Saving for later
Saving for later
First things first, it must be passed into law, this is just a dream right now…This is significant. It's a large, legally recognized entity (the state of FL) saying out loud, in written law, that mRNA vax's can and have harmed recipients. It's a start. But I'm sure either pharma, a pharma lobbyist or even the U.S. Gov is going to sue. Where does such a lawsuit take place, in Florida? US Circuit Court?
True. And of course it's likely to run the course all the way up to scotus. Pure speculation on my part but I can imagine a court deciding FL has every right to forbid forced/coerced vaccination but not be allowed to outlaw it completely.First things first, it must be passed into law, this is just a dream right now…
What if they deem it unsafe for use and institute law that prosecutes for any harm or death from the drug? It is still available, but puts pharma in the hot seat for charges in case of death. Make pharma choose to pull it for use in Florida or take their chances of being charged with murder.True. And of course it's likely to run the course all the way up to scotus. Pure speculation on my part but I can imagine a court deciding FL has every right to forbid forced/coerced vaccination but not be allowed to outlaw it completely.
I like the way you think! Isn't there some sorta legal conundrum about superceding the feds? I'm thinking something that is very specific to all vaccines was mentioned and that it prevented states from going after pharma once pharma rec'd their federal liability protections. Regardless, my tv says it might cause cancer according to the state of California. Maybe they could put a warning on the vax declaring possible sudden death according to the state of Florida.What if they deem it unsafe for use and institute law that prosecutes for any harm or death from the drug? It is still available, but puts pharma in the hot seat for charges in case of death. Make pharma choose to pull it for use in Florida or take their chances of being charged with murder.
Dude, The Man is getting ready to double down on vidsanity. I fear the pushback won't be as strong as it should be many more will make the choice of easy compliance over difficult courage.If there really is mRNA (it's expensive) in this shot and not a bunch of heavy metals and other crap, is there an actual alleged positive use for this tech? It seems there may be a consensus finally now that this "dangerous virus" innoculation does NOTHING. Many on here said it from the beginning yet there's still hesitation and uncertainty about banning it? Maybe the numbers will just get better the next couple years
How much longer should society wait after the last nearly 3 years of vaccine lies, coercion and games to initiate some checks and balances for medical industrialization? Is the vaccine medical cabal still helping us stay safe and healthy? IMO addressing it now is better because the children and elderly have so much less protections than the rest of us that just tells them NO (I'm being polite). Looks to me like everyone gets to make some more life (saving) decisions coming up soon in Round 2. So much money to be made off not addressing it. Classic.
Does liability protection cover charging the CEO with murder? I figured the protection was from civil liability.I like the way you think! Isn't there some sorta legal conundrum about superceding the feds? I'm thinking something that is very specific to all vaccines was mentioned and that it prevented states from going after pharma once pharma rec'd their federal liability protections. Regardless, my tv says it might cause cancer according to the state of California. Maybe they could put a warning on the vax declaring possible sudden death according to the state of Florida.