ANTIFA terrorists freak out over new bill proposed to ban masks

[Thinker101]

dude, can't make this shit up. these leftists fks are some of the stupidest people on the planet. Seriously, this fk thinks he can walk up to a teller with a mask on.

If you think pre-arresting people for crimes they might commit based on how they're dressed and where they are is ok, then you're an honest to goodness fascist.

what's your issue?

The respect of people's individual rights.

So for some reason your individual rights are more important than those of others.
antifa violence - Bing video

I'd like to see Antifa go back to their parents' basement as much as you would. But the fact remains that you can't (and shouldn't) be able to target people based on what they're wearing. That's all this is about. If they assault someone then they should be apprehended and charged accordingly.

Doesn't sound like anyone is "targeting" them, the proposed bill targets masks.

 

[jc456]

what?

are you truly this stupid?
you can't be?

why does a bank robber wear a mask?

what is the purpose of the mask then? can you honestly answer?

I highly doubt it, but I'll ask anyway.

And you don't get the point that someone walking into a bank with a mask on and doing a simple withdrawal or deposit to their account isn't a crime, is it? Nope. Arresting and charging someone for wearing something in a certain place is assuming you have precognition.

See my post above this one. Does it stand to reason that someone wearing a mask in a bank is there to rob it. Probably, yes. That's why armed guards are at banks, and will be on high alert to react if they see someone with a mask on.

Go ahead and walk into your bank with a mask on and see how that goes.

If a bank has a policy that no one can wear a mask in their establishment then that's fine. If you wear a mask in there with that policy in place then you reap what you sow. It's an entirely different ball game when we're talking about public spaces.

So you're saying we need a policy....isn't that the point of this thread? I can see a policy put in place, we certainly need one because there is a shortage of common sense.

respect and patriotism is missing as well. They wear masks so their parents can't see their child being an asswipe criminal.

Can't you see a CEO of a major corporation daughter swinging clubs at peaceful people and then the board of directors going..... well, you know, she gets those views somewhere. hmmmm maybe you should move on. Yep, I bet the parents taught them to conceal their faces for that very fear.

 

[jc456]

dude, can't make this shit up. these leftists fks are some of the stupidest people on the planet. Seriously, this fk thinks he can walk up to a teller with a mask on.

If you think pre-arresting people for crimes they might commit based on how they're dressed and where they are is ok, then you're an honest to goodness fascist.

what's your issue?

The respect of people's individual rights.

So for some reason your individual rights are more important than those of others.
antifa violence - Bing video

I'd like to see Antifa go back to their parents' basement as much as you would. But the fact remains that you can't (and shouldn't) be able to target people based on what they're wearing. That's all this is about. If they assault someone then they should be apprehended and charged accordingly.

how are you going to apprehend them if they have their faces covered? doh!!!!

kind of the point of the whole thing.

 

[Norman]

Disgusting that RWNJs are supporting and defending fascist. I've said it before and I'll say it agaim - the US kicked the ass of fascists in Europe and patriotic Americans will do it again on US soil.

Those are democrats...

Except maybe the black ones. To be sure I don't know what the black ones are.

 

[Some Guy]

And what does concealing your face have to do with assaulting people? The answer is nothing. My identity doesn't matter in the slightest if i'm not committing a crime. All this vaguely worded law does is target people based on a broad definition of a piece of attire combined with a broad definition of a certain activity.

I hate Antifa. I think they're ******* idiots. But they deserve to be able to protest at long as they're not assaulting people and committing crimes. If they commit an actual crime like assault or damaging property, then arrest and charge them for that.

Yes, but the mask makes it harder to pick them out of a line-up.

So you're pre-determining who's going to commit a crime.

Might as well just lock up all the black people cause i heard somewhere from someone that black people are gangbangers and therefore it stands to reason that this black person is probably a gangbanger. Let's not even wait until he actually commits a crime cause we all know he's going to, being a gangbanger and all.

