Could/should we outlaw protesters hiding their identify via masks and hoods?

[ProfJohn]

After pictures of the idiots in masks burning the flag and soldier and the people smashing windows in Seattle I am wondering why we haven?t made it illegal for people to protest in masks and hoods?

It is almost inevitable that when these types of people show up at an event that some type of illegality is going to follow. So why not prevent the illegality beforehand by outlawing the mechanism that allows it to happen.

Take away their masks and you take away their ability to break the law incognito. Also I am almost 100% positive that these people burning the flag and smashing windows would not have done so if they knew their pictures were going to show up in the local paper where thier mom, dad, girlfriend, boss and everyone could see and identify them. Additionally, if they did break the law it would be much easier for the police to track them down.

Some of you may say that such a law would be a violation of their first amendment rights. However, showing up to a protest dressed in a mask is not part of the free speech and right to assembly that is being expressed at such rallies. In other words they can still freely express themselves without the masks and hoods. In fact, in many parts of the country wearing a mask in public is already illegal.

It seems that such laws would give the police tools to fight violence and vandalism before they happened as opposed to waiting until afterwards.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Topic Title: Could/should we outlaw protesters hiding their identify via masks and hoods?
Topic Summary: In order to prevent vandalism and mayhem?

Would be easier if you worded your title and question correctly:

Should we rip up Constitution, declare and rename U.S. Fourth Reicht immediately in order to prevent vandalism and mayhem?

 

[JD50]

No way, although I might not agree with their actions, they certainly have the right to wear whatever they like while they are protesting. But, if people start vandalizing and getting violent, I am all for the Police using tear gas, pepper spray, etc....

 

[dyna]

Originally posted by: JD50
No way, although I might not agree with their actions, they certainly have the right to wear whatever they like while they are protesting. But, if people start vandalizing and getting violent, I am all for the Police using tear gas, pepper spray, etc....

What if its a gas mask?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: dyna

Originally posted by: JD50
No way, although I might not agree with their actions, they certainly have the right to wear whatever they like while they are protesting. But, if people start vandalizing and getting violent, I am all for the Police using tear gas, pepper spray, etc....

What if its a gas mask?

Hehe, good point. What if they are dressed up in bio suits, with gas masks and flak jackets.

The polic would be pretty much useless at that point

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: dyna

Originally posted by: JD50
No way, although I might not agree with their actions, they certainly have the right to wear whatever they like while they are protesting. But, if people start vandalizing and getting violent, I am all for the Police using tear gas, pepper spray, etc....

What if its a gas mask?

Good point, but it still shouldn't be illegal. But thats what riot batons, rubber bullets and bean bag shooting shotguns are for.

 

[ayabe]

No, this is America.

 

[Moonbeam]

When people finally realize the benefits to an electronic identity implant that can be scanned for your personal data, the masks will become irrelevant. We will just ask the computers, under court order, to tell us who was where at the scene of a crime. Then we can access their personal data for sound recorded at that time as well as what each could see out of his or her eyes.

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Topic Title: Could/should we outlaw protesters hiding their identify via masks and hoods?
Topic Summary: In order to prevent vandalism and mayhem?

Would be easier if you worded your title and question correctly:

Should we rip up Constitution, declare and rename U.S. Fourth Reicht immediately in order to prevent vandalism and mayhem?

It is not strictly a Constitutional issue.

Various states have differing laws regarding their use

http://www.anapsid.org/cnd/mcs/maskcodes.html


most of it has been used against the KKK


should we overturn rulings supporting the law simply because of who or what they protest against? That won't fly either

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
After pictures of the idiots in masks burning the flag and soldier and the people smashing windows in Seattle I am wondering why we haven?t made it illegal for people to protest in masks and hoods?

It is almost inevitable that when these types of people show up at an event that some type of illegality is going to follow. So why not prevent the illegality beforehand by outlawing the mechanism that allows it to happen.

Take away their masks and you take away their ability to break the law incognito. Also I am almost 100% positive that these people burning the flag and smashing windows would not have done so if they knew their pictures were going to show up in the local paper where thier mom, dad, girlfriend, boss and everyone could see and identify them. Additionally, if they did break the law it would be much easier for the police to track them down.

