America - The Official Thread
- Thread starter ///M-Spec
- 39,219 comments
- 1,749,998 views
- 2,801
- fatkrakr
You both and several other here act like this is some made up threat and that in the last few years these masked thugs havent been out terrorizing innocent people. Some of them even on their "side". How can you claim to be so committed to a cause and yet wouldnt dare show your face while supporting said cause? Probably because your cause is to cause trouble.
People have been wearing masks to protest probably sense the very first protest ever. I have never before heard of calls to stop it. Lately though people have been hiding behind these mask to cause trouble at protest, so if a law needs to be passed to protect people from these thugs then Im all for it.
You dont have the right to hide behind a mask and terrorize a community.
killerjimbag
(Banned)
- 4,018
- The Great White North
- abetterplaya
Sure they protect them. One is a law abiding officer, the other,a law breaking,using our/increasing our, tax dollars,causing my insurance rates to go up,putting people out of work, by burning down, smashing homes, their cars,buses,trash cans,police cars,business,looting, rioting,blocking ambulances, piece of trash, that if was met on the street, one on one, would probably resort to the fetal position like a baby real quick.
Balaclavas are also worn by security and military personnel whose identities need to be protected and remain anonymous for operational, counter-intelligence reasons, to allow them to participate in further under-cover operations or to prevent retaliation against them or their next of kin. The difference being one wears it to avoid arrest, detection to break the law,the other wears it to protect them self,their family and ultimately,YOU,to enforce the LAW. I have family in the military,and lots of friends who are cops. I tend to like these people, as they usually protect my freedom, my neighborhoods,parks,kids etc and some fought and died in wars to give everyone on here the right to be a 🤬 on the internet.
Cops are all bad guys,until an innocent, peace full bystander, gets pepper sprayed/punched by a thug wearing the same thing and a gas mask.It's all fun and games until you need one of them isn't it.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,011
- Mile High City
...to wear clothing of your choice. I wouldn't be so quick to throw away the fruits of their blood and sweat.
- 40,808
killerjimbag
(Banned)
- 4,018
- The Great White North
- abetterplaya
- 40,808
Ah. So those people peacefully protesting outside the White House went down to Missouri and rioted later that night (without masks, amusingly), then boarded a plane and flew to London (which, you should probably be made aware, is a different country in a different continent) and rioted there too?
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,552
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Once again we already have laws to deal with those that break the law.
I've not yet seen a valid argument to make it a crime to wear a mask on its own.
Oh and don't make assumptions about what i may or may not think about anyone.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,011
- Mile High City
I guess break time is over at night.Lots of balaclavas there. Yes they seem like a bunch of posers to me,they just don't strike me a the violent type. I could be wrong?
That's not a protest, it's a riot.
I'm not sure what rioters wearing masks while breaking the law have to do with protesters wearing masks while not breaking the law.
- 1,971
- Seattle, WA
Danoff
Premium
- 34,011
- Mile High City
I don't feel Ninjas were properly represented in your post, so here we go:
That's because a true ninja is never seen.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,499
- Texas
No, it's not.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
I don't disagree that many wear masks with the intent on causing trouble, but I'll still wager over 80% of those wearing masks are doing it conceal their identity because of their political stance. It's a similar situation to how the media was shocked there were so many Trump supporters (despite their 10-20% odds of Trump winning), and it was revealed that most Trump supporters didn't tell people they're Trump supporters for fear of being labeled. That's why they usually wear masks, out of fear of persecution from others.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
I don't feel Ninjas were properly represented in your post, so here we go:
There are 8 ninjas in that photograph but he isn't one of them.
killerjimbag
(Banned)
- 4,018
- The Great White North
- abetterplaya
I never said it was a crime,in Canada, unless your intending on committing a crime.I live in Canada,cold as hell and snowing like crazy now,lots of hats,toques,not so many face coverings,unless their not used to being cold.I wear a baseball hat and avoid going out unless I have too.Walk into a bank in Canada with your face covered with a balaclava,happy face,president Nixon mask on and see how that goes.It's not a crime right?I mean if you gotta cover your face because,well you can't be in sunlight,your afraid of blushing, it's part of your religion I get it. The Motorcycle issue, I ride and wish I had the damn thing off as soon as I stop,and I wear an open face helmet.
But it is a crime if you wear it during any of these these pleasantries.
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/marni-soupcoff-dont-jail-people-for-wearing-a-mask
Plus various States have different laws about concealing your face.
If someone wants to go to some States and try their luck,here ya go.
http://www.anapsid.org/cnd/mcs/maskcodes.html
.I wasn't making an assumption,sorry if you took it that way, I'm pretty sure I said everyone. It wasn't directed at you,it was meant in general as to the peolpe reading it,I'm pretty sure more than 1 person read it.I don't make a habit of braking the law,and the first person ever to break into my house or tresspass on my property would probably suffer the consequences of
A) 220 pounds of dogs,their actually really nice once you get to know them.
B) 6'4" 235 pounds of my son,he's nice,usually.
C) The red headed she devil being my wife.
A,and B would be the wise choice,for about 10 minutes,you don't want C,trust me.
Because d,e,f,g, have to be unlocked,loaded and cleaned,I hate doing that,plus they (police) get a little upset if you use them in the city limits and buckshot is a bitch to pull out of walls,it sprays everywhere.
- 1,433
- Northern Ireland
Fair enough - a shame really everyone else's points weren't taken on board either then, considering they put the extra effort in..............
To be honest yes, I do think the 'threat' that exists in your head - that all masked protestors are or intend to be criminals - is made up.
But for the third time, glad to be proven wrong with some evidence........
Is it only if you're "so committed" to a cause or does supporting one at all make masking yourself suspicious?
- 3,308
- Kentucky
- Chrunch_Houston
Yes, speaking anonymously in a YouTube video is exactly the same as wearing a mask and smashing a Starbucks.
Oh, wait, Perhaps you were just being sarcastic.When I started this mess three pages ago, I was referring specifically to the videos posted by @RESHIRAM5 in this post. I was not talking about the lawn guy, or the someone riding a motorcycle. I was speaking about those showing up to "protests" with their faces covered.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,430
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
Yup, no masks at all:
Although, I guess to be fair, it is a hood. So maybe this:
Wanting to ban people wearing masks because they might commit a crime is on the exact same level of daftness as wanting to ban guns because someone might commit a crime with them. A mask, or any face covering, isn't a threat by itself, just as a gun by itself isn't a threat. When you violate someone's right with either, it becomes illegal, but the same would be said if I violated your rights with a toaster, a plastic cup, a dull pencil, or a fluffy puppy.
Hell I wear a mask for days on end because SLC is so polluted I have a hard time breathing and it's not 30 degrees out. By your logic I'm a criminal.
- 3,308
- Kentucky
- Chrunch_Houston
Joey D
Premium
- 47,430
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
They protested here for days, in fact they protest here a lot because our government is so inept in Utah. I didn't attend them but working next to the the capitol I have little choice but to walk through them and thus be associated with them.
And given your recent comments I'm guessing those Trump supporters I posted a picture of should be arrested as well since you know they are protesting wearing a mask...those criminals!
killerjimbag
(Banned)
- 4,018
- The Great White North
- abetterplaya
Here let me post this for the last time,in some States it clearly is a crime to wear a mask. It clearly depends on the StateYup, no masks at all:
Although, I guess to be fair, it is a hood. So maybe this:
Wanting to ban people wearing masks because they might commit a crime is on the exact same level of daftness as wanting to ban guns because someone might commit a crime with them. A mask, or any face covering, isn't a threat by itself, just as a gun by itself isn't a threat. When you violate someone's right with either, it becomes illegal, but the same would be said if I violated your rights with a toaster, a plastic cup, a dull pencil, or a fluffy puppy.
Hell I wear a mask for days on end because SLC is so polluted I have a hard time breathing and it's not 30 degrees out. By your logic I'm a criminal.
As the late great Don Merideth would sing,turn out the lights,the party's over.
Any more debate?Or should I quote each State?
WEST VIRGINIA 61-6-22.
Wearing masks, hoods or face coverings.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, no person, whether in a motor vehicle or otherwise, while wearing any mask, hood or device whereby any portion of the face is so covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, may:
(1) Come into or appear upon any walk, alley, street, road, highway or other thoroughfare dedicated to public use;
(2) Come into or appear in any trading area, concourse, waiting room, lobby or foyer open to, used by or frequented by the general public;
(3) Come into or appear upon or within any of the grounds or buildings owned, leased, maintained or operated by the state or any political subdivision thereof;
(4) Ask, request, or demand entrance or admission to the premises, enclosure, dwelling or place of business of any other person within this state; or
(5) Attend or participate in any meeting upon private property of another unless written permission for such meeting has first been obtained from the owner or occupant thereof.