It's government punishment based only on profiling, and that's so ******* wrong. The right wing complains endlessly about how the left blames white men for everything, and that sucks, doesn't it? You're doing the EXACT same thing here.

The appropriate plan of action is to profile that Antifa has a history of violence in their protests. So, step up a police presence where it stands to reason that Antifa will be. If someone commits a crime, take them down and charge them for the actual crime they committed, not the attire they're wearing before/while committing said crime.

And the need to wear a mask?

People wear masks on Halloween cause it's fun. People wear various articles of the same clothing to show solidarity.

I agree that Antifa should be looked at with a high level of scrunity based on their actions. But pre-arresting them for crimes not yet committed? Nope. Perhaps something added onto a charge when a crime is actually committed, like evading arrest via the mask or something like that. But as soon as we start pre-arresting people based on what they're wearing and where they are: that's real fascism.

i believe the law said anyone caught inciting violence or breaking the law WHILE WEARING A MASK got 2 years added to their sentence.

so they're not sitting around exchanging smores and singing campfire songs in a casper mask so just stop it.

I looked it up. There's two parts to it. Interference with protected rights and destroying buildings while "disguised."

The part about destroying property is a little clearer that the "Interference with protected rights" section. You're right, it basically says an added 2 years on top of whatever the sentence is for the actual offense. The part about Interference with protected rights is wildly vague. "Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, while in disguise, including while wearing a mask, injures, oppresses, threatens or intimidates any person.... shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both."

So i stand corrected on one point: it's not "pre-arresting" so to say, but i'll maintain that this could easily be used in that manner. What does "mask" mean? Is a bandanna a mask? Does covering one's mouth but not nose count as a mask? Does covering one's forehead and nose but not their mouth count as a mask? And what does "disguise" mean? Trench coat and rubber nose and glasses? Dressed in steampunk gear? What does "oppress" or "threaten" or "intimidate" mean in this context? If i stand in someone's way from walking on the sidewalk, am i oppressing them? Or intimidating them? If i'm just a big strong dude wearing a bandanna on my head and give someone a strong look, am i intimidating them?

There's so much potential for the misapplication of the law that it's silly. It's attempting to cover things that are already crimes, which is my point. If someone commits a crime, it doesn't matter what they're wearing, they get charged for the crime. And if they're wearing a mask and therefore get away, you can't really apply this proposed law anyway.

This is nothing but an attempt by an authoritarian politician to use the government to beat down his political opponents. It's a horrible thing when anyone does it, regardless of their jersey color.

 

[Some Guy]

If you think pre-arresting people for crimes they might commit based on how they're dressed and where they are is ok, then you're an honest to goodness fascist.

what's your issue?

The respect of people's individual rights.

So for some reason your individual rights are more important than those of others.
antifa violence - Bing video

I'd like to see Antifa go back to their parents' basement as much as you would. But the fact remains that you can't (and shouldn't) be able to target people based on what they're wearing. That's all this is about. If they assault someone then they should be apprehended and charged accordingly.

Doesn't sound like anyone is "targeting" them, the proposed bill targets masks.

They why is it called the "unmaking Antifa" proposal? Of course it's targeting them, explicitly.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

Disgusting that RWNJs are supporting and defending fascist. I've said it before and I'll say it agaim - the US kicked the ass of fascists in Europe and patriotic Americans will do it again on US soil.

^^^complains about fascists and terrorists concealing who they are. Shows hooded terrorists to prove point^^^

 

[jc456]

what's your issue?

The respect of people's individual rights.

So for some reason your individual rights are more important than those of others.
antifa violence - Bing video

I'd like to see Antifa go back to their parents' basement as much as you would. But the fact remains that you can't (and shouldn't) be able to target people based on what they're wearing. That's all this is about. If they assault someone then they should be apprehended and charged accordingly.

Doesn't sound like anyone is "targeting" them, the proposed bill targets masks.

They why is it called the "unmaking Antifa" proposal? Of course it's targeting them, explicitly.

unmaking or unmasking?

