Sister in Laws Wedding

To many ads? Support ODJT and see no ads!

Dj Jimmy D

DJ Extraordinaire
Oct 5, 2012
942
1,529
My sister in law/daughter (we raised her since she was 13) was supposed to get married this coming May but things have now changed and it has been pushed back a year. The hall she was going to use is concerned about their future and where things will be at that point.

The biggest thing that came out of the meeting was the Halls lawyers are recommending that the they put in a clause that all vendors coming in will have to show proof of vaccination to be allowed to work there once it is available to the general public. I had heard some rumblings about this from some people I have talked to but this was the first time someone came out and said it. So I now see a path to showing not only proof of insurance but proof of vaccination for all employees coming in. Wondering if anyone else has spoken to their halls about this yet?
 

steve149

Shine on you crazy diamond
Staff member
ODJT Supporter
Sep 26, 2011
27,766
44,997
Connecticut
I think many will do it so they don't get sued by someone for allegedly catching it there "when they COULD have done something to minimize the threat".
 

MIXMASTERMACHOM

DJ Extraordinaire
Oct 16, 2011
11,092
1,444
62
I love this thread and thanks Jimmy. There's a lot question marks I have when it comes to this vaccine. Who is making it or who will win the contract to make this vaccine? How much is it costing to make this vaccine? What are the things that are going to be in it? Who will pay for people who take the vaccine? Will health insurance cover the cost? How often will somebody be required to take the vaccine? Who will be required by law to take the vaccine? What about how quickly this vaccine supposedly is being created? What are the side effects of this vaccine? I'm just not going to take somebody's word about this vaccine when it comes to my health.

Now about this issue being talked about. Will it become mandatory for people working in a venue to take this vaccine? What about people attending the event? Will they be required to take the vaccine or they can't attend the event? Taking the vaccine, will it allow people to stop wearing those stupid mask? How will they know if somebody has taken the vaccine? They are supposed to have a chip to plant in people to tell if you have taken the vaccine.

Now keep in mind this is all about the world's greed. This is why the world is destroying itself because of the greed. The guy doing my taxes nailed it. This is going to be the world's biggest money maker of all times.
 

djrox

Sir Wyzazz
ODJT Supporter
Aug 12, 2006
7,899
5,152
New Orleans, Louisiana
I think many will do it so they don't get sued by someone for allegedly catching it there "when they COULD have done something to minimize the threat".
So when some catches some other contagious or otherwise transmittable illness, you'd be ok with lawsuits for that?
 

steve149

Shine on you crazy diamond
Staff member
ODJT Supporter
Sep 26, 2011
27,766
44,997
Connecticut
So when some catches some other contagious or otherwise transmittable illness, you'd be ok with lawsuits for that?
OK .. no, but realistically, you know it happens ... This is a cause du jour.
 

Proformance

DJ Extraordinaire
Nov 6, 2006
7,228
4,614
Let's get real.

There will be all kinds of new :"rules" promoted as public health or social justice (bogus justifications you cannot argue without great cost to yourself) but, it is really about power and control in a time of massive unemployment and runaway inflation. ( No, the economy is NOT in great shape, and unemployment is NOT low.) The propaganda is in great shape, and it's the truth that is low. We'll soon hear about the real economy just as we did Covid-19 AFTER THE FACT, when the reality of it is so evident that it is no longer deniable.

First - let's be clear about what today's economy really IS - so we can be clear about what the indicators are actually measuring. Today's economy is not sales, jobs, or the kinds of futures you traditionally think of. Today - our economy is Finance. It 's not about who has currency - it's about who controls it's value, and hence who has the power to erase debt. Debt is erased by inflation. The stock market is high because wealthy and highly leveraged banks, corporations, and individuals are about to become richer as a result of the declining dollar value.

We are entering the age of extreme Elitism and the "Great Unwashed Masses." A period of globalism when the separation between the elite, powerful, and wealthy will be one of the highest in recorded history. There will be all kinds of new :"rules" promoted as public health or social justice in the wake of massive government corruption and organized disinformation.

History has shown us that the inevitable end to this path is a prolonged and devastating war. Not the kind of war where one superpower dominates a backward tribal enclave, rather the kind of war that seeks global dominance - one in which we fight to survive rather than control. It's not even clear if the adversaries will be nations, corporations, or both.. How far out on the horizon - I don't know, because a true measure of the modern space race is hard to know.

