To Hijab or not to Hijab

[rvg]

See above. Why are you obscuring your features in a society that sees openness as an essential part of social intercourse?

Because I'm a free man and am under no obligation to disclose my identity to anybody except law enforcement.

The niqab doesn't (yet) have the associations of the balaclava, the hoodie or the burka. All of those have the common theme; they obscure the individual's features, and mark them out as troublemakers.

That's just an opinion. You are free to hold that opinion, but that doesn't give you the right to see what I wish to hide.

Reflective shades mark one out as an arrogant a-hole, and for the related reason; they obscure one's eyes.

And?

[Pannonian]

Because I'm a free man and am under no obligation to disclose my identity to anybody except law enforcement.

That's just an opinion. You are free to hold that opinion, but that doesn't give you the right to see what I wish to hide.

And?

It's just as well that you live in the US and not in Europe. You have your way, we'll have ours.

[AE Bravo]

That's because the average citizen is capable of beating up a Euro cop. I think they can be intimidated easily.

United States law enforcement would no doubt SON the pink panther popo you guys have over there. Whether you're wearing a burka, ski mask, niqab, or whatever they don't give two shits you gonna get five-0'd.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

What's wrong with covering one's face?

Only criminals cover their faces.

Because I'm a free man and am under no obligation to disclose my identity to anybody except law enforcement.

That's just an opinion. You are free to hold that opinion, but that doesn't give you the right to see what I wish to hide.

And?

Turn that on its head - you are free to cover your face, in private, but in public you are expected to have your face uncovered to show you are honest. To obscure one's face is to obscure ones' features to prevent recognition and also to obscure one's expression.

That's because the average citizen is capable of beating up a Euro cop. I think they can be intimidated easily.

United States law enforcement would no doubt SON the pink panther popo you guys have over there. Whether you're wearing a burka, ski mask, niqab, or whatever they don't give two shits you gonna get five-0'd.

You need to visit Europe and meet some of our cops. For one thing there are a lot fewer fat cops in Europe and unlike in the US they are all professionals trained to a consistent standard (admittedly some variation by country) who don't have a habit of shooting suspects as they are running away.

There have been enough instances in the news recently to demonstrate a significant proportion of US cops are thugs with badges and guns.

[Brenus]

Well US cops are good in putting 16 years old teen-age in bikini on the grounds mind you.... That takes a lot of training...

[Papewaio]

So ban all beards then...

[Gilrandir]

"Again I strongly doubt the usage of such vague terms in a law." You might but you are wrong. Read what I wrote. When the Judge in his/her summary, said that juries have to agree "beyond doubts", can you quantify? I can't. Nor I can measure a doubt btw.

The judge can say whatever he/she likes, I asked about the wording the LAW uses.
No matter what you wrote, you didn't link to any law so that others might make sure of the wording of it. Until you do this I will condsider my opinion (i.e. laws can't use phrases like too high, too short, common sense) correct.

"But such orders again should be based on some legally stipulated size otherwise they are arbitrary which again brings us to the neccessity of quoting the law in question." Yes, just go in a internal code of clothing in any company, or schools, and they provide length, colours and other style you are allowed to wear at work. In UK, schools have uniforms, and no ones seems to care too much.

We don't speak here of DRESS CODES OF A COMPANY OR SCHOOL, you said there was A LAW, which means it covers ALL public places. Or it may specify the locations it refers to. In either case WE NEED A LAW to have a look at it.

"These are VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW which are justified by an emergency" No, there are not. If you kill a kid running after his ball then pretext of the respect of the law for doing it, you will find out it is not a lawful argument.

In the situation described you face a choice: whether to drive on your side of the road and hit the kid who IS VIOLATING (though inadvertently) the traffic rules, or swerve to the other side and hit a car whose driver ISN'T VIOLATING the traffic rules. In either case someone is hurt and the judge will also have a tough choice in his decision.

But it's a garment introduced from abroad, so it doesn't have that saving grace.

The whole of Great Britain as we know it today is introduced from abroad. So?

Only criminals cover their faces.

