Category Archives: Business relations

articles pertaining to companies and worklife

Journalism vs. Facebook

At this point, I’m not even going to pretend to be surprised that this article would eventually come. In fact, I doubt that anybody who reads it would be. Facebook is a company that has a notorious history of censoring people. Rather it be for political reasons, what they classify as “spam,” or simply cleaning house of freelance journalists, Facebook has long since established its guilt. However, for the company, this guilt has not come without a price. With multiple lawsuits, one would think the company would make a few policy changes.  This has not been the case. If anything, Facebook appears to be tightening the reigns on the very policies that have gotten them sued in the first place.

On my personal profile, I have multiple freelance journalists. You maybe wondering what we all have in common, why I would even mention them. The one common ground we all share is that all of our accounts have been, in some way, censored by Facebook. Furthermore, when conducting this censorship, we are given no explanation as to why.

Though Facebook has restricted my account, notice that they do not give an actual reason as to why.

On 10/20/2020,  the journalist/founder of the platform “Discuss Global,” received a message like the one photographed above. in less than twenty four hours, I also received a message indicating that my account had been “restricted.” According to Facebook’s message, I had violated a policy. However, as you can see above, there is no example of what policy was violated, nor is there a copy of the violating post/comment. For those who have been on the platform for awhile, may recall the “journalistic purge.” This purge was the mass removal of dozens of independent journalistic platforms. Among these, “Cop Block” “The Daily Haze,” and “The free thought project.” It is almost as though Facebook is attempting to take down any journalist who is critical of Trump, something that I have in common with the other targeted journalists on my “friends” list.

Though I am given the option to appeal, doing so only brings up this error. This same event occurred when other journalists attempted to appeal.

While Facebook has given us the ability to appeal this “violation,” you can see for yourself what that appeal process brings. While Facebook continues to violate the rights of independent journalists, who don’t share their political views, earlier this year, the social media giant lost a class action lawsuit. you can read here for more information into that.

It’s commonly stated that Facebook is the perfect example of how socialism works. If you speak out against anything they support, they silence you. Perhaps, with all the lawsuits, Facebook should consider looking into their own policies and how they’re enforced before violating the rights of anybody who speaks out against their political agendas. Although this can be prevented, it would require that people take a stance against the platform.

Police department exposed

update

The Chief of police reached out to us, though she didn’t exactly answer our question. Below is that correspondence.

Chief: What are your questions about our policies?

WoC: Our platform was recently informed that your department rejected a potential application, partly on the grounds of an accusation to which an individual was found innocent. We know this because we were able to pull up this disposition. Though the individual involved has declined to comment on this, I thought I would touch base with you guys and find out how that was able to be used against this person, regardless of this disposition?

Chief: The individual you are talking about KNOWS why he was turned down. You have to tell the truth. I will be glad to talk to you I person. I will be in the office Monday.

At this point, the conversation was abruptly ended, she has not responded since this message.

—————————————

It was inevitable that this article would be written. In our current trend of exposing the “justice” system for all the glamorous corruption, it shouldn’t be to hard to conceive that we would begin targeting specific law enforcement agencies. Today, we are going after a small Oklahoma town, Earlsboro Police Department. This department was brought to our attention by a former applicant, denied a job on the basis of a charge, to which they were determined innocent. Upon conducting my own research into this department, it’s not all that surprising that they would had denied the individual’s application upon those grounds. After all, in 2018, the department was so corrupt it had gained state wide attention. Let’s review the Earlsboro Police Department.

History of abuse and corruption

As we have stated, this small town department is riddled with a past of corruption. In 2015, officer Michael Young, who is believed to still be with the department, targeted a freelance journalist. The journalist, associated with the organization “Cop Block,” had been filming the officer’s interaction with another citizen. To see that video, just click this link.  The situation, based upon the video, is rather disturbing.