 

[iceberg]

Yes, but the mask makes it harder to pick them out of a line-up.

So you're pre-determining who's going to commit a crime.

Might as well just lock up all the black people cause i heard somewhere from someone that black people are gangbangers and therefore it stands to reason that this black person is probably a gangbanger. Let's not even wait until he actually commits a crime cause we all know he's going to, being a gangbanger and all.

It's government punishment based only on profiling, and that's so ******* wrong. The right wing complains endlessly about how the left blames white men for everything, and that sucks, doesn't it? You're doing the EXACT same thing here.

The appropriate plan of action is to profile that Antifa has a history of violence in their protests. So, step up a police presence where it stands to reason that Antifa will be. If someone commits a crime, take them down and charge them for the actual crime they committed, not the attire they're wearing before/while committing said crime.

And the need to wear a mask?

People wear masks on Halloween cause it's fun. People wear various articles of the same clothing to show solidarity.

I agree that Antifa should be looked at with a high level of scrunity based on their actions. But pre-arresting them for crimes not yet committed? Nope. Perhaps something added onto a charge when a crime is actually committed, like evading arrest via the mask or something like that. But as soon as we start pre-arresting people based on what they're wearing and where they are: that's real fascism.

i believe the law said anyone caught inciting violence or breaking the law WHILE WEARING A MASK got 2 years added to their sentence.

so they're not sitting around exchanging smores and singing campfire songs in a casper mask so just stop it.

I looked it up. There's two parts to it. Interference with protected rights and destroying buildings while "disguised."

The part about destroying property is a little clearer that the "Interference with protected rights" section. You're right, it basically says an added 2 years on top of whatever the sentence is for the actual offense. The part about Interference with protected rights is wildly vague. "Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, while in disguise, including while wearing a mask, injures, oppresses, threatens or intimidates any person.... shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both."

So i stand corrected on one point: it's not "pre-arresting" so to say, but i'll maintain that this could easily be used in that manner. What does "mask" mean? Is a bandanna a mask? Does covering one's mouth but not nose count as a mask? Does covering one's forehead and nose but not their mouth count as a mask? And what does "disguise" mean? Trench coat and rubber nose and glasses? Dressed in steampunk gear? What does "oppress" or "threaten" or "intimidate" mean in this context? If i stand in someone's way from walking on the sidewalk, am i oppressing them? Or intimidating them? If i'm just a big strong dude wearing a bandanna on my head and give someone a strong look, am i intimidating them?

There's so much potential for the misapplication of the law that it's silly. It's attempting to cover things that are already crimes, which is my point. If someone commits a crime, it doesn't matter what they're wearing, they get charged for the crime. And if they're wearing a mask and therefore get away, you can't really apply this proposed law anyway.

This is nothing but an attempt by an authoritarian politician to use the government to beat down his political opponents. It's a horrible thing when anyone does it, regardless of their jersey color.

i understand what you're saying but this needs to end and people need to stop others from simply speaking or having a peaceful gathering. this is not the anti-fas call who can and who can't do this. it just isn't. they take it upon themselves to determine who has rights and who doesn't and that is not up to *us* at that level, certainly not through that process.

if the anti-fa was truly behind their actions, they wouldn't need masks.

 

[Thinker101]

The respect of people's individual rights.

So for some reason your individual rights are more important than those of others.
antifa violence - Bing video

I'd like to see Antifa go back to their parents' basement as much as you would. But the fact remains that you can't (and shouldn't) be able to target people based on what they're wearing. That's all this is about. If they assault someone then they should be apprehended and charged accordingly.

Doesn't sound like anyone is "targeting" them, the proposed bill targets masks.

They why is it called the "unmaking Antifa" proposal? Of course it's targeting them, explicitly.

unmaking or unmasking?

Hey, I'm good with either one.

 

[JBond]

It's an unconstitutional law. It bans a certain article of clothing purely because it's used by, but not exclusively by, a domestic terrorist group in America.

