Slow down, governor. SLO County doesn’t need a COVID curfew — at least not yet

COVID-19 cases are rising at alarming rates, so it’s understandable that public officials would want to take every precaution to prevent the potentially deadly virus from spreading even more.

But let’s get one thing straight: It’s what people do that matters most — not when they do it.

That’s why we’re skeptical about the need for a statewide curfew in California.

Other states already have imposed curfews; Massachusetts has a 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. curfew. Ohio recently passed a curfew as well.

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Monday that he’s considering a state-wide curfew, but will first look at studies that examined how effective the measure has been elsewhere, including France, Germany and Saudi Arabia.

According to online reports, results have been mixed.

A report from George Mason University’s Center for Security Policy Studies found that, despite strict curfew and lockdown measures in Saudi Arabia, “the outbreak continued to spiral out of control.”

“One reason for the rise in confirmed COVID-19 cases is that curfew creates crowding issues in local grocery stores,” the report said.

On the other hand, a curfew was judged highly effective in several large cities in French Guiana, according to a report on Sortiraparis.

But it came with this caveat: “We cannot copy (curfew) from one land to another,” a health agency director said.

The same could be said of California.

A curfew might be a good idea in, say, Los Angeles County. In fact, the LA Times Editorial Board has already said as much.

“If curfews can help avoid a return to the sweeping lockdowns of last spring, Californians should welcome them,” the board said in a recent editorial.

But the possibility that a curfew might help isn’t enough to justify a statewide measure, especially since most local jurisdictions are hard-pressed enforcing conronavirus restrictions already in effect.

Besides, what purpose would a curfew serve in San Luis Obispo County?

Would it prevent late-night house parties? Restrictions on large gatherings can be used to shut those down, and with Cal Poly students leaving soon, that should be less of an issue through the end of the year.

Would a curfew discourage diners from lingering over their meal, or ordering another round of drinks? Since restaurants are now limited to outdoor service, the cold weather already is a far more effective deterrent than a 10 p.m. cut-off time.

On top of that, there would have to be so many exceptions that a curfew would be next to impossible to enforce.

In Massachusetts, for example, there are exceptions for going to and from work, running “critical errands,” taking care of health needs and even taking a walk.

So again, what’s the point?

If it’s to shut down restaurants and bars that are drawing crowds and flouting masking and social distancing requirements, then punish those businesses. Or require bars and restaurants to close earlier, rather than passing a blanket curfew that affects all businesses.

If anything, it makes sense for supermarkets and other essential stores to extend their hours, to provide shoppers with an opportunity to take advantage of those times when there are fewer people around.

We know what measures are most critical to prevent the spread of COVID-19: Consistently wearing a mask; maintaining a distance of at least 6 feet from people who aren’t in your household; avoiding large gatherings altogether or, if you do choose to attend, say, a church service, make sure it’s outdoors; staying home if you’re sick; avoiding unnecessary travel; and frequent hand washing.

The evidence supporting a curfew on top of that is too inconclusive to justify it.

We strongly urge Gov. Newsom to allow public health officials in the individual counties to decide whether to impose curfews.