It shows officer Young parked in front of a residence, lights enabled. Upon leaving, he does a U-turn. When getting to the corner, where the journalist is located, he stops at the stop sign. However, he doesn’t simply drive away. Instead, Young sits at this sign, blocking potential traffic. This goes on for several minutes.  Finally, after blocking the road for several minutes, officer Young decides to engage the journalist. The fact that the officer chose to even engage somebody, filming on a public road, is already questionable. But as we’ve said, this department doesn’t exactly operate with the legal scope.

More controversy hit the department in 2018. The former chief of police, Troy Magers found himself the centerfold of this event. Though this controversy was aimed at the private life of Magers, it spoke loudly for his character. So, we are going to give a quick rundown of the situation.

The former chief had rented a house. Upon leaving the residence, the home owner found it to be a complete wreck. Trash, feces, urine, roaches littered the home, it looked as if a hoarder had been living there. Though there is much debate as to why he was removed, one allegation is it was over sexual harassment claims and abuse of power. Though we haven’t been able to confirm the reasons leading up to his removal, we did find that he has an extensive history of misdemeanors and civil litigations dating back to the 1990’s. This leads us to our current question: If the EPD allowed this man to apart of the department, why did their current Chief of Police, Candie, deny a man who was found to be innocent of his charge?

Allegations against the former Chief of police didn’t just stop at how he destroyed a rental home. We were able to make contact with a man who had lived in the town during this time. According to this contact, the former chief had made a point of targeting a young woman and her children. In fact, the harassment had become so severe that she had allegedly bought a gun to protect her family from the police. Ultimately, after the officer attempted to remove her children, she and her family, was forced to move from their home.

We reached out to the department, in attempt to get answers. However, what we found was that any comment we left was  hastily removed. To ensure our question was seen, and hopefully answered, we left it for them on a Google review (pictured below.) One thing we noticed when looking at their reviews, was their rating. 2.6 out of 5. While it’s not uncommon to see lower scores with any law enforcement agency, this is still remarkably low. Reviews accuse officers of theft  to inaction in a potential life threatening situation.

Because they continue to delete any questions asked by the WoC team, we made our questions in a very public way. Doing it like this also ensures that the department cannot delete it.
The record showing the background of the EPD former police Chief, Troy Magers.

We find it interesting that a man with such a record of misdemeanors and civil suits was qualified to be a chief, but a man who was innocent wasn’t qualified to join the department.  While the department has allegedly pulled the “legalities” card, when we review the history of their previous chief, that is something we find to be rather suspicious. While the department has now become more active within its local community, it doesn’t necessarily excuse it from its past. When policies are being created on the spot, when officers, who still remain with the department, hold a history of abuse and intimidation,  we have more than enough reason to believe that nothing has truly changed.

It is unfathomable to believe that such a small department could be more corrupt than those in bigger cities. While we don’t believe the corruption has stopped, simply changed hands, it does appear that the department has made some drastic changes. While we still can’t confirm officer Young’s employment with this specific agency, we are told by a source that he maybe working for another department.  Allegedly the entire department was wiped clean, alongside Chief Magers. According to sources, this was brought about from accusations of “sexual misconduct.” However, neither the city of Earlsboro, nor it’s police department, will confirm this. One thing that is clear is they are still enforcing a non-existent law. There is no law barring a person employment purely based upon an accusation. After all, accusations happen all the time, it’s the establishment of guilt that matters. Because our journalist does live within the same state as this department, they can rest assure that we are going to be watching them very closely in the days to come.

Always guilty

“The system is broken.” At some point you have probably heard this expression. What if I were to tell you that this statement is wrong? The very system that you believe to be broken, in fact, was maliciously designed so that no matter what, you pay for the crime. If it sounds completely insane, it’s not. For many people, wrongfully strung into the court system, this is the reality that they face, regardless of disposition.

For those who haven’t been through this auction for your freedom, the idea you have is probably along these lines: you are charged, you go to court. If you are found guilty, you do your time, and you’re free. Alternatively, you are found innocent and that’s simply the end of it. Well, that’s not entirely true, just ask any innocent person who has been charged with a crime. Regardless of the fact that they were found “innocent” of the charge, the reality for them is this: they still pay for that crime.

