that it is made out to be.



:yay:
 

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
Also, the legislature has never passed a law that says the Governor can shut down businesses nor define who or what is essential. All these edicts are arbitrary and capricious. Without merit, and no scientific peer reviewed verifiable evidence that the flu renamed COVID is the killer that it is made out to be.
I beg to differ. The Governor's Emergency Powers are vast and per the statutes are to "be broadly construed" (Public Safety Article Section 14-302) and when you take a look at the powers granted (Section 14-303(b)) you will see that the legislature allowed for orders to, among other things, control "the occupancy and use of buildings", "control the movement of individuals", "control places of assembly".
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...

I beg to differ. The Governor's Emergency Powers are vast and per the statutes are to "be broadly construed" (Public Safety Article Section 14-302) and when you take a look at the powers granted (Section 14-303(b)) you will see that the legislature allowed for orders to, among other things, control "the occupancy and use of buildings", "control the movement of individuals", "control places of assembly".
Does not matter. Under the US Constitution, all law rules and regulations, passed by a State's Legislature, must apply equally to all. Any agency, such as the Health Department, must apply equally to all, their procedures. They cannot treat some different than others. If they are going to do virtual visits, then it must be only virtual visits for everyone. If they are going to do onsite visits, they must do onsite visits for all. Also, a law is no law, if subject to interpretation, such as the word, "reasonable", by the lowest paid employee of any State or County agency. It begs for abuse.

Besides, under Maryland Public Safety Section 14-301

(c) "Public emergency" means:
(1) a situation in which three or more individuals are at the same time and in the same place engaged in tumultuous conduct that leads to the commission of unlawful acts that disturb the public peace or cause the unlawful destruction or damage of public or private property;
(2) a crisis, disaster, riot, or catastrophe; or
(3) an energy emergency.

I see nothing mentioned about a flu bug.

In Maryland Public Safety Section 14-3A-01

(b) "Catastrophic health emergency" means a situation in which extensive loss of life or serious disability is threatened imminently because of exposure to a deadly agent.
(c) "Deadly agent" means:
(1) anthrax, ebola, plague, smallpox, tularemia, or other bacterial, fungal, rickettsial, or viral agent, biological toxin, or other biological agent capable of causing extensive loss of life or serious disability;
(2) mustard gas, nerve gas, or other chemical agent capable of causing extensive loss of life or serious disability; or
(3) radiation at levels capable of causing extensive loss of life or serious disability.

Shutting down the whole State over an annual virus that has a 99.8% survival rate, is not what this statute was made.
 

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
If I may ...
No, you may not ......

I responded to your specific claim that I quoted above. And now you do your move the goal post bit.

If you are so certain that you can succeed at obtaining a finding that the actions being taken are unconstitutional go for it. Hell, as a potential patron of his business you should even be able to show that you have standing to bring suit, right? Why not put your money where your mouth is? I'll even kick in a few bucks for your gofundme account.
 

Bann

Doris Day meets Lady Gaga
PREMO Member
@TPD and @Bann

I hope you guys know that I in no way agree with what the authoritarians are doing to TPD and any others like him. And I find it absolutely ludicrous that the Governor has passed his power to un-elected "health officials".
Oh, I get ya. I'm glad you're posting the regs, because I never have the time to run them down. :lmao:

And, you're right - it IS absolutely ludicrous. I was "okay" with giving them time to come up with plans in the beginning of all this, but the longer they went infringing on people's livelihoods and rights to pursue happiness, I was done.

(that, and making me out to be a criminal for dancing was a bridge too far! :biggrin: )

#justdance
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
It I may ...

No, you may not ......

I responded to your specific claim that I quoted above. And now you do your move the goal post bit.