Some of you may say that such a law would be a violation of their first amendment rights. However, showing up to a protest dressed in a mask is not part of the free speech and right to assembly that is being expressed at such rallies. In other words they can still freely express themselves without the masks and hoods. In fact, in many parts of the country wearing a mask in public is already illegal.

It seems that such laws would give the police tools to fight violence and vandalism before they happened as opposed to waiting until afterwards.

Why dont you just Make the Wear yellow 6 pointed stars.

 

[yllus]

A fairly interesting question. On the one hand you would hope that a protestor would have the cajones to let him/herself be identified if they truly believe in their cause, but realistically this judging of a person's masculinity should have utterly no bearing on what is and isn't deemed illegal in today's enlightened society.

Hah, I started responding before I read the entirety of your post, which is pretty scary. You seem to feel that making life easier for law enforcement agencies should trump the right to do whatever you want as long as it's not harmful/illegal to others - before any crime has been committed. Thanks but no thanks. By the same token we should make it illegal for people to walk around malls in baggy clothing because it hinders their ability to shoplift. Limit cars from going faster than 140 km/h to limit their ability to illegally race and speed.

I consider it a very important part of modern society to trust individuals to be lawful citizens instead of limiting their freedoms because of what they might do.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: yllus
Hah, I started responding before I read the entirety of your post, which is pretty scary. You seem to feel that making life easier for law enforcement agencies should trump the right to do whatever you want as long as it's not harmful/illegal to others - before any crime has been committed. Thanks but no thanks. By the same token we should make it illegal for people to walk around malls in baggy clothing because it hinders their ability to shoplift. Limit cars from going faster than 140 km/h to limit their ability to illegally race and speed.

I consider it a very important part of modern society to trust individuals to be lawful citizens instead of limiting their freedoms because of what they might do.

Yup.

 

[2Xtreme21]

We should make it illegal to not support our government. At least until Bush is out of office anyway... right?

 

[Sinsear]

No they should not make it illegal for people to wear masks. It would be a bad precedent to start; we could all end up looking like the N. Koreans in their plain old gray/blue/black suits.

 

[fskimospy]

I think the most fundamental reason it won't happen is because it would be viewed as an attempt at the intimidation of protesters (which it would in fact be).

 

[k1pp3r]

Originally posted by: dyna

Originally posted by: JD50
No way, although I might not agree with their actions, they certainly have the right to wear whatever they like while they are protesting. But, if people start vandalizing and getting violent, I am all for the Police using tear gas, pepper spray, etc....

What if its a gas mask?

Rubber bullets?

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Should we rip up Constitution, declare and rename U.S. Fourth Reicht immediately in order to prevent vandalism and mayhem?

Originally posted by: JD50
No way,....

Originally posted by: ayabe
No, this is America.

Originally posted by: smashp
Why dont you just Make the Wear yellow 6 pointed stars.

And so on.....

Many states have precisely such a law, and have had for quite some time. Of course it was primarily aimed at the KKK.

Yes, sadly we in US have been "defining right" based of our view of the group requesting enforcement of their rights. Of course in this situation it was the so-called left wishing to restrict them. However, I will note that many "leftist" judges have disagreed with such bans & championed civil rights by striking down such restrictions.

I suspect this issue will be re-visited in the (near) future because of Muslims (chador sp?). We have already seen cases where the women refuse to remove for drivers license photos etc.

Fern

 

[Red Dawn]

Where's Gov Rhodes and the Ohio National Guard when you need them?:roll:

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Would be easier if you worded your title and question correctly:

Should we rip up Constitution, declare and rename U.S. Fourth Reicht immediately in order to prevent vandalism and mayhem?

QFT!

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: Fern
I suspect this issue will be re-visited in the (near) future because of Muslims (chador sp?). We have already seen cases where the women refuse to remove for drivers license photos etc.
Fern

I think that's a special case, since it hinders positive physical identification which is one of the key reasons for the picture being there in the first place.

We had a case like this in FL I believe but I don't know what the ultimate outcome was.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Should we rip up Constitution, declare and rename U.S. Fourth Reicht immediately in order to prevent vandalism and mayhem?

Originally posted by: JD50
No way,....

Originally posted by: ayabe
No, this is America.

Originally posted by: smashp
Why dont you just Make the Wear yellow 6 pointed stars.

And so on.....

Many states have precisely such a law, and have had for quite some time. Of course it was primarily aimed at the KKK.