What many of these people harshly learn is that companies, government agencies, and so fourth, still hold that charge against them. Is this legal? Not really, but they still do it.  For these individuals, the concept of “innocent” simply does not exist. The embarrassment of being dragged into a courtroom, the loss of income, and people knowing what you were accused of but not accepting the disposition makes the words, “innocent until proven guilty” a lost luxury.

However, there is a way to obtain that luxury again, at least that’s the glimmer of light. The downside to it is in that it is going to cost you hundreds of dollars to do so. So, let’s break this court system down. For this breakdown, I’m going to presume innocence. You are charged with a crime. You are dragged to a courtroom for months, or even years on end. Finally, you get the verdict “innocent.” You think the humiliation is over, it’s not. Now, you have this charge on your background, still very publicly visible to those who look.

While it should be the responsibility of the court to remove this, when you were found innocent, they won’t. You have to spend money to bribe these political parasites into doing that. Without the bribe, your life spins into chaos. Every job you apply for, sees this charge. Although they see the disposition of that charge, it generally doesn’t matter. You’re denied jobs regardless. Meanwhile, these law enforcement agencies, judges, and various other parasitic leeches are banking off of this flawed system, all of it at your expense.

Once you pay the bribe, you get the expungement. However, that could take months to go through; it could also mean more court dates. The worst aspect to all of this is in the fact that the damage has already been done. While you’re left to deal with the broken pieces of your life, the cash cow within the (in)justice system continues it’s illusion that it is “for the people” rather than against them.

 

 

India based Media platform files false copyright claim

It goes to say that there are many predatorial media platforms. Distorting or outright fabricating truths is not an uncommon element. However, you would never expect one of these platforms to target an aspiring musician, simply trying to share their musical compositions. However, that is exactly what Manorama News TV, a platform based in India, did.

This content is for Gold Status members only.
Login Join Now

Injured employee mistreated?

Unless you’re completely out of your mind, the last thing in the world that you would want to do is injure yourself at work. With any sort of injury, there is a loss of income, dealing with legal things that you may not had expected, and the list goes on. This story is brought to...

This content is for Gold Status members only.
Login Join Now

Disabled individuals targeted?

It goes without say that we should all be entitled to medical care. For some people, this form of care means life or death. However, in all the splendor joys that 2020 has already provided us, we are finding that, for many people, medical care is outright being denied. In fact, for specific groups of people, they aren’t even being allowed in the door before being asked to leave the facility. Why? It all boils down to the mask mandate. I understand that many people will disagree with this article. I also understand that I will most likely catch a lot of grief for writing it, however, I simply refuse to sit back and watch as specific groups of disabled people continue to be targeted, denied their basic right to medical. After all, we have already seen other rights be stripped away, we’ll get into that also.

Mask Mandate

First, and foremost, it is important to understand that the mask mandate is that: a mandate. Although many people will try to claim this to be law, it’s not. The difference in a mandate and law comes down to a variety of factors, how it came to be is among them. While state and federal laws get run through every government house known to man, the mandate had never undergone such a process. Basically, this makes it unenforceable by law enforcement, though they are attempting to enforce it anyway. The issue in them enforcing it can be chalked down into what the very definition of their occupation: to uphold and enforce the law.

Initially, the mask mandate was a suggestion. Never intended to be required, the government composed a list of “safety” procedures for people to follow, if they so wished. However, what we ended up seeing completely opposed this initial stance. In a progressively slow measure, this request grew into the mandate. Some of the “safety” guidelines are as follow:

  1. Stay at least six feet apart from one another. Apparently, we are facing the only known virus in history that has a travel distance of six feet.
  2. Wear a mask. This is something we are going to really get into shortly.
  3. Avoid large crowds. Goes back to the whole six feet portion.

Enforcement vs. your rights

In enforcing this potential violation to the constitution, as well as civil liberties, we have seen the outright measures our very own government are willing to take. In the past several months, we have seen churches forced into closing their doors and their ministers arrested upon refusing to do so. If you aren’t well versed in the Constitution yet, let’s just recap, shall we?

Under the first amendment, you have the right to free speech, the press, religion, and so on. In regards to religion, the amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Hence where their idea of enforcement now becomes a problem.

