Just because I think Ian said it well – loopholes:
6. A person who declines to wear a mask or cloth face covering because of a medical or developmental issue, or difficulty breathing, shall not be required to produce documentation, or other evidence, verifying the condition.
All of which is to day, the mandate only applies to two groups: (1) those who want to wear masks, and (2) those who can’t read.
OK, I did ask y’all if you’d go to your Town Clerks and get copies of your town’s Same Day Registrations and send them to me. Well, I have to admit – not a single one. But unlike Sununu who is disappointed in us all (just like Obama who has said as much in his THIRD memoir that also didn’t get done when scheduled), I am still your greatest fan!
So let me try again. Sununu – masks – mandatory. I just found the Emergency Order #74 and here’s the relevant Operational part (reformatted, emphasis mine):
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Section 18 of Executive Order 2020-04 as extended by Executive Orders 2020-05, 2020-08, 2020-09, 2020-10, 2020-14, 2020-15, 2020-16, 2020-17, 2020-18, 2020-20, and 2020-21 it is hereby ordered, effective immediately, that:
1. Beginning on November 20, 2020, all persons over the age of 5 within the State of New Hampshire shall wear a mask or cloth face covering over their noses and mouths any time they are in public spaces, indoors or outdoors, where they are unable to or do not consistently maintain a physical distance of at least six feet from persons outside their own households.
2. For purposes of this Order, the term “public spaces” includes any part of private or public property that is generally open or accessible to members of the general public. Public spaces include, but are not limited to, lobbies, waiting areas, outside plazas or patios, restaurants, retail businesses, streets, sidewalks, parks, beaches, elevators, restrooms, stairways, parking garages, etc.
3. This Order is not intended to override any provisions related to the wearing of masks and cloth face coverings that are contained within industry specific guidance that is part of Exhibit B to Emergency Order 52. In any situation where the provisions of such industry specific guidance conflicts with this Order, the provisions of such industry specific guidance shall control.
4. Nothing in this Order shall be construed to prevent municipalities within the State of New Hampshire from enacting their own ordinances related to the wearing of masks or cloth face coverings that contain stricter provisions than those contained within this Order.
5. This Order shall not apply to the following:
a) Educators, students, and staff within K-12 schools;
b) Any person with a medical condition or disability that prevents wearing a mask or other face covering;
c) Any person consuming food or drink or sitting at a restaurant or table to eat or drink;
d) Any person engaged in physical strenuous physical activity;
e) Any person giving a religious, political, media, educational, cultural, musical, or theatrical presentation or performance for an audience;
f) Any person who is deaf or hard of hearing, and any person while communicating with an individual who is deaf or hard of hearing or who has a disability, medical condition, or mental health condition that makes communication with that individual while wearing a mask or face covering difficult;
g) Any person obtaining or providing a service that requires the temporary removal of a mask or face covering;
h) Any person asked to remove a mask or face covering to verify an identity for lawful purposes; or
i) Any public safety worker actively engaged in a public safety role and when a mask or face covering would seriously interfere in the performance of their public safety responsibilities.6. A person who declines to wear a mask or cloth face covering because of a medical or developmental issue, or difficulty breathing, shall not be required to produce documentation, or other evidence, verifying the condition.
7. The provisions of this Order shall remain in effect through January 15, 2021.
So, no penalty? At all? It specifically covers those that have medical issues et al in #6 and they get a free pass (or, as Ian says, a very large loophole that can be exploited).
WHY has Sununu create such angst over a “mandatory face mask” issuance if there no penalty (fine, arrest, jail time, getting a tongue lashing, getting verbally attacked by the Town’s resident Karen….)? Why bother with such a toothless waste of time and pixels? This is supposed to be Very Important???
So, it’s mandatory. But NH Journal had this little nugget: ““We are going to rely on education,” Sununu said, but he acknowledged that people who flaunted the mandate could face consequences.”. The Concord Monitor: “Sununu said there will be no penalty for individuals who choose to flout the new mandate.”
Which is it? And if there are “consequences”, why aren’t they listed in the E.O.? Transparent and Open Government demands that nothing should be arbitrary or capricious and not outlining what penalities (e.g., “consequences”) is flouting such in and of itself.
- What is that penalty?
- WHO IS GOING TO ENFORCE IT when it goes into action at midnight in areas that haven’t walked down Tyranny’s Road and mandated it themselves?
- And yes, enforce WHAT, exactly?
- And, given there is no penalty in this latest missive, WHY BOTHER? Other, of course, that little hint of “better be good, boys and girls – or ELSE!”.
Now, it’s already well known that NY Gov Cuomo is having a mental midget fit because NY Sheriffs have said they won’t enforce his latest crackdowns (which DO have penalties) and a lot of NY based police departments have said the same thing.
So if there is an unknown set of penalties, should we get ahead of what logically would be the next step that would lead some to believe that Sununu “is doing something about this”?
Would your county’s Sheriff have his deputies to that? Would your local police go out of their way to arrest someone for not wearing a face diaper IF there was a penalty?
I’m planning on calling around here and ask that question. Would y’all be willing to do the same and report back?
That’s the first step in “The Resistance”. That’s the first answer to the questions I’m getting – WHO would be willing to do Sununu’s dirty work if there was a punch behind it?? He could FORCE that NH State Troopers to do this – but what about other agencies not under his direct control? And then ask your selectmen / council members / aldermen, since the Chief reports to them?
Where do THEIR loyalties go – Sununu or to YOU, the folks that put their butts into those seats?
I ask because that WAS his position before the election – no mandate. Now, after the election, immediate mask mandate with no penalty? How long until that “no penalty” clause disappears?
Especially if Biden does win the Electoral College and starts “buying” loyalty with our money that is now flowing back to NH as “nudges” or “grease” for the State to bend to the Fed’s will and agenda ?
