very well said. Right or wrong the small business has right to set their rules as we have a choice of where to go

ADA 36.105 Definition of “disability.”
(a) (1) Disability means, with respect to an individual:
(i) A physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual;
(ii) A record of such an impairment; or
(iii) Being regarded as having such an impairment as described in paragraph (f) of this section.

(b)
(1) Physical or mental impairment means:
(i) Any physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more body systems, such as: neurological, musculoskeletal, special sense organs, respiratory (including speech organs), cardiovascular, reproductive, digestive, genitourinary, immune, circulatory, hemic, lymphatic, skin, and endocrine; or
(ii) Any mental or psychological disorder such as intellectual disability, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental illness, and specific learning disability.
(2) Physical or mental impairment includes, but is not limited to, contagious and noncontagious diseases and conditions such as the following: orthopedic, visual, speech and hearing impairments, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, intellectual disability, emotional illness, dyslexia and other specific learning disabilities, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Human Immunodeficiency Virus infection (whether symptomatic or asymptomatic), tuberculosis, drug addiction, and alcoholism.
o (3) Physical or mental impairment does not include homosexuality or bisexuality.


(f) Is regarded as having such an impairment. The following principles apply under the “regarded” as prong of the definition of “disability” (paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section):

(1) Except as set forth in paragraph (f)(2) of this section, an individual is “regarded as having such an impairment” if the individual is subjected to a prohibited action because of an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment, whether or not that impairment substantially limits, or is perceived to substantially limit, a major life activity, even if the public accommodation asserts, or may or does ultimately establish, a defense to the action prohibited by the ADA.

(2) An individual is not “regarded as having such an impairment” if the public accommodation demonstrates that the impairment is, objectively, both “transitory” and “minor.” A public accommodation may not defeat “regarded as” coverage of an individual simply by demonstrating that it subjectively believed the impairment was transitory and minor; rather, the public accommodation must demonstrate that the impairment is (in the case of an actual impairment) or would be (in the case of a perceived impairment), objectively, both “transitory” and “minor.” For purposes of this section, “transitory” is defined as lasting or expected to last six months or less.

In a nut shell

Neither of the two appeared disabled so how does those statutes apply? Because she's wearing mask does not mean she's impersonating a medical professional, only that she herself is afraid of being infected. In this irrational country her wearing a mask means drone mentality more than faux professionalism. As its her business, she would be entitled to require a mask to shop her establishment, if that was the depute, just as she can deny service for no shoes and/or no shirt, no?

I don't agree whatever with her mask wearing or the condition that others wear masks in her presence/store, but it is her establishment and they could simply leave to go somewhere else for the same goods/services.

As I said when I posted, I think they manufactured this event simply to enhance their "influencer" status of youtube moreso than making any statement on rights. The couple could have just as easily went outside and called the police from the sidewalk to get the owner/teller in legal trouble, no?

She cannot charge them with trespass. US Title 52 the business is defined as a place of "public accommodation". Under US Title 42, Sec. 12101: Unlawful to deny entry to persons with disability or perceived medical condition. The "owner" has impersonated a medical officer and has impersonated a public officer. The cops violated Title 52 and 42 and medical officer. US Code cannot be superceded by state or local, even under "Emergency" conditions.

I've done what the two "patrons" have done on numerous occasion. I carry the Fed and Wis State statutes with me when I think there may be a "challenge". I ask the person opposite me to read the statutes. I record the reading. If they are still in disagreement I ask them to call law enforcement as I need another witness to corroborate as evidentiary in order to file a legal injunction against the business. Still have not seen a cop. And then, I don't live in a place that is batshit crazy either.

Disagree. Two people against one. If they don't listen a bit of intimidation is in order they could easily overwhelm her and cause her harm, or killer her. Her mistake was attempting to prod the other woman. She lost her bat.She should have kept them at bay while she called the police to have them charged with trespass.Hindsight is 20-20. In the moment those two intimidated her (her mask says she's already predisposed) and she strengthened herself with aluminum.

That bakery lady said she could use force...yeah but I think a baseball bat would be 'deadly force'. Not allowed!

People who have a skewed value system and I suspect a self entitled attitude are trolling a small business owner. That is on display here. Masks are virtually worthless and likely harmful.
Side thought ,weird how the corrupt technocrats are so good at Unmasking (Husseingate) and masking(FauciGates) and in both cases a Gate was complicit.
They thrive on the public’s fear.
I have gotten old and tired of calling it fearporn but..... that’s what it is. Right now I think a lot of fear is being felt by Durham’s targets.
The business owner may have been mentally weakened by a reduction in fresh air , due to her mask. That said I didn’t watch after they started wrestling for the bat.

I agree with 25n56il4. Craziness. Oregon seems to have more than their share. I thought they decided to defund police.
If you don't like the rules of the store, then don't do business with them. Your 'safe space' is somewhere else.

I think all this mask wearing is BS and forcing it is even more BS. Additionally, I think this was a setup to irritate the business owner or why else would the camera be rolling before they even walked in the door? I also wonder if prior attempts by the maskless couple to do the same to other business owners didn't create a confrontation worth recording so we don't know about them. I think the business owner here is a paranoid imbecile regarding mask wearing, but I side with her decision to set simple conditions for entering her establishment. Her fearful mentality is a product of the MSMM and Neo Communist propaganda and prodding her like this is in poor taste and, as can be seen, may be dangerous. Would the maskless couple go around prodding strange dogs and expect not to get bit? I think not.

The lady bakery owner proves our point. All this crap is making people crazy! I needs to stop!