By forcing religious institutions into closing their doors, they directly violated the first amendment. Regardless of the reason as to why this was done, it changes nothing in regards to the result. To take it further, those who refused to cease practicing within their religious institutions, were simply arrested. Never, in the history of the United States, has a minister been arrested for refusing to terminate their religious practices; of course, this is no longer a truthful statement.

Within the mask mandate, there are exemptions that must be noted. It is these exemptions that have lead to this article. The exemptions within themselves aren’t the problem, it’s how businesses treat individuals who are exempted that has become the problem.

  1. pre-existing respiratory conditions.
  2. seizures
  3. sensory disorders, such as those associated with autism.

The above are only a few examples of things that are exempted. Regardless of this, corporations, and even medical facilities, are making blanket policies that force everybody, exempted or not, to wear these masks. Furthermore, for those who are exempted, there doesn’t appear to be any form of help with fighting these illegal policies. So, let’s go ahead and arm our disabled friends with a few pieces of legal information that may be of assistance.

The ADA

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is quickly becoming a critical law to know. Within this law, there are protections that could translate into the enforcement of these corporate policies, as well as the mandate itself though the mandate has exemptions for this very reason. The two titles that we are going to specifically focus on are II and III of the ADA.

Title II

“Title II applies to State and local government entities, and, in subtitle A, protects qualified individuals with disabilities from discrimination on the basis of disability in services, programs, and activities provided by State and local government entities. Title II extends the prohibition on discrimination established by section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. 794, to all activities of State and local governments regardless of whether these entities receive Federal financial assistance.”

Title III

Title III focuses on private businesses (also known as public accommodations). All new construction and modifications must be accessible to individuals with disabilities. For existing facilities, barriers to services must be removed if it is readily achievable. Public accommodations include facilities such hotels, restaurants, bars, theaters, grocery stores, hardware stores, dry-cleaners, banks, professional offices of health care providers, lawyers, and accountants, hospitals, private bus or train stations, museums, libraries, zoos, amusement parks, places of education, day care centers, senior citizen centers, homeless shelters, gymnasiums, health spas, bowling alleys, and golf courses to name a few.

To read this in its entirety, please visit this link.

Essentially, these titles prevent corporations, etc. from denying disabled individuals services solely on the grounds of their disabilities. For those who are being denied, as we’ve recently seen, this act will quickly become your best friend in fighting these unjust policies.

The mandate has been met with such controversy that lawsuits are currently ongoing. States such as Ohio, Wisconsin, and Texas are just a few states to mention. Rather or not you are for, or against the mandate, one thing must be clear: For the disabled individuals who cannot wear such devices, life has become a much more difficult challenge than what was ever needed. Rather it requires a revocation, overhaul, or even clarification of the mandate, to resolve the issues that are apparently present, it is, without a doubt, that action must be taken.

Jacob Blake: shooting review

Update

It’s been discovered that Jacob Blake had a warrant. It’s possible this may have played into his encounter with police. Photos sent to us by an anonymous source

This article is my review of the shooting. In it, we have the video, as well as screenshots from that video. You may, or may not agree with my statements. Ultimately, it is up to you to make your own conclusion.

The video of the shooting.

From the video, we can see the events as they unfold. There are several problems that I have observed within the video, let’s just dive right into this situation.

Image one, showing the two involved officers.

From the very start of the video, two officers are seen holding weapons. While it is unclear if both are lethal force, we know that at least one officer has a pistol. At this point, Jacob is observed going to the driver side of his vehicle, where his children are currently located. Though one officer (left of the one pointing a weapon) maybe holding a taser, based on how he’s holding the weapon. I am left to question why the other officer has a pistol. At this point, Jacob shows no signs of aggression, though I cannot speak for events that may had arisen prior to the video.

Jacob makes a disasterous choice.