It's no different whatsoever than people who think that AR-15s should be banned because they're the "mass shooters' weapon of choice." Both laws are wrong, plain and simple.

I can see both sides. Theses morons running around in silly masks to avoid apprehension are hindering police work.

 

[jc456]

So for some reason your individual rights are more important than those of others.
antifa violence - Bing video

I'd like to see Antifa go back to their parents' basement as much as you would. But the fact remains that you can't (and shouldn't) be able to target people based on what they're wearing. That's all this is about. If they assault someone then they should be apprehended and charged accordingly.

Doesn't sound like anyone is "targeting" them, the proposed bill targets masks.

They why is it called the "unmaking Antifa" proposal? Of course it's targeting them, explicitly.

unmaking or unmasking?

Hey, I'm good with either one.

ooohhhk

 

[Some Guy]

So you're pre-determining who's going to commit a crime.

Might as well just lock up all the black people cause i heard somewhere from someone that black people are gangbangers and therefore it stands to reason that this black person is probably a gangbanger. Let's not even wait until he actually commits a crime cause we all know he's going to, being a gangbanger and all.

It's government punishment based only on profiling, and that's so ******* wrong. The right wing complains endlessly about how the left blames white men for everything, and that sucks, doesn't it? You're doing the EXACT same thing here.

The appropriate plan of action is to profile that Antifa has a history of violence in their protests. So, step up a police presence where it stands to reason that Antifa will be. If someone commits a crime, take them down and charge them for the actual crime they committed, not the attire they're wearing before/while committing said crime.

And the need to wear a mask?

People wear masks on Halloween cause it's fun. People wear various articles of the same clothing to show solidarity.

I agree that Antifa should be looked at with a high level of scrunity based on their actions. But pre-arresting them for crimes not yet committed? Nope. Perhaps something added onto a charge when a crime is actually committed, like evading arrest via the mask or something like that. But as soon as we start pre-arresting people based on what they're wearing and where they are: that's real fascism.

i believe the law said anyone caught inciting violence or breaking the law WHILE WEARING A MASK got 2 years added to their sentence.

so they're not sitting around exchanging smores and singing campfire songs in a casper mask so just stop it.

I looked it up. There's two parts to it. Interference with protected rights and destroying buildings while "disguised."

The part about destroying property is a little clearer that the "Interference with protected rights" section. You're right, it basically says an added 2 years on top of whatever the sentence is for the actual offense. The part about Interference with protected rights is wildly vague. "Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, while in disguise, including while wearing a mask, injures, oppresses, threatens or intimidates any person.... shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both."

So i stand corrected on one point: it's not "pre-arresting" so to say, but i'll maintain that this could easily be used in that manner. What does "mask" mean? Is a bandanna a mask? Does covering one's mouth but not nose count as a mask? Does covering one's forehead and nose but not their mouth count as a mask? And what does "disguise" mean? Trench coat and rubber nose and glasses? Dressed in steampunk gear? What does "oppress" or "threaten" or "intimidate" mean in this context? If i stand in someone's way from walking on the sidewalk, am i oppressing them? Or intimidating them? If i'm just a big strong dude wearing a bandanna on my head and give someone a strong look, am i intimidating them?

There's so much potential for the misapplication of the law that it's silly. It's attempting to cover things that are already crimes, which is my point. If someone commits a crime, it doesn't matter what they're wearing, they get charged for the crime. And if they're wearing a mask and therefore get away, you can't really apply this proposed law anyway.

This is nothing but an attempt by an authoritarian politician to use the government to beat down his political opponents. It's a horrible thing when anyone does it, regardless of their jersey color.

i understand what you're saying but this needs to end and people need to stop others from simply speaking or having a peaceful gathering. this is not the anti-fas call who can and who can't do this. it just isn't. they take it upon themselves to determine who has rights and who doesn't and that is not up to *us* at that level, certainly not through that process.

if the anti-fa was truly behind their actions, they wouldn't need masks.

I agree. I'm just not willing to use it as an excuse to bloat government and give them more tools to misapply force.

