Not the Same
Among the silliest things I heard yesterday in light of the riots across America and the continuing pandemic…and there were many…was criticism of Iowa’s governor for encouraging cities and counties to put curfews in place if those local officials deemed it appropriate to limit or stop violence and looting. The criticism was that she was willing to have those curfews, but stood against cities and counties putting rules limiting access in place due to coronavirus.
Talk about comparing apples and oranges…not just legally, but also intellectually.
Limited nighttime and overnight curfews are often used, with little objection, in cases of specific, limited emergencies…like in the aftermath of floods or tornados…because it’s hard to properly police areas that are vulnerable at night. You rarely see looting and vandalism in broad daylight. And they are timed generally to follow a sundown to sunrise pattern…again, for that reason. And after a day or a few days, the imminent danger is gone and the curfew goes away.
The other idea, for local folks to decide to shut down businesses and close off the streets 24/7, would have been for a period of weeks at least, and was not tied to a limited public safety event; instead, a public health crisis. The impact is far different, far too broad, and typically not within the powers granted local officials by their city’s own ordinances. Recall that Waterloo had to change its ordinance to include anything like a pandemic, because it wasn’t included in the mayor’s powers before that.
Those on the left are trying to say that the governor’s actions are stifling free speech and are race-motivated. That’s not the difference. The difference is to control crime in the streets after dark in one situation, public health in the other. And that is a difference with distinction.
