America - The Official Thread

[Danoff]

Sounds like a plan, except it's still not about controversial opinions but safety threats...

Being allowed to wear masks and retain complete anonymity validates the most radical groups, be it KKK or Antifa, far too much for my liking.

Under what circumstances are you comfortable with someone wearing a face covering in public?

 

[Tornado]

Sounds like a plan, except it's still not about controversial opinions but safety threats...

Being allowed to wear masks and retain complete anonymity validates the most radical groups, be it KKK or Antifa, far too much for my liking.

"It validates those groups with radical opinions that I don't like, but I must insist once again that those opinions aren't the problem but safety"

 

[Carbonox]

So who gets to determine what views pose a threat and on what basis?

Well, groups with a known history of violence against non-protestors certainly fall into that category.

Under what circumstances are you comfortable with someone wearing a face covering in public?

I can't think of any at the moment. Do witnesses often cover their faces? They're some of the only people who have any sort of justifiable reason to do so, honestly.

For the matter, this is the only time I'll ever say anything that might be interpreted as remotely positive about Anjem Choudary - but even he dares speak up and expose his idiocy with his own name and hideous face. He could do with a revocation of his police protection, though.

 

[Scaff]

Well, groups with a known history of violence against non-protestors certainly fall into that category.

We already have laws to deal with that.

I can't think of any at the moment. Do witnesses often cover their faces? They're some of the only people who have any sort of justifiable reason to do so, honestly.

People sking, motorcyclist's, people who are cold and want to wrap up in a scarf, those who think masks stop pollution.

Point is many people wear them and criminalising it, in any circumstances, is open to abuse in a massive way.

For the matter, this is the only time I'll ever say anything that might be interpreted as remotely positive about Anjem Choudary - but even he dares speak up and expose his idiocy with his own name and hideous face. He could do with a revocation of his police protection, though.

Police protection? He's in jail.

 

[fatkrakr]

This has got to be the stupidest discussion to date in this thread. People are actually defending the right to wear a mask to a protest even though they know the only reason you wear a mask to a protest is so you can violate someone else's rights and commit crimes.
Your basically argue to not violate your right to violate my rights

 

[Scaff]

This has got to be the stupidest discussion to date in this thread. People are actually defending the right to wear a mask to a protest even though they know the only reason you wear a mask to a protest is so you can violate someone else's rights and commit crimes.
Your basically argue to not violate your right to violate my rights

The only reason?

You can't think of any others at all?

 

[fatkrakr]

sking, motorcyclist's, people who are cold and want to wrap up in a scarf, those who think masks stop pollution

Those are all great reason to wear a mask, but thats not why people wear them to protest now is it? Or are you really gonna try to argue that ignorant angle?

 

[Scaff]

Those are all great reason to wear a mask, but thats not why people wear them to protest now is it? Or are you really gonna try to argue that ignorant angle?

You should lay off the insults a little.

The fact remains that people can and do have reasons other than violence to wear masks when in a protest.

The most obvious being that of annonimity from reprisals, potentially from employers (who may object to the actions), from the police (it's certainly not unknown and blacklisting of protesters following the UK miners strike was common) and from opposing protesters (death treats and attacks occur on both sides of any heated protest).

However the single most fundamental reason is that it presumes intent and punishes action you may take.

 

[Tornado]

Those are all great reason to wear a mask, but thats not why people wear them to protest now is it?

Do they wear them so they can dump waste into the Great Lakes and not get caught? Would explain all of the confusion.

 

[fatkrakr]

The fact remains that people can and do have reasons other than violence to wear masks when in a protest.

The fact is people are wearing these mask to violate peoples rights and commit crimes. Not all, but even you must admit far to many do and if that means a law must be passed, well... We cant carry a lot of things with us that we use to be able to certain places because of a few bad people. Its already illegal to wear a mask into a businesses in most if not all states in the USA.

However the single most fundamental reason is that it presumes intent and punishes action you may take.

There is a million videos showing more than intent though.

 

[fatkrakr]

Do they wear them so they can dump waste into the Great Lakes and not get caught? Would explain all of the confusion.

Thanks for participating.

 

[Carbonox]

People sking, motorcyclist's, people who are cold and want to wrap up in a scarf, those who think masks stop pollution.

Point is many people wear them and criminalising it, in any circumstances, is open to abuse in a massive way.



Police protection? He's in jail.

If only ski masks were only used for their original purpose, eh? Another thing is that masks allow rioters committing vandalism to slither into the crowd of others who aren't, resulting in it being impossible to prove who were responsible because they all look the same. I can't think of many things more uncomfortable than the police being powerless against a violent crowd all because of a technicality.

Also, my mistake regarding Choudary, I must've forgotten. The thought of him getting jailed always felt quite distant.

 

[Tornado]

Thanks for participating.

You're shaking around the same Think of the Children schtick from the last page when Carbonox was trying to pretend it was his argument. Can we conclude that you would be in favor of the Chinese-style government response as well, since reducing protestor violence is the claimed goal?

 

[Danoff]

I can't think of any at the moment. Do witnesses often cover their faces? They're some of the only people who have any sort of justifiable reason to do so, honestly.

For the matter, this is the only time I'll ever say anything that might be interpreted as remotely positive about Anjem Choudary - but even he dares speak up and expose his idiocy with his own name and hideous face. He could do with a revocation of his police protection, though.

