Masks of Mischief


AyameTaylor
Free Thinker
#1
(Note: As i could not find the archive I am going to type out the Article i just read here, and post a photo of the article taken by my web cam. If anyone can find this article and hot link it for validity it would be appreciated)

Quote:

Masks of Mischief

it should be obvious anyone donning a disguise is up to no good

It was Alberta Conservative MP Blake Richards who introduced the private members bill (C-309) to make wearing mask at violent protests a criminal offence.

While we owe some gratitude to Richards for his initiative, the question remains why i' taken so long to get this common sense reality accepted?

After Street protests in Quebec, and before that the Stanley cup disturbances in Vancouver, and before that the G20 riots in Toronto, it's alarmingly apparent that those planning to smash windows, Vandalize, intimidate or otherwise raise hell, cover their faces so they cannot easily be identified from videos.

It shouldn't be rocket science to realize that by making it illegal to wear masks at such protests, it is at least a bit of a deterrent to illegal or violent behavior.

As an amendment to the criminal code, Bill C-309's alternative title is the unwieldy "Preventing Persons from Concealing Their Identity during Riots and Unlawful Assemblies Act."

The weakness in the legislation is it seems to apply only to those committing illegal acts. To Wit: 'Every person who commits an offense... while wearing a mask or other disguise to conceal their identity without lawful excuse is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years."

Sorry Folks, but that isn't good enough. I'd argue that any person wearing a mask or disguise at any controversial protest or demonstration is up to no good, and can be assumed to be contemplating illegal behavior.

If someone carries a loaded gun while committing a crime it van be assumed he is willing to use it, hence the consequences for the person are graver when he is caught.

Police should not have to wait until a person wearing a mask at a protest does something illegal before arresting him. The mask itself is, or should be, evidence of mischief.

It not the same thing, but the wearing of the burka or veil or face covering is unacceptable in certain instances. Quebec and other places (Belgium, Holland) have ruled that people applying for government jobs, or making demands on Government services in hospitals,, schools, licensing offices and in courts. That as it should be.

It strikes most of us as lunacy when someone wearing a burka applies for a drivers license and refuses to reveal her face for a photograph- as happened in Florida. The "Lunacy" Doesn't refer to the burka wearer, but to the system that permits it.

During the Afghanistan's guerrilla war against Soviet occupation, western journalists revelled in stories of sneaking into the country disguised in a burka o join mujahedin fighters. It added a bit of glamour and derring-do to the adventure. Oddly some burka-wearing zealots, who raise a fuss about laws against the garment, turn out to be women not raied under Islam, but who've converted and (Mistakenly) think face covering is a religious rather than cultural requirement.

There'll be controversy when (if at some future demonstration or Brouhaha, police arrest people wearing masks before they've committed an illegal act. Inevitably, some will test or provoke the system. Just to see what happens.

If so-sobeit.

Lets see if the courts will accept that wearing a mask at a protest is an indication of illegal intent, jast as carrying a loaded gun is.

-Peter Worthington (the Calgary Sun: Monday May 14, 2012.)


So, I think this guy is on crack. How can wearing a mask and expressing our freedom of speech with anonimity be a criminal offense. A LOT of people hold opinions based on touchy subjects but don't want their family's caught in the cross fire of that opinon expressed. Besides when did protesting become about WHO is there but WHY they are there?

Not all protests or Bruhaha's are violent, and in fact more often then not they don't become violent with out provocation!

So the Idea that Wearing a make at ANY "controversial Protest or Demonstration" SHOULD be a criminal offense and or a sign that we're up to mischief? Aren't ALL protest's Controversial by some standard? That's the point!

Just because someone is wearing a mask doesn't mean their going to swing a loaded gun around or toss Bricks in to windows, blow up cars or cause "Mischief" because if that was the case then every Police member attending the "Protests" of the G20 summit would be committing a CRIMINAL offense by that standard as they HAVE to wear "Protective Masks" over their faces and this makes them harder to identify via video as well.

Oh wait? Comparing a mask to a gun..... oh that's quaint.... even more quaint. Comparing a mask to a burka- Yes lets go back to the caveman standard of visualising the Burka (a relgious Choice symbol) and turn it in to a bad thing.

While agree it's ridiculous to attempt to get a driver's license photo and wear a burka, it doesn't make the Burka a bad symbol.

Wearing a mask to a protest mean's you don't want your name involved BUT you wish to express the opinions being made. WHICH IS IN OUR Rights and Freedoms.

We have the right to anonymous voting and a protest is showing our vote AGAINST something.

Smarten up Peter, your logic is flawed. (Or am I the only one who thinks this?)

Photo of Article
 
karrie
No Party Affiliation
#2
You are allowed to remain anonymous at legal protests. this only refers to concealing ones identity while breaking the law. Which I'm sure will be of concern to people breaking the law
 
AyameTaylor
Free Thinker
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by karrie View Post

You are allowed to remain anonymous at legal protests. this only refers to concealing ones identity while breaking the law. Which I'm sure will be of concern to people breaking the law

If you read the article through, the author pretty much states that is EXACTLY what should be done. ANYONE wearing a mask at ALL functions that garner the phrase Protest or Demostration should be arrested based on the concept that they are WILLING to cause mischife. Much like a person arrested with a loaded gun should be convicted with the INTENT to use said gun.
 
spaminator
+1
#4  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by AyameTaylor View Post

(Note: As i could not find the archive I am going to type out the Article i just read here, and post a photo of the article taken by my web cam. If anyone can find this article and hot link it for validity it would be appreciated)

So, I think this guy is on crack. How can wearing a mask and expressing our freedom of speech with anonimity be a criminal offense. A LOT of people hold opinions based on touchy subjects but don't want their family's caught in the cross fire of that opinon expressed. Besides when did protesting become about WHO is there but WHY they are there?