Upon arriving to his door, Jacob makes a choice that may prove fatal. For unknown reasons, he is seen bending to a 90° angle. While this may not seem like much, it was more than enough for officers to believe a threat was present. This is where things become very questionable. The officers are seen standing behind Jacob, placing them into a position of power. This means that, even in a hand-to-hand situation, the officers have the advantage as it is difficult to fight when your opponent is behind you. With this, I question the fact that this officer chose to open fire when he clearly could had taken Jacob down with no problem. After all, they are trained to do tactics such as this.

Even if Jacob had been reaching for a weapon, the officers would had been able to react faster than him. By the time Jacob could had grabbed the alleged weapon, turned around, and fired, he would had already been taken to the ground. This, if anything, demonstrates not only the flaw within their department’s training, but also a severe lack of competency from its officers.

Jacob attempts to get into his vehicle as the officer fires.

Seven shots were fired into Jacob’s back. In training, we are told to “fire to stop the action or threat.” After one, maybe even two, shots, any potential threat Jacob had posed, would had been eliminated. So why did this officer shoot seven rounds? Again, this is a reflection of incompetent training and officers. At this point, as he’s being fired upon, Jacob attempts to get into the vehicle. For this, I have three theories:

1. Jacob was trying to create a barrier between him and the officer’s hailstorm of bullets. The front seat, being the barrier, could had potentially stopped further bullets.

2. Jacob may had been trying to flee the scene. Bear in mind, he had children in that vehicle. These children already witnessed their father being shot, it is possible that he was trying to flee in hopes of getting them out of the situation.

3. Jacob was shot in the back, this os critical to understand. Vital organs, such as kidneys, liver, etc. could had been damaged. This means that, as he bled out, his vision, ability to walk, stand, or even speak could had been impaired. Sitting would had been his safest choice. If he was able to apply enough pressure to his back, he very well could had slowed the bleeding until actual help arrived.

Officers showing how little control they have.

As the gun toting officer fired, a woman is observed walking to the scene. At this point, the other officer has seemingly walked away. It is clear to me that these officers have very little self control, they can’t even control the location. In no respectful police agency would this woman be able to walk up onto a shooting scene like this. Where did the officer go? That’s a very good question.

The other officer returns.

Although the other officer did return to the scene, I am stunned to see that nothing is done about the woman. They just shot a man, her presence there paces her in immediate danger. The officers involved clearly lack the cobtrol to use their training, aside lethal force. They further demonstrate their incompetence by failing to secure the scene, something that is more apparant in this photo.

It is, with my own training and evaluation, that I believe these officers used excessive deadly force. Their position from Jacob gave them more than enough alternatives that a shooting could had easily been avoided. While an investigation will ensue, as per department protocol, I do hold my reservations as to rather or not justice will come. The key evidence to this will really boil down to one question: did Jacob have a lethal weapon to which he was attempting to retrieve? Based on the current evidence, within this video, I don’t believe that is the case. The fact that his children were literally next to him, in the very vehicle to which he was shot, only furthers my belief toward this.

Sinclair hires sex offender, denies alleged comments made by him

When taking your children to any store, you expect that location to be a safe place. The concept that a registered sex offender would have such easy access to your children is incomprehensable. For one family, this scenerio became a reality in a very disturbing form. Here’s what we’ve learned thus far.

An Oklahoma family was recently taking an outing to a local lake. On the way, they stopped at a Sinclair convience store, located at: 12606 S McLoud Rd, McLoud, OK 74851. With a parent present, two children, ages 12 and 13 went inside to get drinks and snacks. As per most customer service businesses, the cashier, identified as Michael Vaughn Hilborn, greeted the three individuals. From this point forward, things took a progressively disturbing turn.

For unknown reasons, Michael proceeded to state, “you look like you’re about to go dancing.” If it isn’t obvious, this is a joke that relates to exotic dancing. While the statement put the parent on alert, they initially brushed this off. After all, perhaps Michael just has a poor sense of humor. However, the situation doesn’t end with that “joke.” At this point, the three customers rushed to get their items, the two children had also gotten a pickle, a common food item found in these stores. The situation abruptly turns from creepy to outright disturbing.

