undefined | Better HN

0 pointswk_end4y ago0 comments

Are we talking about "first order enforcement" or not?

If we are, neither private contracts nor vaccine mandates are directly enforced at the barrel of a gun - the RCMP aren't busting down people's doors to shoot them for failing to get vaccinated, just as people aren't immediately killed by the feds for violating legal contracts.

If we're talking about how they're ultimately enforced, if all else fails...well, they're both enforced the same way.

0 comments

amscanne4y ago

The police (who carry guns) have shut down events for mandate violations in Canada, and arrested people. (There was a particularly stubborn anti-vax pastor in Alberta IIRC.)

For private disputes, it’s also not uncommon to have an armed officer help enforcement. Consider an extremely common private contract dispute - an eviction - where the police may come to remove the tenant.

The “barrel of a gun” is of course a metaphor, but first order enforcement can be closer than you think.

wk_endOP4y ago

All you're doing here is arguing with yourself: you agree that the barrel of a gun is, in the final analysis, ultimately used to enforce both vaccine mandates and private contracts. Therefore an opposition to things being enforced at the barrel of a gun alone is an incoherent reason to oppose vaccine mandates and not private property.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse