We need to do this too - Muslims MUST lift veil for police

[jimnyc]

How the hell are police supposed to do their jobs properly if they cannot even verify who the person is they are interviewing? Why can't a criminal then wear a veil and then hide behind it after committing a crime?

Muslims are complaining that it is a religious issue and that their privacy is being invaded. Boo Fucking Hoo. Police need to know what/who they are dealing with.


New Australian law to make Muslims lift veils

CANBERRA, Australia — Muslim women would have to remove veils and show their faces to police on request or risk a prison sentence under proposed new laws in Australia's most populous state that have drawn criticism as culturally insensitive.

A vigorous debate that the proposal has triggered reflects the cultural clashes being ignited by the growing influx of Muslim immigrants and the unease that visible symbols of Islam are causing in predominantly white Christian Australia since 1973 when the government relaxed its immigration policy.

Under the law proposed by the government of New South Wales, which includes Sydney, a woman who defies police by refusing to remove her face veil could be sentenced to a year in prison and fined 5,500 Australian dollars ($5,900).

The bill -- to be voted on by the state parliament in August -- has been condemned by civil libertarians and many Muslims as an overreaction to a traffic offense case involving a Muslim woman driver in a "niqab," or a veil that reveals only the eyes.

The government says the law would require motorists and criminal suspects to remove any head coverings so that police can identify them.

http://content.usatoday.net/dist/custom/gci/InsidePage.aspx?cId=azcentral&sParam=36929229.story

[fj1200]

Do they need probable cause?

[jimnyc]

Do they need probable cause?

In the course of police action. They very well can't proceed very far if they can't even identify the person they are dealing with. Even if pulled over for jaywalking, they should have to identify themselves the same way as everyone else.

The specific "probable cause" would have to be determined on a case by case basis, I assume. And short of outright harassment, I would give the police a TON of leeway to do their jobs and not have to worry about who's "behind the mask".

[Gunny]

How the hell are police supposed to do their jobs properly if they cannot even verify who the person is they are interviewing? Why can't a criminal then wear a veil and then hide behind it after committing a crime?

Muslims are complaining that it is a religious issue and that their privacy is being invaded. Boo Fucking Hoo. Police need to know what/who they are dealing with.



http://content.usatoday.net/dist/custom/gci/InsidePage.aspx?cId=azcentral&sParam=36929229.story

Been saying the same thing for years. Try being white or black and walking down the street at night wearing a ski mask and see what happens.

[Nukeman]

Do they need probable cause?

So tell me do they need probable cause to ask someone to remove a ski mask in order to see their face, for identification purposes, after being pulled over ??

[Gunny]

So tell me do they need probable cause to ask someone to remove a ski mask in order to see their face, for identification purposes, after being pulled over ??

I've been searching online for a replica pro wrestling mask to wear around from now on. I can just tell the police I'm from "parts unknown ...":laugh:

[fj1200]

So tell me do they need probable cause to ask someone to remove a ski mask in order to see their face, for identification purposes, after being pulled over ??

That would be in the course of some sort of offense.

[logroller]

That would be in the course of some sort of offense.

Well now you're "profiling" FJ-- CRIMINAL profiling.:beer:

[logroller]

So tell me do they need probable cause to ask someone to remove a ski mask in order to see their face, for identification purposes, after being pulled over ??

Nevermind the cash and guns in the bag-- that's not mine, I don't how that got in there! Hey this isn't my mask...:laugh2:

[Nukeman]

That would be in the course of some sort of offense.

And if you had read the article and subsequent follow up on the article you would note that is exactly the intent of the Aussie law. They would need to remove the scarf so the officer could identify them in the course of a trafic stop or other violation.

Tell ya what try walking down the street by the White house with a ski mask on right now, this week, and see if you get stopped... no offense just walking... Bet ya can't, yet if you put on a Burka your fine.... Hmmmm.. Why the double standard.. both obscure who you are, both hide your identity, ones OK the other is "strange" and needs investigating!!!!!

I'm sorry it is time for the Islamic faith to come out of the 14th century and join the rest of the world!!!!

[jimnyc]

And if you had read the article and subsequent follow up on the article you would note that is exactly the intent of the Aussie law. They would need to remove the scarf so the officer could identify them in the course of a trafic stop or other violation.

Tell ya what try walking down the street by the White house with a ski mask on right now, this week, and see if you get stopped... no offense just walking... Bet ya can't, yet if you put on a Burka your fine.... Hmmmm.. Why the double standard.. both obscure who you are, both hide your identity, ones OK the other is "strange" and needs investigating!!!!!

I'm sorry it is time for the Islamic faith to come out of the 14th century and join the rest of the world!!!!

Because we need to "bend" to accommodate the Shitslamic faith. We don't want to trample on their rights to wear their egg crates without probable cause.

Next thing you know, criminals will realize they can dress like these cockroaches and have anonymity to commit their crimes.

[Gunny]

Because we need to "bend" to accommodate the Shitslamic faith. We don't want to trample on their rights to wear their egg crates without probable cause.

Next thing you know, criminals will realize they can dress like these cockroaches and have anonymity to commit their crimes.

The only saving grace there is no self-respecting criminal would be caught dead in a get-up like that.

[fj1200]

And if you had read... you would note... They would need to remove the scarf so the officer could identify them in the course of a trafic stop or other violation.

I read, I noted, I stated it was in the course of an offense. :2up:


Why the double standard..

One is religious and one isn't. One has a reason to wear a Burka in July in DC just as one may have a reason to wear a ski mask in DC in February.

[Gunny]

I read, I noted, I stated it was in the course of an offense. :2up:



One is religious and one isn't. One has a reason to wear a Burka in July in DC just as one may have a reason to wear a ski mask in DC in February.

What does one being religious and one not have anything to do with the law in this Nation? Surely you aren't saying that in this "secular" Nation that "wasn't created based on religion" that a religious sect has more rights than people who wish to wear a ski mask for whatever reason?

Doesn't get much more hypocritical.

[fj1200]

What does one being religious and one not have anything to do with the law in this Nation? Surely you aren't saying that in this "secular" Nation that "wasn't created based on religion" that a religious sect has more rights than people who wish to wear a ski mask for whatever reason?

Doesn't get much more hypocritical.

Who says they have more rights? Wear a burka if it works for you, wear a ski mask if it works for you.

[Gunny]

Who says they have more rights? Wear a burka if it works for you, wear a ski mask if it works for you.

As usual, you completely skirt the point being made as well as not defending your "one is religious one is not statement". YOU made that distinction. No one else.

Why don't you try knocking off your dime-a-dozen avoid-the-issue-at-all costs attempted wordsmithing and try being honest for once? Or can you?

[fj1200]

As usual, you completely skirt the point being made as well as not defending your "one is religious one is not statement". YOU made that distinction. No one else.

Why don't you try knocking off your dime-a-dozen avoid-the-issue-at-all costs attempted wordsmithing and try being honest for once? Or can you?

How am I not being honest, I have no problem with them wearing a burka. You clearly have a problem with them exercising their religious freedoms.