Yes, sadly we in US have been "defining right" based of our view of the group requesting enforcement of their rights. Of course in this situation it was the so-called left wishing to restrict them. However, I will note that many "leftist" judges have disagreed with such bans & championed civil rights by striking down such restrictions.

I suspect this issue will be re-visited in the (near) future because of Muslims (chador sp?). We have already seen cases where the women refuse to remove for drivers license photos etc.

It's happening already with groups that have been in this country forever:

3-22-2007 Mennonites leaving Mo. over photo law

HUNTSVILLE, Mo. - The grocer, the butcher, a cabinet maker and several other members of the town's Mennonite community are planning to move to Arkansas over a Missouri requirement that all drivers be photographed if they want a license.

The Mennonites ? a plain-living sect whose members are similar to the Amish, but usually more worldly ? say the 2004 law conflicts with the Biblical prohibition against the making of "graven images."

"We want to respect our government. We're not trying to fight them. But we still have our beliefs," said Ervin Kropf, a bearded, overall-wearing grocer whose market draws customers from miles around for the fresh milk, brown eggs and spices supplied by his fellow Mennonites.

Kropf said he is looking to sell his store. He said if he cannot find a buyer, he will stay in Missouri but rely on someone else to bring in his supplies, because he will not be able to hold a driver's license without agreeing to a photo.

Around Huntsville, community members say more than a dozen families altogether are preparing to move south to Arkansas, where state law offers a religious exemption to the photo requirement. Other Mennonite enclaves near Rolla, Springfield and Vandalia are facing a similar dilemma.

Maura Browning, a spokeswoman for the Missouri Department of Revenue, which oversees driver's licenses, said that while her agency is sympathetic, "we are the administrator, not the creator, of state law."

Some community members call their Mennonite neighbors peaceful, hardworking taxpayers wrongly ensnared in the government's war on terror.

"This whole business of homeland security is a farce," said Joel Hartman, a University of Missouri-Columbia professor of rural sociology. "These people are no threat whatsoever to the larger society."

There are an estimated 500,000 Mennonites in the U.S., according to Donald Kraybill, a professor and a fellow at the Young Center for Anabaptist and Pietist Studies at Elizabethtown College in Pennsylvania.

The effect of the nationwide crackdown upon Amish and Mennonites is not limited to driver's licenses.

Amish who have been able to cross the border into Canada and Mexico for medical treatment or to visit relatives without passports will no longer have that option starting in January. So those who object to having their photos taken for their passports will effectively be unable to leave the country.

And in Pennsylvania, a state law requiring photo identification to purchase guns has prompted many Amish who hunt to hire non-Amish neighbors to buy guns for them, according to Kraybill.
=========================================
We are pushing the limits of how far people can be pushed.

You cannot expect this to continue unabated without something snapping.

 

[JD50]

It should be mandatory for you to have a picture of your face on a drivers license. If you don't want your picture taken, then don't drive.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Should we rip up Constitution, declare and rename U.S. Fourth Reicht immediately in order to prevent vandalism and mayhem?

Originally posted by: JD50
No way,....

Originally posted by: ayabe
No, this is America.

Originally posted by: smashp
Why dont you just Make the Wear yellow 6 pointed stars.

-snip-

-snip-

.

Interesting. I suppose the Amish have avoided this problem by not using automobile's.


I'm kinda curious about the reason for their aversion to photo's. Does anybody know?

Fern

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Some of you may say that such a law would be a violation of their first amendment rights. However, showing up to a protest dressed in a mask is not part of the free speech and right to assembly that is being expressed at such rallies. In other words they can still freely express themselves without the masks and hoods. In fact, in many parts of the country wearing a mask in public is already illegal.

It seems that such laws would give the police tools to fight violence and vandalism before they happened as opposed to waiting until afterwards.

Jawohl, und seig heil, herr Führer! When you're through with the First Amendment, I'm sure there are more you'd love to destroy. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

< Fixed German spelling. Thanks, Boberfett. >

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Topic Title: Could/should we outlaw protesters hiding their identify via masks and hoods?
Topic Summary: In order to prevent vandalism and mayhem?

Would be easier if you worded your title and question correctly:

Should we rip up Constitution, declare and rename U.S. Fourth Reicht immediately in order to prevent vandalism and mayhem?

Does the right to privacy protect a person from having to be identified out in public?