 

[jc456]

And the need to wear a mask?

People wear masks on Halloween cause it's fun. People wear various articles of the same clothing to show solidarity.

I agree that Antifa should be looked at with a high level of scrunity based on their actions. But pre-arresting them for crimes not yet committed? Nope. Perhaps something added onto a charge when a crime is actually committed, like evading arrest via the mask or something like that. But as soon as we start pre-arresting people based on what they're wearing and where they are: that's real fascism.

i believe the law said anyone caught inciting violence or breaking the law WHILE WEARING A MASK got 2 years added to their sentence.

so they're not sitting around exchanging smores and singing campfire songs in a casper mask so just stop it.

I looked it up. There's two parts to it. Interference with protected rights and destroying buildings while "disguised."

The part about destroying property is a little clearer that the "Interference with protected rights" section. You're right, it basically says an added 2 years on top of whatever the sentence is for the actual offense. The part about Interference with protected rights is wildly vague. "Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, while in disguise, including while wearing a mask, injures, oppresses, threatens or intimidates any person.... shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both."

So i stand corrected on one point: it's not "pre-arresting" so to say, but i'll maintain that this could easily be used in that manner. What does "mask" mean? Is a bandanna a mask? Does covering one's mouth but not nose count as a mask? Does covering one's forehead and nose but not their mouth count as a mask? And what does "disguise" mean? Trench coat and rubber nose and glasses? Dressed in steampunk gear? What does "oppress" or "threaten" or "intimidate" mean in this context? If i stand in someone's way from walking on the sidewalk, am i oppressing them? Or intimidating them? If i'm just a big strong dude wearing a bandanna on my head and give someone a strong look, am i intimidating them?

There's so much potential for the misapplication of the law that it's silly. It's attempting to cover things that are already crimes, which is my point. If someone commits a crime, it doesn't matter what they're wearing, they get charged for the crime. And if they're wearing a mask and therefore get away, you can't really apply this proposed law anyway.

This is nothing but an attempt by an authoritarian politician to use the government to beat down his political opponents. It's a horrible thing when anyone does it, regardless of their jersey color.

i understand what you're saying but this needs to end and people need to stop others from simply speaking or having a peaceful gathering. this is not the anti-fas call who can and who can't do this. it just isn't. they take it upon themselves to determine who has rights and who doesn't and that is not up to *us* at that level, certainly not through that process.

if the anti-fa was truly behind their actions, they wouldn't need masks.

I agree. I'm just not willing to use it as an excuse to bloat government and give them more tools to misapply force.

kind of tough to bring in offenders when you can't see their faces. unless of course you can? is that what you're saying?

 

[iceberg]

And the need to wear a mask?

People wear masks on Halloween cause it's fun. People wear various articles of the same clothing to show solidarity.

I agree that Antifa should be looked at with a high level of scrunity based on their actions. But pre-arresting them for crimes not yet committed? Nope. Perhaps something added onto a charge when a crime is actually committed, like evading arrest via the mask or something like that. But as soon as we start pre-arresting people based on what they're wearing and where they are: that's real fascism.

i believe the law said anyone caught inciting violence or breaking the law WHILE WEARING A MASK got 2 years added to their sentence.

so they're not sitting around exchanging smores and singing campfire songs in a casper mask so just stop it.

I looked it up. There's two parts to it. Interference with protected rights and destroying buildings while "disguised."

The part about destroying property is a little clearer that the "Interference with protected rights" section. You're right, it basically says an added 2 years on top of whatever the sentence is for the actual offense. The part about Interference with protected rights is wildly vague. "Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, while in disguise, including while wearing a mask, injures, oppresses, threatens or intimidates any person.... shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both."

