Law California Lawmakers Pass a Mask Ban for Law Enforcement

[fingercuffs]

Glenn Beck's still peddling the California has a mask mandate and his morons are still believing it.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

How about a mask ban for protesters and people shopping (in public) while we're getting shit done?

People have a right to privacy in their personal life. Maybe a law banning masks for protesters is warranted but masked people committing crimes are subject to arrest and identification. If we are all subject to identification in public, especially if we're talking about surveillance cameras everywhere, it makes the likelihood of a Big Brother type scenario more probable. When you have public facing jobs, especially a public servant, then you are by default consenting to identification for transparency and accountability.

 

[oldshadow]

People have a right to privacy in their personal life. Maybe a law banning masks for protesters is warranted but masked people committing crimes are subject to arrest and identification. If we are all subject to identification in public, especially if we're talking about surveillance cameras everywhere, it makes the likelihood of a Big Brother type scenario more probable. When you have public facing jobs, especially a public servant, then you are by default consenting to identification for transparency and accountability.

You have no right to privacy in public. You can be filmed and anti mask laws are constitutional with religious and medical exceptions. They also make celebration exceptions.

 

[fingercuffs]

People have a right to privacy in their personal life. Maybe a law banning masks for protesters is warranted but masked people committing crimes are subject to arrest and identification. If we are all subject to identification in public, especially if we're talking about surveillance cameras everywhere, it makes the likelihood of a Big Brother type scenario more probable. When you have public facing jobs, especially a public servant, then you are by default consenting to identification for transparency and accountability.

I know I get vilified on Sherdog as a but my freedom when it comes to being on camera but if I'm mowed down by some hit and run I'd like someone to be found and brought to justice for it. They increased cameras in San Jose because of the amount of hit and runs and thankfully sane San Jose people welcomed it in the hope it would stop people killing people.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

You have no right to privacy in public. You can be filmed and anti mask laws are constitutional with religious and medical exceptions. They also make celebration exceptions.

You have no expectation of privacy in public but you can create your own privacy by covering your face. It looks like most masking laws are limited to certain circumstances like protests and require an intent to commit a crime for it to be illegal. That's a big difference than the police having the authority to identify anyone for wearing a mask. Police need probable cause to identify you not just be suspicious of you.

 

[oldshadow]

You have no expectation of privacy in public but you can create your own privacy by covering your face. It looks like most masking laws are limited to certain circumstances like protests and require an intent to commit a crime for it to be illegal. That's a big difference than the police having the authority to identify anyone for wearing a mask. Police need probable cause to identify you not just be suspicious of you.

North Carolina outlaws mask in public with certain exceptions. That being religious, health and certain celebrations.

 

[oldshadow]

You have no expectation of privacy in public but you can create your own privacy by covering your face. It looks like most masking laws are limited to certain circumstances like protests and require an intent to commit a crime for it to be illegal. That's a big difference than the police having the authority to identify anyone for wearing a mask. Police need probable cause to identify you not just be suspicious of you.

North Carolina outlaws mask in public with certain exceptions. That being religious, health and certain celebrations

And its has enhancements for wearing one at protests.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

I know I get vilified on Sherdog as a but my freedom when it comes to being on camera but if I'm mowed down by some hit and run I'd like someone to be found and brought to justice for it. They increased cameras in San Jose because of the amount of hit and runs and thankfully sane San Jose people welcomed it in the hope it would stop people killing people.

That's pretty much why cars have license plates. There's nothing wrong with recording anything you can see from public but you can't force people to identify themselves. Even window tint laws are more for maintaining an unobstructed view than for the police to be able to identify you. They nees to be able to view the occupants during a traffic stop, for their safety, but they'd need probable cause to initiate the encounter.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

North Carolina outlaws mask in public with certain exceptions. That being religious, health and certain celebrations.

I didn't find the exact date that law was enacted but it seems like a pretty good example of people voting away their rights in the name of partisan politics.

 

[Andy Capp]

California Lawmakers Pass a Mask Ban for Law Enforcement

The legislation responds to immigration raids by federal agents who have shielded their identity. It heads to Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has not said whether he would sign it.

Federal agents stand guard on a road outside an agricultural facility where an immigration raid occurred in Camarillo, Calif.,

California state lawmakers passed a bill on Thursday that would bar most law enforcement officers from covering their faces while interacting with the public, a direct response to immigration raids by masked agents who have been difficult to identify.

California’s Legislature is believed to be the first to pass such a bill, though similar proposals have been introduced in other states and Congress.
The legislation now goes to Gov. Gavin Newsom, whose support is not certain. The legislation, passed by Democratic lawmakers who control both houses of the State Legislature, would apply to local and federal agencies, and questions have been raised about whether the state has the legal ability to regulate federal agents.

“We’re looking at the constitutionality of it,” Mr. Newsom said in July in an interview with the Tennessee Holler, a liberal news site.