As they proceed to purchase the items, Michael picks up the pickles and bags of hot cheetos and proceeds to ask, “who they were for.” Not seeing the unfolding situation, one of the girls replied by telling him, “ours.” It is, at this point, Michael takes the already disturbing situation to the next level. Michael proceeds to ask the girls, “can you get pregnant?” Before moving his hips in a very sexual manner. As he does this, he allegedly begins to say, “whoop, whoop.” The three ultimately left the store and contacted Mcloud police. So, who is Michael?

In the state of Oklahoma, Michael is a lifetime, tier 3, sex offender. Although we found no record of him within the DOC system, we were able to find his registry, which is photographed below. Initially, the police were hesitant about arresting him, as what he stated was in poor taste, but also faced the possibility of no charges as he had not blatently stated anything that was sexual. However, upon discovering his registry, the police did, in fact, take him into custody.

Meanwhile, Sinclair denies the entire event occurred. For those who know the inner operations of this company, this should not come as a surprise. Currently, Sinclair has been uncooperative with the current investigation. However, based on various comments, it appears that the company is protecting him. Multiple comments have mentioned that Michael was working at another Sinclair station, which was located next to a school. If you don’t know, registered sex offenders can’t live near a school, muchless work next door to one.

Only after community pressured Sinclair, was he relocated to the store where this latest event took place. Currently, he is being held at the Pottawatomie County jail, awaiting potential charges. Although Sinclair still adamently denies that event taking place, given their lack of cooperation with the police, it leads me to ask, “if it didn’t happen, why not cooperate?” From what we’ve learn, no safety measures are taken to prevent offenders from being employed. This is highly worrysome as children do frequent these stores. Perhaps, the company should start taking real measures in protecting their customers, especially minors. This sotuation, had a parent not been present, could had taken a much darker route.

A clip, showing Michael Vaughn Hilborn’s registry.

The mask mandate: does it violate the ADA?

In email, PM, and amongst our team, this article has been a long time coming. We are going to be discussing the mask mandate and how it has cruely targeted individuals with disabilities. While we are aware that many people will not agree with this article, we believe the mandate to be in violation of the “Americans with disabilities act” (ADA.) While the mandate itself has exemptions, the many corporations who poorly enact this mandate also violate selective portions of it, thus our definition of violating the ADA.

Hollywood casino: Maryland Heights, Missouri

Doing something as mundane as going to a casino shouldn’t turn into a discrimination situation. For one woman, with various medical conditions, it did. Worst yet, she is allegedly not the only individual targeted by unfair, selective and enforcement of the mask mandate. She wrote us saying the following:

I walked into the casino. security stopped me and told me I could not enter without a mask. I handed them my dr. note and they called upstairs. They came back and told them they didn’t care about my Dr note but I had to wear a mask. Which that itself violates the mandate law in st louis. Health conditions are exempted on the mandate.

Wished to remain anonymous

She later informed us, via phone, that a relative of hers was forced to wear a mask. At first it seemed to be an “okay, whatever” sort of situation. She went on to explain that the relative is on an oxygen machine and had difficulty breathing as a result. To this, we requested permission to make mention of that ordeal within this article.

I attempted to contact the casino. I asked one simple question: “how many people have shown your employees doctor notes and was still forced to mask or leave?” The response I got was simply being hung up on, with no further communication. Upon recieving this response, I sent them an email (pictured at the end of this article) and am currently awaiting a reply.

Meanwhile, we were able to find some aspect of their policy. However, it says nothing in regards to disabled people. The policy we have found simply reads:

While the amenities our customers have come to know and love may be somewhat limited for the time being, the ability to safely welcome back our team members and guests remains our top priority. With this in mind, we worked closely with the Missouri Gaming Commission, state and local leaders, and public health officials to finalize comprehensive Phase I reopening protocols and new health and safety precautions. Our returning team members will be trained on these procedures and our guests will see reminder signage about them throughout the property. These new protocols include, but are not limited to, the following:

SOCIAL DISTANCING

  • Capacity on our gaming floor may be limited, but we do not expect this to impact the customer experience.
  • The installation of floor decals and signage to strictly enforce social distancing guidelines will be placed in areas where lines typically form.
  • Table game seating will be limited, and some slot machines will be placed out of service.
  • Live music, entertainment, convention, and banquet services will remain suspended.
  • There will be no large drawings, tournaments, or special events.
  • Restaurant offerings will be limited to Hops House, Hollywood & Grind, Phat Thai, Celebrity Grill, and Charlie Gitto’s.
  • The gift shop, fitness center and valet parking will also be closed.
  • Valet parking will be closed, and the parking area typically used for valet parked cars is available for self-parking. Additional handicap parking spaces will be added to both casino parking areas.
  • The hotel has reopened.