Not all protests or Bruhaha's are violent, and in fact more often then not they don't become violent with out provocation!

So the Idea that Wearing a make at ANY "controversial Protest or Demonstration" SHOULD be a criminal offense and or a sign that we're up to mischief? Aren't ALL protest's Controversial by some standard? That's the point!

Just because someone is wearing a mask doesn't mean their going to swing a loaded gun around or toss Bricks in to windows, blow up cars or cause "Mischief" because if that was the case then every Police member attending the "Protests" of the G20 summit would be committing a CRIMINAL offense by that standard as they HAVE to wear "Protective Masks" over their faces and this makes them harder to identify via video as well.

Oh wait? Comparing a mask to a gun..... oh that's quaint.... even more quaint. Comparing a mask to a burka- Yes lets go back to the caveman standard of visualising the Burka (a relgious Choice symbol) and turn it in to a bad thing.

While agree it's ridiculous to attempt to get a driver's license photo and wear a burka, it doesn't make the Burka a bad symbol.

Wearing a mask to a protest mean's you don't want your name involved BUT you wish to express the opinions being made. WHICH IS IN OUR Rights and Freedoms.

We have the right to anonymous voting and a protest is showing our vote AGAINST something.

Smarten up Peter, your logic is flawed. (Or am I the only one who thinks this?)

Photo of Article

you typed out all that? I would have died of old age.

Masks of mischief

It should be obvious that anyone donning a disguise is up to no good



By Peter Worthington ,QMI Agency First posted: Sunday, May 13, 2012 08:00 PM EDT



The 2010 G20 Summit in Toronto turns ugly as a black bloc riot damaged police cruisers and a number of retail locations in the city's financial district. (QMI Agency files)


Related Stories




  • Former Mountie backs riot mask ban
  • Tory MPs move to double penalty for masked rioters
  • Rioters get smile wiped off their masks

It was Alberta Conservative MP Blake Richards who introduced the private member’s bill (C-309) to make wearing a mask at violent protests a criminal offence.While we owe some gratitude to Richards for his initiative, the question remains why it’s taken so long to get this common sense reality accepted?
After street protests in Quebec, and before that the Stanley Cup disturbances in Vancouver, and before that the G20 riots in Toronto, it’s alarmingly apparent that those planning to smash windows, vandalize, intimidate and otherwise raise hell, cover their faces so they cannot easily be identified from videos.
It shouldn’t be rocket science to realize that by making it illegal to wear masks at such protests, it is at least a bit of a deterrent to illegal or violent behaviour.
As an amendment to the Criminal Code, Bill C-309’s alternative title is the unwieldy “Preventing Persons from Concealing Their Identity during Riots and Unlawful Assemblies Act.”
The weakness in the legislation is it seems to apply only to those committing illegal acts. To wit: “Every person who commits an offence ... while wearing a mask or other disguise to conceal their identity without lawful excuse is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.”
Sorry, folks, but that isn’t good enough. I’d argue that any person wearing a mask or disguise at any controversial protest or demonstration is up to no good, and can be assumed to be contemplating illegal behaviour.
If someone carries a loaded gun while committing a crime, it can be assumed he is willing to use it, hence consequences for the person are graver when he is caught.
Police should not have to wait until a person wearing a mask at a protest does something illegal before arresting him. The mask itself is, or should be, evidence of mischief.
It’s not the same thing, but the wearing of the burka or veil or face covering is unacceptable in certain instances. Quebec and other places (Belgium, Holland) have ruled that people applying for government jobs, or making demands on government services, must reveal their faces. In Quebec, the niqab and face coverings are banned for those receiving public services in hospitals, schools, licensing offices and in courts. That’s as it should be.
It strikes most of us as lunacy when someone wearing a burka applies for a driver’s licence and refuses to reveal her face for a photograph — as happened in Florida. The “lunacy” doesn’t refer to the burka wearer, but to the system that permits it.
During Afghanistan’s guerrilla war against Soviet occupation, western journalists revelled in stories of sneaking into the country disguised in a burka to join mujahedin fighters. It added a bit of glamour and derring-do to the adventure. Oddly, some burka-wearing zealots, who raise a fuss about laws against the garment, turn out to be women not raised under Islam, but who’ve converted and (mistakenly) think face covering is a religious rather than cultural requirement.
There’ll be controversy when (if) at some future demonstration or brouhaha, police arrest people wearing masks before they’ve committed an illegal act. Inevitably, some will test, or provoke the system. Just to see what happens.
If so — so be it.
Let’s see if the courts will accept that wearing a mask at a protest is an indication of illegal intent, just as carrying a loaded gun is.

Masks of mischief | Columnists | Opinion | Toronto Sun
Last edited by spaminator; May 16th, 2012 at 02:02 PM..
 
TenPenny
#5
The key is the phrase 'legal protest', which means that anyone wearing a mask in public can be arrested when some police officer decides that what you are doing constitutes an 'illegal protest'.

I guess these guys don't go snowmobiling much, we could have lots of people arrested for gathering in 'unauthorized groups' while riding snowmobiles.
 
AyameTaylor
Free Thinker
#6
Exactly. This guy must have some extreme control issues :3
 

Similar Threads

70
Why do the Police Need to Wear Masks
by Stretch | Apr 16th, 2009