So i stand corrected on one point: it's not "pre-arresting" so to say, but i'll maintain that this could easily be used in that manner. What does "mask" mean? Is a bandanna a mask? Does covering one's mouth but not nose count as a mask? Does covering one's forehead and nose but not their mouth count as a mask? And what does "disguise" mean? Trench coat and rubber nose and glasses? Dressed in steampunk gear? What does "oppress" or "threaten" or "intimidate" mean in this context? If i stand in someone's way from walking on the sidewalk, am i oppressing them? Or intimidating them? If i'm just a big strong dude wearing a bandanna on my head and give someone a strong look, am i intimidating them?

There's so much potential for the misapplication of the law that it's silly. It's attempting to cover things that are already crimes, which is my point. If someone commits a crime, it doesn't matter what they're wearing, they get charged for the crime. And if they're wearing a mask and therefore get away, you can't really apply this proposed law anyway.

This is nothing but an attempt by an authoritarian politician to use the government to beat down his political opponents. It's a horrible thing when anyone does it, regardless of their jersey color.

i understand what you're saying but this needs to end and people need to stop others from simply speaking or having a peaceful gathering. this is not the anti-fas call who can and who can't do this. it just isn't. they take it upon themselves to determine who has rights and who doesn't and that is not up to *us* at that level, certainly not through that process.

if the anti-fa was truly behind their actions, they wouldn't need masks.

I agree. I'm just not willing to use it as an excuse to bloat government and give them more tools to misapply force.

then come up with a better answer and suggest it.

 

[Some Guy]

People wear masks on Halloween cause it's fun. People wear various articles of the same clothing to show solidarity.

I agree that Antifa should be looked at with a high level of scrunity based on their actions. But pre-arresting them for crimes not yet committed? Nope. Perhaps something added onto a charge when a crime is actually committed, like evading arrest via the mask or something like that. But as soon as we start pre-arresting people based on what they're wearing and where they are: that's real fascism.

i believe the law said anyone caught inciting violence or breaking the law WHILE WEARING A MASK got 2 years added to their sentence.

so they're not sitting around exchanging smores and singing campfire songs in a casper mask so just stop it.

I looked it up. There's two parts to it. Interference with protected rights and destroying buildings while "disguised."

The part about destroying property is a little clearer that the "Interference with protected rights" section. You're right, it basically says an added 2 years on top of whatever the sentence is for the actual offense. The part about Interference with protected rights is wildly vague. "Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, while in disguise, including while wearing a mask, injures, oppresses, threatens or intimidates any person.... shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both."

So i stand corrected on one point: it's not "pre-arresting" so to say, but i'll maintain that this could easily be used in that manner. What does "mask" mean? Is a bandanna a mask? Does covering one's mouth but not nose count as a mask? Does covering one's forehead and nose but not their mouth count as a mask? And what does "disguise" mean? Trench coat and rubber nose and glasses? Dressed in steampunk gear? What does "oppress" or "threaten" or "intimidate" mean in this context? If i stand in someone's way from walking on the sidewalk, am i oppressing them? Or intimidating them? If i'm just a big strong dude wearing a bandanna on my head and give someone a strong look, am i intimidating them?

There's so much potential for the misapplication of the law that it's silly. It's attempting to cover things that are already crimes, which is my point. If someone commits a crime, it doesn't matter what they're wearing, they get charged for the crime. And if they're wearing a mask and therefore get away, you can't really apply this proposed law anyway.

This is nothing but an attempt by an authoritarian politician to use the government to beat down his political opponents. It's a horrible thing when anyone does it, regardless of their jersey color.

i understand what you're saying but this needs to end and people need to stop others from simply speaking or having a peaceful gathering. this is not the anti-fas call who can and who can't do this. it just isn't. they take it upon themselves to determine who has rights and who doesn't and that is not up to *us* at that level, certainly not through that process.

if the anti-fa was truly behind their actions, they wouldn't need masks.

I agree. I'm just not willing to use it as an excuse to bloat government and give them more tools to misapply force.

kind of tough to bring in offenders when you can't see their faces. unless of course you can? is that what you're saying?

The law doesn't actually say anything preemptive. It requires the person to be apprehended before the stiffer penalty can be applied. so even if it passed, it doesn't do anything to get the mask off a motivated person.