Not neccessarily. If you are a protester in a totalitarian country you will wish to cover your face so that the government shouldn't find you.

[rvg]

Only criminals cover their faces.

I'm not sure why you'd wanna post something that is so obviously false.

Turn that on its head - you are free to cover your face, in private, but in public you are expected to have your face uncovered to show you are honest. To obscure one's face is to obscure ones' features to prevent recognition and also to obscure one's expression.

I am not obligated to show anything to anybody outside of the law enforcement.

You need to visit Europe and meet some of our cops. For one thing there are a lot fewer fat cops in Europe and unlike in the US they are all professionals trained to a consistent standard (admittedly some variation by country) who don't have a habit of shooting suspects as they are running away.

People here give as good as they get. There are lots of cops getting shot as well.

There have been enough instances in the news recently to demonstrate a significant proportion of US cops are thugs with badges and guns.

Yup.

[Fragony]

Can we please make a difference between simply covering your hair and covering your face? Covering your face is a big no and every discrimination you get is well-deserved, but a simple headscarve, what are we having a discussion about really. If it doesn't comes to terms with dress policy it should of-course doesn't have to be a problem if it's a problem but not in private or public space. It's going too far if you even discuss it imho. Of course they can cover their hair if they want to cover their hair, why shouldn't they.

The big Quid pro Quo is should we alter customs and normalse it. I say no to that, the right to say au revoir when being overly insistant please.

[rory_20_uk]

If people have the right to cover their face, I should also have the right not to interact with them.

I personally think that it is against the mores of UK society and should be discouraged. There are plenty of other countries where they can do so.

[rvg]

If people have the right to cover their face, I should also have the right not to interact with them...

Bingo. They are free to do their thing and you are free to do your thing. You can't force them to show their face, and they can't force you to interact with them.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm not sure why you'd wanna post something that is so obviously false.

In Western society, only criminals cover their faces in public. Even people who wear sunglasses will tilt the glass down their nose so you can see their eyes whilst they are talking to you. Unless, of course, you want to deliberately offend someone - which I did actually do once because he came up to me and started bitching about how I was cross with his kids for hitting the intercom at a train station and running away.

I am not obligated to show anything to anybody outside of the law enforcement.

Because you're an anti-social jerk? That's how that sounds. There's legal obligation and there's social obligation. You most certainly ARE socially obligated to show your face in public in the West.

Now, granted, whether the US is actually part of Western society or the Anglo-sphere is something the rest of us do wonder about on occasion.

People here give as good as they get. There are lots of cops getting shot as well.

Yup.

From this response I might presume you think that it's ok for the US to devolve into a Mad Max-like society.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The whole of Great Britain as we know it today is introduced from abroad. So?

A fair point, except each subsequent wave of migration has left scars on the UK that have never truly healed. The Scots and Welsh hate the English - the English despise the aristocracy for being Norman. I've even heard it said the oldest members of the aristocracy despise the monarch for being German!

Not neccessarily. If you are a protester in a totalitarian country you will wish to cover your face so that the government shouldn't find you.

That's actually the exception that proves the rule because those protesters are criminals, it'#s just that they're criminals in a corrupt regime.

[rvg]

In Western society, only criminals cover their faces in public.

This statement is false.

Because you're an anti-social jerk? That's how that sounds. There's legal obligation and there's social obligation. You most certainly ARE socially obligated to show your face in public in the West.

Jesus man. It's my goddamn face. If I wanna cover it with rags, it's my right to do so. If those rags offend you, you are free to shun me.

Now, granted, whether the US is actually part of Western society or the Anglo-sphere is something the rest of us do wonder about on occasion.

We're special.

From this response I might presume you think that it's ok for the US to devolve into a Mad Max-like society.

Actually, things are becoming tamer and tamer by the year. Police brutality? That's nothing new. What is new, is that everyone has a smartphone these days, thus more bad cops get caught in action.

[Fragony]

Bingo. They are free to do their thing and you are free to do your thing. You can't force them to show their face, and they can't force you to interact with them.

