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.

  • tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I get it for that balaclava stuff, which doesn’t have a lot of functional use unless it’s very cold.

    But cops are gonna sometimes need to wear a gas mask, and that’s gonna obscure features.

    • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      19 minutes ago

      Cold does not apply. This is california. Park rangers might sometimes need to go places where you need more than a light jacket, but no other cop ever will.

      A cop does not ever need a gas mask.

      They can simply choose to not deploy gas.

      They’re not running into fucking burning buildings. Nobody else uses gas munitions. Gas is a terror weapon.

      Edit: also coast guard. Pacific can get pretty cold.

    • thedruid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Fuck em. Tear gas is on outlawed war weapon. They should have been jailed for it’s use.

      I don’t care what reason a cop has anymore. They are liars all of them trained and required to be. That right there takes a certain lack of care for fellow humans

      So cops and law enforcement as they are currently practiced are as big a threat as trump.

      Until they turn on trump, they are complicit

    • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      That’s one of the main exceptions mentioned in the article:

      Under the proposal, law enforcement officials would be exempted from the mask ban if they serve on a SWAT team or if a mask is necessary for medical or health reasons, including to prevent smoke inhalation.

      But I can see the claim of “health reasons” being abused.

      • DBT@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        13 hours ago

        They will absolutely claim they need it for protection from Covid. And it all of a sudden won’t hinder their breathing at all.

        • stoy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          Then they should only be allowed to wear a full gasmask or a standard medical mask in those engagements.

          None of this balaclava shit.

          Make them uncomfortable or hypocrates.

          Oh, and regardless of when they are wearing a mask or not, they need to have their ID number printed clearly visible on their helmets, their vests (back and front), and their pants.

          • yumpsuit@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Full gasmask and helmet with a photo of the officer. Require a distinctive pose in the photo by each member of a department for easy identification by face-blind folks. This reveals the officers’ anime preferences and thereby lets the public know levels of threat.

            And let’s get an exhale filter on that gas mask, because during the pandemic is now. Every broken chain of transmission is still valuable, especially for vulnerable persons targeted by cops.

        • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Which would be obnoxiously ironic, considering how police unions fought tooth and nail against mask mandates during the pandemic. Fucking idiots.

      • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        12 hours ago

        if a mask is necessary

        I’m not sure if this will be the case, but does that cover the case where they’re the reason? Because that’s one way to ensure escalation to “tear gas on hand, everywhere, at all times.”

        • yumpsuit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          43 minutes ago

          And lead at an indoor shooting range. Some of the fashiest doorknob-licking motherfuckers imaginable will still don a respirator for range time.

        • kreskin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          13 hours ago

          And theres the problem of frequent blood spatter. College kids and old people bleed a lot.

        • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          13 hours ago

          It’s likely phrased in the law as closer to while serving on a swat team, as in they’re actively wearing a ballistic face shield and gas mask for legitimate reasons.

          It’s a prime opportunity for things to get lost in translation between the law, the person talking to the press, and the report.

    • crystalmerchant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Whoopsie daisy, looks like we all need to wear gas masks today boys! Our buddy in forensics says there’s totally a legitimate risk today, so the gas masks gotta come out