Don't be lulled into a sense of complacency that corporations and governments are racing into orbit and the moon for the sake of "exploration" - the endeavor is a military necessity. We've known since the 1960's that the moon is a dead rock - but today, it's the preeminent surveillance and launch site. Keep in mind, without an atmosphere explosive ordinance delivers far less punch. In space - warfare is about high velocity. Anything moving fast enough can cause colossal damage. Compare the energy of an RPG to a surviving meteorite of the same size and it's obvious why the moon is suddenly so important again. .
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
  • Wow
Reactions: Andy A and dunlopj

Ausumm

No Matter Where You Go... There You Are!
Oct 21, 2008
11,421
13,260
57
Bethlehem PA
Welcome to the new Democrat party.
How do you know the venue is owned by a Democrat?
I believe it was the other side that wanted freedom from prosecution for people/places that (allegedly) transmit the virus and get sued.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeff Romard

Ausumm

No Matter Where You Go... There You Are!
Oct 21, 2008
11,421
13,260
57
Bethlehem PA
So when some catches some other contagious or otherwise transmittable illness, you'd be ok with lawsuits for that?
Back in the 80's people WERE sued for transmitting AIDS without warning someone.
And people were taken to court for using AIDS as a threat against someone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeff Romard

Proformance

DJ Extraordinaire
Nov 6, 2006
7,228
4,614
Back in the 80's people WERE sued for transmitting AIDS without warning someone.
And people were taken to court for using AIDS as a threat against someone else.
It takes very minimal social distance to prevent AIDS. In fact, it's the once disease for which a "shut down" actually works. .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ausumm and djrox

djrox

Sir Wyzazz
ODJT Supporter
Aug 12, 2006
7,899
5,152
New Orleans, Louisiana
Back in the 80's people WERE sued for transmitting AIDS without warning someone.
And people were taken to court for using AIDS as a threat against someone else.
In the event you were unaware or forgot, in addition to being Professional Mobile/Event DJ/MC, I am also a member of the legal profession and have been for 30+ years. I am, thereby, uniquely and keenly aware of the frivoulusness and abuse of the US legal/court system. I am fully aware that people CAN & DO sue for all things from honest & serious to absurd & wasteful, but that was clealry not my question.

I asked, " So when some catches some other contagious or otherwise transmittable illness, you'd be ok with lawsuits for that?"
 

Ausumm

No Matter Where You Go... There You Are!
Oct 21, 2008
11,421
13,260
57
Bethlehem PA
It takes very minimal social distance to prevent AIDS. In fact, it's the once disease for which a "shut down" actually works. .

I am fully aware that people CAN & DO sue for all things from honest & serious to absurd & wasteful, but that was clealry not my question.

I asked, " So when some catches some other contagious or otherwise transmittable illness, you'd be ok with lawsuits for that?"
And the reason for MY post was to state that I would be okay with pursuing legal action,
IF the person purposely and intentionally transmitted said disease.
(because it's been done before with AIDS)
 

Proformance

DJ Extraordinaire
Nov 6, 2006
7,228
4,614
And the reason for MY post was to state that I would be okay with pursuing legal action,
IF the person purposely and intentionally transmitted said disease.
(because it's been done before with AIDS)
There's already a provision for that and it applies to all kinds of malicious acts.
Take for example, people prosecuted for online bullying prior to a suicide. With a disease, (as with any toxin) it would need to be shown that a person intentionally took action to insure that the person would be harmed.

Coughing in someone's face without already knowing you're infected or symptomatic is rude, perhaps even threatening, but might not be malicious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: djrox

djrox

Sir Wyzazz
ODJT Supporter
Aug 12, 2006
7,899
5,152
New Orleans, Louisiana
And the reason for MY post was to state that I would be okay with pursuing legal action,
IF the person purposely and intentionally transmitted said disease.
(because it's been done before with AIDS)
SWING AND A MISS.

There is legal action/no cause for liability, neither civil nor criminal, unless the transmission is know, deliberate and intentional.
 

steve149

Shine on you crazy diamond
Staff member
ODJT Supporter
Sep 26, 2011
27,766
44,997
Connecticut
SWING AND A MISS.

There is legal action/no cause for liability, neither civil nor criminal, unless the transmission is know, deliberate and intentional.
As a business owner, I have no idea if "YOU" know you're carrying the virus, but I do know that I might be equally enjoined if someone sues YOU because "they must have gotten it at my business" .. so it would seem that requiring "YOU" to show proof of a negative test when testing is easily available and maybe proof of vaccination as well (let's say a few months in the future), might be prudent.
 

Proformance

DJ Extraordinaire
Nov 6, 2006
7,228
4,614
.. so it would seem that requiring "YOU" to show proof of a negative test when testing is easily available and maybe proof of vaccination as well (let's say a few months in the future), might be prudent.
It is also racist by today's standards.
Let's start with proof of citizenship first - and then apply the law for those it is pledged to represent.
 

djrox

Sir Wyzazz
ODJT Supporter
Aug 12, 2006
7,899
5,152
New Orleans, Louisiana
As a business owner, I have no idea if "YOU" know you're carrying the virus, but I do know that I might be equally enjoined if someone sues YOU because "they must have gotten it at my business" .. so it would seem that requiring "YOU" to show proof of a negative test when testing is easily available and maybe proof of vaccination as well (let's say a few months in the future), might be prudent.
That ignores every bit of judicial & legal precedence that governs such matters.

You illogic would mandate that manufacturers of automobiles be "enjoined" in every vehicular accident because they had no idea that the at fault driver was inept, intoxicated, impaired...etc.

Your fears do not mandate complicit behavior of others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJ Bobcat