Hacker News Reader

Comment by bjt2n3904 | Hacker News Reader

> If only we had some sort of united group of all the States, where the response could be coordinated and centralized for maximum effectiveness.

We do! It's called the United States government. I'll be letting the president know you're interested in him taking over and using his own ideas, instead of this one you seem to be particularly fond of.

Or, if that idea is slightly terrifying for you, perhaps it's a better idea that the states are handling this themselves. Your state conglomeration thing can always decide to use the National Guard to prevent outside travelers.

View on HN

> Your state conglomeration thing can always decide to use the National Guard to prevent outside travelers.

The National Guard serves a dual role. Most of the time, it’s under the control of individual states, with the state governor acting as commander in chief. However, the president can activate the National Guard and place it under federal control. When this occurs, guard units are used to supplement the regular Army, bolstering its forces with additional combat units. [1]

1. https://science.howstuffworks.com/national-guard.htm

Well, if the federal government blocks you from using the NG to protect your states, then perhaps your state should... I don't know. Form a militia, and protect itself! Perhaps it could even seize the equipment from the National Guard in a mini-revolution!

It's almost like the constitution was written to enable these things to happen, and prevent a corrupt and/or inept leader from forcing a one-size-fits-all solution on the nation!

What do you mean by outside travelers? do you mean people from other states, or from outside the country? If you mean from other states, then they are legally barred from doing that.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement_under_Unit...

States cannot discriminate against people from other states on the sole reason that they are from some other state.

Now... (I believe) they could use the National Guard to do wellness checks to make sure people don't have a fever, and potentially get them to quarantine, but it would have to be applied without regard to what state their license says. Though, the legality of forcing quarantine varies by state.

I may be wrong, but I think you missed OP's point. I took his tongue-in-cheek "If only we had some sort of united group of all the States" comment to mean if only we had a president who exercised his influence to encourage this type of coordinated response versus what he's done up to this point, which is nearly the opposite of coordinated.

You have no idea how crazy you sound as a European lol, the most straightforward way to put it is you're using an anonymous account on a website to dunk on someone in the comments section for implying they may care about avoiding infection during a pandemic

> You have no idea how crazy you sound as a European

Europe, a group of many independent states, trying different approaches to a common problem, with an over-arching bureaucracy to coordinate between them... and the US approach sounds crazy to you?

You're comparing apples to oranges. Europe is comprised of sovereign states which can and actually have closed their borders. From my understanding, but correct me if I'm wrong, this would be a legal and political nightmare in the US right?

Edit: not endorsing parent comment

I have no idea how that's the conclusion you drew from GP, can you elaborate?

As a European I’d think you’d appreciate the point he’s making. This is analogous to Spain and Portugal deciding on a joint Iberian policy between the two of them instead of trying to go to the EU and haggle it out with Hungary and Sweden.

Well, he'd appreciate your point ever more had the tenant of the WH been someone who can actually read pages with letters instead of watching tv 12 hours a day.

> you're using an anonymous account on a website to dunk on someone

I enjoy that you are making this point from the username "anoncareer0212"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com