The Democratic governor explained at the time that he understood that officers may need masks to protect their safety in limited circumstances, but that he thought it was “insane” how widespread the practice had become.
Supporters of the bill said on Thursday that the ban was even more urgent in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling earlier this week that allowed federal agents to resume immigration stops based on factors including ethnicity and if someone is speaking Spanish.

“We are in a truly disaster of a situation where we have secret police, effectively, on our streets,” said Scott Wiener, a Democratic state senator from San Francisco who wrote the bill.
“It’s tearing apart the fabric of society,” he added. “You have communities in Southern California where people are scared to go out on the street, they’re scared to go to work, they’re scared to bring their kids to school. And now is the time for us to say what the rules are.”

Mr. Wiener’s legislation would bar officers from wearing face coverings that shield their identities, such as the ski masks, balaclavas and neck gaiters that have become common in recent months during President Trump’s immigration crackdown. It does not apply to medical masks, clear plastic face shields, respirators, eye protection or other safety devices.

The bill would take effect in January if signed by Mr. Newsom. The governor has until Oct. 12 to act on the legislation.

Numerous lawmakers described fear and anxiety in California’s many Latino communities. Sasha Renée Pérez, a Democratic state senator from the Los Angeles area, said that one of her constituents was so afraid of immigration agents that he ran onto a freeway and died. She said that her own family members have begun carrying their passports at all times.

“That’s a very strange reality,” Ms. Pérez said.

Opponents of the California bill, including numerous law enforcement agencies, argued that officers must have the choice to cover their faces to protect themselves and their families from retaliation. Limiting the ways officers can keep themselves safe will make it harder to recruit people to work in law enforcement, they said.

“Bad guys wear masks because they don’t want to get caught. Good guys wear masks because they don’t want to get killed,” said Kelly Seyarto, a Republican state senator from Riverside County. “It’s that simple.”

He also argued that the state doesn’t have the power to regulate federal agencies, so that part of the bill is likely to be thrown out in court, and that the bill would wind up creating new civil liability for local officers because of how it would be enforced.

Mr. Wiener pointed to an opinion from the legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, who argued that the policy is constitutional because it does not only apply to federal agencies. State and local governments can require that federal agencies comply with general laws, Mr. Chemerinsky wrote, such as speed limits and restrictions on the use of force.

“There is no rule saying that just because you work with federal government, you’re exempt from all state law,” Mr. Wiener said.
The California State Senate passed the bill on Thursday, two days after the State Assembly approved the legislation.

Similar bills have been introduced in other states — including New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Michigan — but have not yet passed.
California lawmakers also passed a companion bill on Thursday that would require local, state and federal agents to wear identifying information such as their name or badge number. That bill was less controversial, and while some law enforcement agencies opposed it, the legislation received support from the major association representing local police officers in California.

So, what's your opinion of this?

 

[Hog-train]

So, what's your opinion of this?

It will not only not apply to them because ICE are feds, but it's also a lame attempt to try to hinder deportations at all costs. Also legitimately endangers agents.

These people and all the protesters are going after the wrong target. Stop attacking officers. They're just doing their job. Don't like the policy - protest the politicians who are setting the policy.

 

[Andy Capp]

I thought libs loved masks

I thought when you got banned you weren't supposed to be allowed back.

 

[avenue94]

It will not only not apply to them because ICE are feds, but it's also a lame attempt to try to hinder deportations at all costs. Also legitimately endangers agents.

These people and all the protesters are gong after the wrong target. Stop attacking officers. They're just doing their job. Don't like the policy - protest the politicians who are setting the policy.

Ah yes, the Nuremberg defense.

 

[Hog-train]

Ah yes, the Nuremberg defense.

Yea bullshit analogy. Because what these Ice agents are doing is the same exact thing they've been doing for decades - detaining illegals. Their methods are the same as they've always been - expedited removal, administrative warrants, etc. It's an arrest.

It's not this uniquely amoral thing like mass killing.

The only difference is WHO they're detaining and deporting now. And that who is dependent on the politicians.

People have a problem with that, protest them.

 

[avenue94]

Yea bullshit analogy. Because what these Ice agents are doing is the same exact thing they've been doing for decades - detaining illegals. Their methods are the same as they've always been - expedited removal, administrative warrants, etc. It's an arrest.

It's not this uniquely amoral thing like mass killing.

The only difference is WHO they're detaining and deporting now. And that who is dependent on the politicians.

People have a problem with that, protest them.

When was the last time we had roving raids that utterly gutted the 4th and 14th Amendment with blatant racial profiling?

There's line I wouldn't advise crossing when citizens criticize ICE agents, but at the end of the day, if you do something your fellow citizens don't like, don't surprised if they don't throw ticker tape parades for you.

 

[Andy Capp]

- I'm surprised theres not people pretending to be ICE and comiting crimes. Or even ICE agenst comting crimes in anonimity

They may be few in number but I'd bet they already are. And if they were, how would anyone know or be able to prove it?

 

[AWilder]

Good. We need less anonymous violence.