It's basically exactly the same as a proposed "assault weapons" ban that would propose to keep assault weapons out of someone's hands. It simply won't work as intended, and all it would do is give the government more immoral power to wield against it's citizens.

 

[Some Guy]

People wear masks on Halloween cause it's fun. People wear various articles of the same clothing to show solidarity.

I agree that Antifa should be looked at with a high level of scrunity based on their actions. But pre-arresting them for crimes not yet committed? Nope. Perhaps something added onto a charge when a crime is actually committed, like evading arrest via the mask or something like that. But as soon as we start pre-arresting people based on what they're wearing and where they are: that's real fascism.

i believe the law said anyone caught inciting violence or breaking the law WHILE WEARING A MASK got 2 years added to their sentence.

so they're not sitting around exchanging smores and singing campfire songs in a casper mask so just stop it.

I looked it up. There's two parts to it. Interference with protected rights and destroying buildings while "disguised."

The part about destroying property is a little clearer that the "Interference with protected rights" section. You're right, it basically says an added 2 years on top of whatever the sentence is for the actual offense. The part about Interference with protected rights is wildly vague. "Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, while in disguise, including while wearing a mask, injures, oppresses, threatens or intimidates any person.... shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both."

So i stand corrected on one point: it's not "pre-arresting" so to say, but i'll maintain that this could easily be used in that manner. What does "mask" mean? Is a bandanna a mask? Does covering one's mouth but not nose count as a mask? Does covering one's forehead and nose but not their mouth count as a mask? And what does "disguise" mean? Trench coat and rubber nose and glasses? Dressed in steampunk gear? What does "oppress" or "threaten" or "intimidate" mean in this context? If i stand in someone's way from walking on the sidewalk, am i oppressing them? Or intimidating them? If i'm just a big strong dude wearing a bandanna on my head and give someone a strong look, am i intimidating them?

There's so much potential for the misapplication of the law that it's silly. It's attempting to cover things that are already crimes, which is my point. If someone commits a crime, it doesn't matter what they're wearing, they get charged for the crime. And if they're wearing a mask and therefore get away, you can't really apply this proposed law anyway.

This is nothing but an attempt by an authoritarian politician to use the government to beat down his political opponents. It's a horrible thing when anyone does it, regardless of their jersey color.

i understand what you're saying but this needs to end and people need to stop others from simply speaking or having a peaceful gathering. this is not the anti-fas call who can and who can't do this. it just isn't. they take it upon themselves to determine who has rights and who doesn't and that is not up to *us* at that level, certainly not through that process.

if the anti-fa was truly behind their actions, they wouldn't need masks.

I agree. I'm just not willing to use it as an excuse to bloat government and give them more tools to misapply force.

then come up with a better answer and suggest it.

I already did. It's pretty easy by now to tell where Antifa will be and when. Step up police presence there, put some plain clothes officers there. And if someone from Antifa commits a crime, arrest them.

Antifa has thrived in areas where the local government (or school) leaders aren't interested in stopping them though. Look at Ben Shapiro's visit to Berkeley. Antifa wasn't much of an issue because the school actually allowed police officers to police. It's where mayors or presidents of schools tell their officers to stand down and let the protests happen because the protests support their own political agenda. I think we should all know by now that the government doesn't mind letting some people suffer or die as long as it's in service of their greater agenda.

 

[jc456]

i believe the law said anyone caught inciting violence or breaking the law WHILE WEARING A MASK got 2 years added to their sentence.

so they're not sitting around exchanging smores and singing campfire songs in a casper mask so just stop it.

I looked it up. There's two parts to it. Interference with protected rights and destroying buildings while "disguised."

The part about destroying property is a little clearer that the "Interference with protected rights" section. You're right, it basically says an added 2 years on top of whatever the sentence is for the actual offense. The part about Interference with protected rights is wildly vague. "Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, while in disguise, including while wearing a mask, injures, oppresses, threatens or intimidates any person.... shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both."