Lemme help you visualize why people might cover their faces in public.

 

[Scaff]

The fact is people are wearing these mask to violate peoples rights and commit crimes. Not all, but even you must admit far to many do and if that means a law must be passed, well... We cant carry a lot of things with us that we use to be able to certain places because of a few bad people. Its already illegal to wear a mask into a businesses in most if not all states in the USA.

Private property is a totally different thing, and quite frankly I don't care if people have carried out violent acts while wearing marks. They have also done the same while not wearing masks, and people have protested while wearing marks with trouble as well.

We already have laws to deal with civil unrest, criminalising people for face attire is simply not required.

Not to mention it would be almost impossible to enforce. Do you propose trying to search everyone before a protest? Do you propose sending the police into a crowd to try and arrest people the moment they don a mask?

There is a million videos showing more than intent though.

And laws to deal with them.

Not that it's even the same argument, you are talking about criminalising a potential action, nor one that has occurred.

 

[fatkrakr]

And laws to deal with them.

And pretty soon probably a law to deal with masked protesters. Unfortunate but new laws need to be made all the time to deal with changing times.

 

[Danoff]

And pretty soon probably a law to deal with masked protesters. Unfortunate but new laws need to be made all the time to deal with changing times.

Gonna need a constitutional convention for that - to overturn the very first right in the bill of rights.

 

[Scaff]

And pretty soon probably a law to deal with masked protesters. Unfortunate but new laws need to be made all the time to deal with changing times.

Will it apply to all that wear masks at a protest?

 

[fatkrakr]

Gonna need a constitutional convention for that - to overturn the very first right in the bill of rights.

Maybe.

Will it apply to all that wear masks at a protest?

The only good reason to wear a mask to a protest.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

Repeat that all you want

Ah go on then.

Sounds like a plan, except it's still not about controversial opinions but safety threats.

Again, saying "but safety threat - because I say so" doesn't elevate your opinions on what (certain) protestors say to some higher status. If it did then anyone could simply declare "danger!" to restrict the speech of anyone with views they don't like. It's not meaningful.

I'm sorry if you don't like me repeating myself - but you should probably ask yourself why multiple people have been repeating themselves at you. I guess everyone else is being immature too?

the only reason you wear a mask to a protest is so you can violate someone else's rights and commit crimes.

The only reason? You do realise that means you're saying that every person who has ever worn a mask to a protest has committed, or at least intended to commit, a crime................that's a remarkable claim, any evidence for that?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Don't forget mask-wearers who remain pretty-much identifiable while protesting peacefully against a state that doesn't respond in kind.

 

[fatkrakr]

The only reason? You do realise that means you're saying that every person who has ever worn a mask to a protest has committed, or at least intended to commit, a crime................that's a remarkable claim, any evidence for that?

Just the videos all over the internet from various protests.

 

[Danoff]

Maybe.

It is amazing what level of conceit people are able to achieve in the face of so many bright individuals that went before them. Countless people have died in the name of freedom of speech and religion, it is the cornerstone of America. I'd say it, more than anything else, is what defines this country. And you just... shrug your shoulders at the thought of burying it because some people broke some other laws. It shows disrespect for the hearts and minds that built what we have now.

Beyond that, victimless crimes are time and again the worst that we have - consistently causing ripple effects in the criminal justice system. Over and over they prove to be mistakes, both in terms of lapses in morality, and in terms of wasted financial and human resources.

 

[Imari]

Those who premeditate crimes, and cover their faces, and then go to a rally, allowed by the first amendment of the US constitution, they should be allowed to do what ever, and get away with it?

You don't see Republicans or Trump supporters covering their faces, unless they are trying defend themselves from the physical attacks by the radical left loons.

It was a joke. It's not actually feasible to arrest everyone with a face.

But I think you're ignoring the fact that there are already laws against people doing "whatever". What does a law against masks add?

Nice one shoehorning it into an us vs. them thing though. I take it you're still assuming that I'm a "radical left loon"?

 

[TRGTspecialist]

Just the videos all over the internet from various protests.

Not my job to back up your claims for you. Let's try again:

How about just evidence that everyone wearing a mask in that photo committed, or intended to commit, a crime. A tiny fraction of the amount of people you've painted over. Shouldn't be difficult at all.

 

[Imari]

The only good reason to wear a mask to a protest.

To protect yourself from those who would do you harm? Or to aid you in cracking heads?

 

[Tornado]

And pretty soon probably a law to deal with masked protesters.

Yeah, I'm sure Congress is going to get right on that.

 

[Carbonox]

Ah go on then.



Again, saying "but safety threat - because I say so" doesn't elevate your opinions on what (certain) protestors say to some higher status. If it did then anyone could simply declare "danger!" to restrict the speech of anyone with views they don't like. It's not meaningful.

I'm sorry if you don't like me repeating myself - but you should probably ask yourself why multiple people have been repeating themselves at you. I guess everyone else is being immature too?

Considering multiple others were able to express a wider variety of points rather than resort to repetition, I beg to differ.

 

[Scaff]

The only good reason to wear a mask to a protest.

And the goalposts have moved.

Now why do they have a good reason?

 

[Carbonox]

And the goalposts have moved.

Now why do they have a good reason?

I'm not the person being addressed, but I'll answer anyway: they're protective masks. I doubt any riot cop would want a sharp flagpole or pepper spray into their eyes if things escalate.