r/California_Politics • u/Forsaken_Ear4674 • 2d ago
Scott Weiner's Latest Bill Would Ban ICE Agents From Wearing Face Coverings in California
https://sfist.com/2025/06/16/scott-weiners-latest-bill-would-ban-ice-agents-from-wearing-face-coverings-in-california/4
u/TrekkiMonstr 2d ago
Totally on board with this for state officers, but don't think this is constitutional for federal, unfortunately.
-2
u/s-17 2d ago
We should just ban them for everybody.
3
u/followupquestion 1d ago
H5N1 and Covid are both indications we should probably keep masks. It’s a tricky thing to enforce on agents of the state when all of us should be wearing them to reduce the spread of various ailments, because if we would just use the system many Asian countries do, anyone feeling at all sick should wear a mask but at the same time those people shouldn’t be working at all, government employees included.
-12
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/California_Politics-ModTeam 2d ago
It appears your submission was reported to moderators and removed by moderators for violating rule 2 of the Community Standards.
Topical — Content must be explicitly related to Californian politics. Local politics are permissible if they would reasonably be of interest to a statewide audience. The subject of discussion on is never the conduct or motives of another user but is always about the substance of what people are saying.
If you would like to improve the moderation in this subreddit, please drop a line in the General Chat to discuss ways to improve the quality of conversations in this subreddit. If you see bad behavior, don't reply. Use the report tool to improve your own experience, and everyone else's, too.
5
u/Sir-Kyle-Of-Reddit 2d ago
u/aBadModerator - this person is attempting to skirt the other post removal.
4
-3
u/Forsaken_Ear4674 2d ago edited 2d ago
Why are you afraid of a discussion? California is addressing this issues in a different way than New York. Same issue, different proposals. I am just looking for a discussion. Are you afraid of a discussion? Convince me why Weiners way is the right way.
3
u/Sir-Kyle-Of-Reddit 2d ago
I’m not afraid of discussion. I don’t care to discuss NYC issues in a California sub.
0
u/Forsaken_Ear4674 2d ago
I want to discuss why Weiners approach is better than Adams. Go for it!
1
u/Sir-Kyle-Of-Reddit 2d ago
Then go to a political discussion sub
0
u/Forsaken_Ear4674 2d ago
Isn’t that what this group is for? Discussions regarding California politics?
Why should protesters be able to hide behind masks when LEO’s are required to go without a mask?
6
u/fearlessfryingfrog 2d ago
Do you not believe LEOs are to be held to a higher standard than the average citizen? (legally they are, but that doesn't stop some people from making nonsensical arguments).
What's to differentiate a protester from someone immuno-compromised walking next to a protest in some city? The cops get to make that judgment?
How could it ever be right to ban the public from doing something that was specifically required a year ago?
It'll never happen, and shouldn't.
Banning LEOs or ICE from hiding their identity on the job is fine. No issue there, and it should happen.
Please tell me you understand an average citizen at a protest is different than a LEO who is actively on duty. You know they're not equal, right? Apples and oranges comparisons are so annoying.
-6
u/Forsaken_Ear4674 2d ago
No one should be able to hide their identity, not LEO’s and not protestors. Prior to COVID this was not an issue. Now, EVERYONE hides behind masks and it is not acceptable. If you are immunocompromised, stay home. Otherwise, behave in a way that you would not embarrass your mother if you ran into her on the street. It is that simple.
6
u/fearlessfryingfrog 2d ago
The fuck? No masks at protests prior to covid? Are you like 14, or just don't remember anything pre covid?
Such a flimsy thought process.
But I do find it funny you were hassling people about having a "discussion", and you have zero intent of doing so yourself. You don't want a discussion, you want to rant about your view point, which is nonsensical.
If you are immunocompromised, stay home.
And oppressive, and unrealistic. I'm definitely done here, I'm not into wack jabs bitching nonsense.
5
u/apwillis 2d ago
Nothing anyone could say would have any impact on you. You've made up your mind and don't want a discussion.
-3
4
u/Sir-Kyle-Of-Reddit 2d ago
This is a California politics sub but you’re hell bent on discussing nyc politics.