(b) The provisions of this section do not apply to any person:
(1) Under sixteen years of age;
(2) Wearing a traditional holiday costume;
(3) Engaged in a trade or employment where a mask, hood or device is worn for the purpose of ensuring the physical safety of the wearer;
(4) Using a mask, hood or device in theatrical productions, including use in mardi gras celebrations or similar masquerade balls;
(5) Wearing a mask, hood or device prescribed for civil defense drills, exercises or emergencies; or
(6) Wearing a mask, hood or device for the sole purpose of protection from the elements or while participating in a winter sport.
(c) Any person who violates any provision of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned in the county jail not more than one year, or both fined and imprisoned
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (Washington, D.C.)
§ 22-3312.03. Wearing hoods or masks.
(a) No person or persons over 16 years of age, while wearing any mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, shall:
(1) Enter upon, be, or appear upon any lane, walk, alley, street, road highway, or other public way in the District of Columbia;
(2) Enter upon, be, or appear upon or within the public property of the District of Columbia; or
(3) Hold any manner of meeting or demonstration.
(b) The provisions of subsection (a) of this section apply only if the person was wearing the hood, mask, or other device:
(1) With the intent to deprive any person or class of persons of equal protection of the law or of equal privileges and immunities under the law, or for the purpose of preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of the United States or the District of Columbia from giving or securing for all persons within the District of Columbia equal protection of the law;
(2) With the intent, by force or threat of force, to injure, intimidate, or interfere with any person because of his or her exercise of any right secured by federal or District of Columbia laws, or to intimidate any person or any class of persons from exercising any right secured by federal or District of Columbia laws;
(3) With the intent to intimidate, threaten, abuse, or harass any other person;
(4) With the intent to cause another person to fear for his or her personal safety, or, where it is probable that reasonable persons will be put in fear for their personal safety by the defendant's actions, with reckless disregard for that probability; or
(5) While engaged in conduct prohibited by civil or criminal law, with the intent of avoiding identification.
- 24,617
- Anoka, MN
Just because something is the law doesn't mean it should be a law.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,430
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
I'm not sure what you posted has to do with what I said. I said wanting to ban masks because someone might want to commit a crime is daft. I said that a mask isn't a threat. I said I wear a mask frequently and therefore must make me a criminal.
I never said anything about current laws, but since you brought that up I'm guessing they wouldn't stand up in court very well since pretty much anyone could claim "protection from the elements" and therefore not in violation of an unconstitutional law. Also those two laws you posted seem to say you can't use a mask to commit a crime, on the same token I can't use a banana to commit a crime either.
- 2,421
- Kentucky, USA
- James_Page
- PageyTheSquid
Speaking from personal experience, yes they do. With crowd control we generally use what our department calls MK 9, it is basically a fire extinguisher filled with OC (pepper spray) and it fogs a crowd. Using it outside means wind can blow it back in our faces and on our skin, having our faces covered prevents it from contacing and reacting with our faces. That isn't the only reason riot police cover their faces, but it certainly helps.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
This whole mask thing is funny, cause it comes off more liberal than, the users who are claiming those arguing for people to be allowed to wear them as liberals. Let me dumb it down. It's the same ideal as those wanting to ban guns, cause the possibility of someone perpetrating a crime exists if they own them. That's just one argument in gun bans. So how is this different? "If we bans masks, people are less likely to protest and turn them into riots"
Which I'll remind you is also silly and naive, cause if they were going to commit a crime like a riot and stealing, they would probably not have any problem breaking the law of wearing a mask.
Which I'll remind you is also silly and naive, cause if they were going to commit a crime like a riot and stealing, they would probably not have any problem breaking the law of wearing a mask.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
I quite like the guy with the plastic wrap over his goggles and the rest of his face exposed. The state can see him, but he can't see them.
- 13,882
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Certainly, but when you're talking about making law that's naturally going to apply to any similar protests or events in the future. That's not specific any more.
So when you write things like "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", that comes off as pretty biased. The purpose of banning masks would be to curtail all people inappropriately protesting, regardless of their political affiliation or lack thereof. In your opinion, a ban on masks at protests would be a targeted ban, which is wholly against the idea of equality that America tends to hold in fairly high regard.
If you'd like to say that you'd support a ban on masks regardless of whether the protesters were Democrat or Republican, then say that.
I doubt anyone would want a sharp flagpole or pepper spray if things escalate. The police have batons and pepper spray too.
That's defense against riot sprays. They most affect the eyes, so covering and sealing them well can help. Admittedly, he's not doing it very well and he's still going to get messed up if he gets hit in the face, but that's the idea behind it at least.
And you accuse others of being violent? Hah!