HEALTH & SAFETY

  • Team members and vendors will be required to wear masks and will undergo a health screening each day, including temperature checks, prior to their shift.
  • Based on the ruling by the St. Louis County Health Department, and in order to help reduce the spread of COVID – 19, Hollywood Casino St. Louis will be requiring all persons in public areas will be required to wear a mask covering the face and nose. Patrons may remove masks temporarily while eating or drinking or when asked by casino staff for identification. Guests not adhering to these requirements will be advised of the requirements and warned that if they continue to disregard they will be asked to leave the property.
  • Slots and table games will be thoroughly and regularly cleaned throughout the day.
  • Sanitizer stations will be installed on the casino floor and be readily available throughout the facility.
  • Plexi-glass separators will be installed at the players club, cage, security podiums and other locations.
  • Citation: https://www.hollywoodcasinostlouis.com/covid-19

Loves Travel Plaza

In this day and age even a simple road trip has become problematic. One of the emails recieved regarded the national travel plaza, Loves. As of March 29th, the corporation began enforcing the mask requirements, with no regard to disabled people. While we had gotten an email of one situation, I had already planned to target this company purely based on what I have personally seen, even prior to their mandate. With that, I will now tackle two birds with one stone.

First, let’s review the email sent to us:

Hello,

My name is (redacted) and I want to see if you would write an article about what just happened to me. I was recently on a roadtrip from my home in (redacted) Tennessee, going to New Mexico. On this trip, I stopped at a Loves travel center in Hazen Arkansas. I needed to get fuel among a few other things. I have COPD, the image sent to you is my Dr. statement explaining why I am unable to wear a mask. I brought this into the store with me, just in case. I go into the store and am immediately stopped by an employee. He informs me that I must wear a mask to enter. I explain to him that I can’t wear one and offer to show him the note. He becomes more aggressive, tells me that he doesn’t care about the note. If I will not wear a mask, I must leave the premises. No gas, no food, and no pit stop, I leave. Thankfully, a nearby gas station was more than happy to have my business. I hope to bring exposure to how people like me are being treated, I hope you will help.

Email sent to our platform.

If you aren’t aware, the mask mandate does have exemptions to it. Autism, COPD, and those with various other medical conditions are classified as exempt. These businesses denying these customers entrance not only violates the mask mandate exemptions code, it is also a violation of the ADA, title II. Title II of the ADA reads as follows:

SUMMARY: This final rule revises the regulation of the Department of Justice (Department) that implements title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of disability in  State and local government services. The Department is issuing this final rule in order to adopt enforceable accessibility standards under the ADA that are consistent with the minimum guidelines and requirements issued by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board), and to update or amend certain provisions of the title II regulation so that they comport with the Department’s legal and practical experiences in enforcing the ADA since 1991. Concurrently with the publication of this final rule for title II, the Department is publishing a final rule amending its ADA title III regulation, which covers nondiscrimination on the basis of disability by public accommodations and in commercial facilities. 

 Citation: https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/titleII_2010/titleII_2010_regulations.htm

What Title II is essentially saying is this: a business cannot treat a person differently simply because they have a disability. Regardless of this law, that is what we are seeing. Under the illusion of “protecting the public,” people with disabilities and medical conditions are being barred from various locations. While public safety is a concern, it is alarming that certain people can’t even go shopping without being forced to violate doctor orders. At this point, it no longer appears to be a matter of public safety, but a situation of compliance.

Our email sent to Hollywood Casino