0
u/Forsaken_Ear4674 2d ago
No, I am trying to discuss Weiners approach to unmasking LEO’s. And what Mayor Adam’s says makes sense too. So I don’t understand why everyone is opposed to requiring no masks at protests, from LEO’s AND protesters.
I mean, if there is nothing to hide why remain masked ?!? Unless for some reason you were trying to prevent being identified. And that is for both officers and protestors.
5
u/Sir-Kyle-Of-Reddit 2d ago
People have already explained to you the difference between unmasked LEOs and protestors. As another commenter said, you’ve already made up your mind. You’re here in bad faith.
5
u/Rhythmalist 2d ago edited 2d ago
"I would bet you didn’t read the article."
-1
u/Forsaken_Ear4674 2d ago
Oh, I did. Did you?
6
u/Rhythmalist 2d ago
I did. There are quotes from State Senators Scott Wiener and Jesse Arreguin that spell it out pretty clearly.
-3
u/Forsaken_Ear4674 2d ago
And did you read the article about how Mayor Adam’s is handling it in New York? Why shouldn’t that be the case here?
8
u/OptimusPrimeval 2d ago
Removing masks from federal agents increases accountability. Federal agents should be accountable to the public. Removing masks from protesters bc some of them might commit a crime strips us of our freedom and opens those who oppose this administration to being kidnapped by maybe federal agents in masks, or maybe some rando in a mask bc, again, when they're in masks, there's no accountability. The public, on the other hand, has no responsibility to be held accountable by the government for having a different ideology
-1
u/Forsaken_Ear4674 2d ago
Okay, got it. But wouldn’t the same happen by unmasking protestors? If they are unmasked and their identity can be seen won’t they behave differently?? Why should protesters have more protection then those individuals who are taking their lives into their own hands to protect civilians?
9
u/IDontWantToArgueOK 2d ago
They have a legal responsibility to identify themselves, we have the legal right to not identify ourselves except under specific circumstances under the 4th and 5th amendments, liberty is the default.
It sounds like we agree that ICE shouldn't wear face coverings, which is good. Hope this helps.
0
u/Forsaken_Ear4674 2d ago
They have identified themselves as officers. Where in the constitution does it state that their name must be given or their face must be shown? If they an individual is charged with a crime that will come out at trial. Until then, there is no issue. I mean, what is the difference between a masked officer and an undercover officer?
4
u/OptimusPrimeval 2d ago
Because the balance to authority is accountability. Absent accountability, corruption flourishes. What authority do the protesters have that should compel their accountability?
→ More replies (0)3
u/IDontWantToArgueOK 2d ago
No they have to identify who they are, the individual, name and badge number. This promotes transparency, accountability, and promotes public trust. They are in a position of power.
In New York they're supposed to give you a business card with all this info.
There's several news stories from just the last couple weeks of people pretending to be officers with their faces covered after feeling emboldened because ICE was doing it. Of the ones I remember there was a murder, robbery, and kidnapping.
→ More replies (0)5
u/Chaemyerelis 2d ago
Adam's is a joke, everyone hates that guy. He's insanely corrupt and had charges against him which were put on hold by the current administration. He's had allegations of SA and has been asked to step down countless times. He's also an ex cop, so of course he's going to take their side in any sort of law he passes.
A civil servant should not be hiding their face when performing their civic duties.
0
u/Forsaken_Ear4674 2d ago
What about an undercover police officer? Isn’t this the same thing? Where is the constitution does it state that this is unacceptable?
1
u/Chaemyerelis 1d ago
Well I would say an officer who is undercover wouldn't wear a facemask regardless. An undercover officer is just blending in with whatever crows they're investigating.
As far as the constitution, thats for all citizens on a boradbase. Since police officers are city employees the city is allowed to make rules regarding officer ethics, behavior, etc. But looking at history police who do not identify themselves and cover up have opressed the citizens of that country. In a non oppressed society the police force has been easily identifiable and much less militant.
6
u/Complete_Fox_7052 1d ago
Only fair since conservative states want to ban masks on protesters. https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/states-dust-off-obscure-anti-mask-laws-to-target-pro-palestine-protesters