So i stand corrected on one point: it's not "pre-arresting" so to say, but i'll maintain that this could easily be used in that manner. What does "mask" mean? Is a bandanna a mask? Does covering one's mouth but not nose count as a mask? Does covering one's forehead and nose but not their mouth count as a mask? And what does "disguise" mean? Trench coat and rubber nose and glasses? Dressed in steampunk gear? What does "oppress" or "threaten" or "intimidate" mean in this context? If i stand in someone's way from walking on the sidewalk, am i oppressing them? Or intimidating them? If i'm just a big strong dude wearing a bandanna on my head and give someone a strong look, am i intimidating them?

There's so much potential for the misapplication of the law that it's silly. It's attempting to cover things that are already crimes, which is my point. If someone commits a crime, it doesn't matter what they're wearing, they get charged for the crime. And if they're wearing a mask and therefore get away, you can't really apply this proposed law anyway.

This is nothing but an attempt by an authoritarian politician to use the government to beat down his political opponents. It's a horrible thing when anyone does it, regardless of their jersey color.

i understand what you're saying but this needs to end and people need to stop others from simply speaking or having a peaceful gathering. this is not the anti-fas call who can and who can't do this. it just isn't. they take it upon themselves to determine who has rights and who doesn't and that is not up to *us* at that level, certainly not through that process.

if the anti-fa was truly behind their actions, they wouldn't need masks.

I agree. I'm just not willing to use it as an excuse to bloat government and give them more tools to misapply force.

kind of tough to bring in offenders when you can't see their faces. unless of course you can? is that what you're saying?

The law doesn't actually say anything preemptive. It requires the person to be apprehended before the stiffer penalty can be applied. so even if it passed, it doesn't do anything to get the mask off a motivated person.

It's basically exactly the same as a proposed "assault weapons" ban that would propose to keep assault weapons out of someone's hands. It simply won't work as intended, and all it would do is give the government more immoral power to wield against it's citizens.

well sure it can work. if a group of people are assembled and a bunch of masked antifa's show up, they can arrest them all. sounds fair to me. wooo hooo.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Let them wear their masks.....just don’t give the rest of US shit when masked people are profiles and met with grave suspicion.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

And what does concealing your face have to do with assaulting people? The answer is nothing. My identity doesn't matter in the slightest if i'm not committing a crime. All this vaguely worded law does is target people based on a broad definition of a piece of attire combined with a broad definition of a certain activity.

I hate Antifa. I think they're ******* idiots. But they deserve to be able to protest at long as they're not assaulting people and committing crimes. If they commit an actual crime like assault or damaging property, then arrest and charge them for that.

Yes, but the mask makes it harder to pick them out of a line-up.

So you're pre-determining who's going to commit a crime.

Might as well just lock up all the black people cause i heard somewhere from someone that black people are gangbangers and therefore it stands to reason that this black person is probably a gangbanger. Let's not even wait until he actually commits a crime cause we all know he's going to, being a gangbanger and all.

It's government punishment based only on profiling, and that's so ******* wrong. The right wing complains endlessly about how the left blames white men for everything, and that sucks, doesn't it? You're doing the EXACT same thing here.

The appropriate plan of action is to profile that Antifa has a history of violence in their protests. So, step up a police presence where it stands to reason that Antifa will be. If someone commits a crime, take them down and charge them for the actual crime they committed, not the attire they're wearing before/while committing said crime.

And the need to wear a mask?

People wear masks on Halloween cause it's fun. People wear various articles of the same clothing to show solidarity.

I agree that Antifa should be looked at with a high level of scrunity based on their actions. But pre-arresting them for crimes not yet committed? Nope. Perhaps something added onto a charge when a crime is actually committed, like evading arrest via the mask or something like that. But as soon as we start pre-arresting people based on what they're wearing and where they are: that's real fascism.

WTF, every day is not Halloween....and majority of them on Halloween are under 12.

You identified the issue. He’s under 12.