In response to immigration raids by masked federal officers in Los Angeles and across the nation, two California lawmakers on Monday proposed a new state law to ban members of law enforcement from concealing their faces while on the job.
The bill would make it a misdemeanor for local, state and federal law enforcement officers to cover their faces with some exceptions, and also encourage them to wear a form of identification on their uniform.
“We’re really at risk of having, effectively, secret police in this country,” said state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), co-author of the bill.
I dunno why he had to go with a Star wars reference. Nazi brownshirts were literally called stormtroopers. Seems a more apt comparison.
Badges should come with a QR code, linked to a government database, profiling official officers. Warrants should also get a QR code, with a justice’s signature, reasoning, and a short list of what activities are permitted by the warrant. The judicial branch controls their own database for the warrants and justices, while the state or federal governments have their own databases for their respective officers.
Also, should these conceptual reforms happen, people should be able to immediately send a copy of the presented warrant and badges to their lawyers and agencies via a QR snapshot.
Why not just… uhhh. Ban ICE.
I’m required to wear a photo id visible at all times while I’m at work as a cable lineman. Wear all the silly hats you want, long as your badge/Id visible and presented when asked.
Wild these papers please people can’t figure it out for themselves.
I always see these news of proposals. Wake me up when these proposals are have actually been legislated.
In theory, anyone could forge a badge, claim to be ice, and literally kidnap people into sex trafficking or slavery and we wouldnt find out for quite a long time. That’s in addition to the already dangerous prospect of having unidentifiable police who are unaccountable.
There should be passed ASAP. Should become a national law too but not gonna happen with this government. We need to pass this on a local and state level as much as possible.
Also many people may not necessarily know how a real ICE badge looks like. And fake badges are available for collectors and cosplayers alike. Also most people will not fully check or examine a badge or insignia, meaning by the time they realize it is fake it will be too late.
Isn’t this already happening?
mmmm People whom are know to hang out on an island full of under age sex trafficed girls, are now in power of the government. Oh of course it is happening, But its no longer limited to the island, and its government approved.
You should not be under any obligation to assume or respect any proposed authority by a person unwilling to show you their face.
This sentence should not need to be spoken.
You should not be under any obligation to assume or respect any proposed authority by a person unwilling to show you their face.
Explaining this to the guy with a badge and a mask shoving a gun in my face.
He’s screaming and cocking the weapon, while a few of his friends approach me with tasers and clubs, but I’m just going to stand here waving a copy of John Locke’s Social Contract while explaining that I am a Free Man On The Land and do not make joinder.
Conversely, I should not be required to show my face to anyone if I’m not trying to assert authority over them. Being a public servant means having a public identity, being a private citizen means you have the freedom to make choices about what you share.
I agree, but there’s a difference between oversight and law enforcement there. If I am telling someone they need to justify restrictions in a behavior plan, that’s different than something for which someone else may be arrested. In the former example, I think they should be able to wear an N95 for health reasons.
Encourage them to wear identification? ENCOURAGE them?!? How that is not and has not always been mandatory is beyond me.
It’s a state legislature attempting to regulate a federal agency. Even if it manages to make it to the Governor’s desk, you know Newsom will veto it, because he’s a cowardly little toad man who has never found a boat he was above licking. And if, by some miracle it survives the legislature and Newsom discovers his spine, the federal courts will bat this away overnight.
All that is assuming Silicon Valley doesn’t have enough votes in the state house to smoother this proposal in committee.
Why even worry about the language of a DOA bill? You’re not stopping ICE from Sacramento. Not with the current crop of liberal dorks and techbro shills running things.
The mask part does not say encourage so I don’t see why the id part would be different.
Id would be trivial to fake. So either way it wouldn’t solve much without a hefty penalty for using a fake one.
I can think of a few forms of encouragement.
Good. Let the cowards face their victims
“Oh? You want to “detain” my student/employee/friend/partner? You have to prove you’re a law enforcement official and are legally-allowed to.”
If that sounds unreasonable to anyone… you’re the extremist.
Problem is they aren’t required to prove it to you - some witness - unless it’s your child that’s involved, and they can take their sweet time providing proof to the person being detained as well, waiting until they’ve already thrown you to the ground and cuffed you.
It’s totally reasonable, but it’ll probably also get you deported to El Salvador. Or at the very least beat.
Wearing masks isn’t the issue, it’s the lack of warrants and identification.
A face can be seen, recognized and recorded from a distance. Video doesn’t usually do any good with badges and other identification but cops and criminals both - or one and the same - risk being identified if they don’t have masks.
Yep. There’s a non-zero chance that maga civilians are dressing tactical and kidnapping people they believe shouldn’t be here. I hope not, but there’s really no way to know either way at this point.
I think it should be assumed, just because.
This should also include identification on vehicles.
None of this unmarked pickup truck or white van bullshit.
This includes the “ghost letter” bullshit. They claim it’s so they can blend in and catch violations as they happen. Bro everyone can see a cop driving from a mile away by the way they drive, the reinforced grill, the slightly beefier trim to hide the installed lights, etc.
I honestly wouldn’t know. I live in Canada and police vehicles here are incredibly obvious and marked. Some unmarked vehicles do exist, but they are for detectives and people going after more serious crimes and dont care about parking tickets and jaywalkers.
Oh you mean pre-crime, we absolutely need to violate your rights to prevent pre-crime.
This has to pass. And other states need to follow suit. It’s ridiculous any law enforcement can hide who they are unless they’re undercover.
The thin blue line is how much responsibility they’re willing to accept. And it’s a very very thin line right now.
Has an undercover cop ever really benefited the people?
I’d love to be corrected on this, but when it comes to cops, I’ma doubt that real fucking fast.
Well, germany was pretty fond of one if their undercover cops for a few years.
It went badly though.
Doesn’t matter if it passes. The president doesn’t abide by the law, so they don’t need to either.
Plus, who is going to enforce it, cops? Lol
If this law is enacted, the Supreme Court will say that states can’t frustrate the operations of federal agents with these sorts of laws. Chief Justice Roberts will write the opinion and compare it to giving states the power to ban bulletproof vests from being worn by federal law enforcement and call it “a step from anarchy”. Clarence Thomas will then write a concurring opinion saying that federal agents acting on orders from the president should actually be immune for any type of civil or criminal liability for any of their actions, lawful or not.
Then, when a Democratic president takes office the court will walk it back and say “well, actually, there’s this exception, and this exception, and that exception…”
Then, when a Democratic president takes office the court will walk it back and say “well, actually, there’s this exception, and this exception, and that exception…”
Or they won’t, because the Dem president will simply “not abuse such powers” due to their “adherence to decorum”.
The SC made the president god-king while Biden was in office.
Stop hogging the time machine, give someone else a chance to document inevitable future
Removed by mod
Good… personal freedom and all that