If you are so certain that you can succeed at obtaining a finding that the actions being taken are unconstitutional go for it. Hell, as a potential patron of his business you should even be able to show that you have standing to bring suit, right? Why not put your money where your mouth is? I'll even kick in a few bucks for your gofundme account.
Here again is the use of the word, "reasonable", "the Governor may promulgate reasonable orders, rules, or regulations..." Even if to be, "Broadly construed". Which doesn't mean he gets to pick and choose who stays in business or who goes out of business by way of his edicts.

Shutting down some businesses, while allowing others to stay open, determining who or what is essential, or restricting hours of operation of some and not others, or other "orders, rules, or regulations", that do not apply equally to all, is unconstitutional. He does not have that authority. I didn't move the goalpost. My argument is one in the same with the Governor, and with the Health department. Neither apply the "orders, rules, or regulations" equally. Even where it says, "designate specific zones in the emergency area in which the occupancy and use of buildings" and "control places of amusement and places of assembly", must apply equally to those affected entities.

I'd be happy to go mask-less in his store. He would then be required to inform me of the "rules". I could then negate what he said and go about my business and get that torque wrench I've been needing of late. There is nothing that I know of that says he must call the po-po or the health dept of my mask-lessness. Besides, the issue is not with my mask-lessness, but with how the health dept treated his business, over that of other businesses. Some get preferential treatment, he does not. That is not equal application of "orders, rules, or regulations".
 

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
Shutting down some businesses, while allowing others to stay open, determining who or what is essential, or restricting hours of operation of some and not others, or other "orders, rules, or regulations", that do not apply equally to all, is unconstitutional. He does not have that authority. I didn't move the goalpost. My argument is one in the same with the Governor, and with the Health department. Neither apply the "orders, rules, or regulations" equally. Even where it says, "designate specific zones in the emergency area in which the occupancy and use of buildings" and "control places of amusement and places of assembly", must apply equally to those affected entities.
Again, no, you may not....

TPD's business could be open if he complied with the current restrictions set by the local health official. It seems the sticking point is with not all employees using masks, not the customers. He has stated that those employees have indicated that they have breathing "issues" when wearing masks. The Governor. as well as the CDC, has allowed exceptions to the mask rule, but the EO allows the local health officials to place more restrictive conditions upon businesses. The difference when dealing with the big box stores (versus TPD's) is that the bigger businesses have to also follow Federal ADA requirements on providing accommodations for those employees within their business that have similar issues with the masks. To my knowledge the state cannot override the federal mandates

Thus for me the fact that TPD is choosing to voluntarily adhere to the ADA provisions (which btw is a great thing) he does not employ the requisite number of employees to mandate such adherence on his part, thus it seems that the local health official would be under no obligation to allow him an accommodation that is not required under law.

Given that there are no cases for that zip code and none of his employees have been confirmed to have the illness, and just so we are clear, I absolutely think that all of these mandates are BS, but the legislature allows for them, the rule should be that businesses must clearly advertise only:
  1. Are masks required for customers - yes or no
  2. Are masks required for employees - yes or no
And then let the people choose whether to do business with them up and until it can be proven that there is an actual health risk at that business. Then, and only then, would isolation, quarantine, and/or closure be indicated.
 

TPD

the poor dad
@TPD and @Bann

I hope you guys know that I in no way agree with what the authoritarians are doing to TPD and any others like him. And I find it absolutely ludicrous that the Governor has passed his power to un-elected "health officials".

I didn’t take your comments as attacks on me but just pointing out things that could be lost in the big picture. I knew going into this what the opposition would say - “just wear the damn mask!”. Go along to get along. I appreciate your points - I read and take notes on what everyone says and make decisions accordingly. People can make all the comments they want but there are very few on this forum that have had the life experiences that I have had.
 

Louise

Well-Known Member
When this was pointed out to me earlier today - I WAS LIVID! People are dying in nursing homes but, knocking on wood, no one has died in my store yet. I would like virtual inspections - wonder what the fee is for that...

Keep up the good fight. Others will follow. God bless the USA.
 
Top