You can with the former, here at least, it isn't really enforced though but it's so rare that there isn't really anything to get upset about. For the latter, voluntary excluding yourself is a right as well, the consequenses you drag along with your tent.

[AE Bravo]

Because you're an anti-social jerk? That's how that sounds. There's legal obligation and there's social obligation. You most certainly ARE socially obligated to show your face in public in the West.

Doesn't sound very free. There will always be exceptions to this and people who will do it, so might as well not restrict it. What if you're a leper, or want to cover up any std symptoms you ashamed of? Or got punk'd in party the night before with a permanent marker'd penis on your forehead you deserve to get out with part of your face covered. Rihanna covered her entire face after she got beat up, not just with sunglasses.

[Gilrandir]

If people have the right to cover their face, I should also have the right not to interact with them.

I personally think that it is against the mores of UK society and should be discouraged. There are plenty of other countries where they can do so.

What about toning one's car windows? It is also an attempt at privacy.

[Gilrandir]

A fair point, except each subsequent wave of migration has left scars on the UK that have never truly healed. The Scots and Welsh hate the English - the English despise the aristocracy for being Norman. I've even heard it said the oldest members of the aristocracy despise the monarch for being German!

Only Romans are above criticism. Ave Caesar!

[Strike For The South]

All Europeans are dirty little fascists and bans on the burkua just prove that.

[Brenus]

"The judge can say whatever he/she likes, I asked about the wording the LAW uses.
No matter what you wrote, you didn't link to any law so that others might make sure of the wording of it. Until you do this I will condsider my opinion (i.e. laws can't use phrases like too high, too short, common sense) correct." Be my guest. You retain the right to be wrong.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This statement is false.

Give me an example of a non criminal walking down a street with their face covered - excluding people adhering to a Middle Eastern culture, naturally, and those wearing protective equipment.

I'm really quite surprised you're arguing this given that the social more is very clear, an uncovered face.

Jesus man. It's my goddamn face. If I wanna cover it with rags, it's my right to do so. If those rags offend you, you are free to shun me.

If you come up to me with a rag tied across your mouth and we're not in a sewer I'll ask you to remove it, if you refuse you're being rude - that's the established social convention.

We're special.

Actually, things are becoming tamer and tamer by the year. Police brutality? That's nothing new. What is new, is that everyone has a smartphone these days, thus more bad cops get caught in action.

This is not comforting.

Doesn't sound very free. There will always be exceptions to this and people who will do it, so might as well not restrict it. What if you're a leper, or want to cover up any std symptoms you ashamed of? Or got punk'd in party the night before with a permanent marker'd penis on your forehead you deserve to get out with part of your face covered. Rihanna covered her entire face after she got beat up, not just with sunglasses.

My dear man, this is England, we have no "freedom" here, we live by the whim of a theocratically sanctioned absolute monarch who, in her benevolence allows us to practice democracy.

Only Romans are above criticism. Ave Caesar!

Oh no, the Welsh still hate the Romans too - but the Romans left (according to the Welsh).

[Fragony]

All Europeans are dirty little fascists and bans on the burkua just prove that.

Spend some time, come back with an opinion

[rory_20_uk]

What about toning one's car windows? It is also an attempt at privacy.

And exactly when does one communicate through toned windows?

I shut my curtains at night as I don't want to communicate. I would not expect to try to communicate with one through them.

[rvg]

Give me an example of a non criminal walking down a street with their face covered - excluding people adhering to a Middle Eastern culture, naturally, and those wearing protective equipment.

Myself, taking a stroll around the neighborhood on a windy winter day. I wear something similar to a niqab in terms of facial coverage. Hate cold weather, hate wind, and when the two are combined, I find it a bit overwhelming. Thus the headgear.

I'm really quite surprised you're arguing this given that the social more is very clear, an uncovered face.

Certainly is, but my point is that you are not obliged to conform.

If you come up to me with a rag tied across your mouth and we're not in a sewer I'll ask you to remove it, if you refuse you're being rude - that's the established social convention.

Funny, I would consider rude the fact that you asked a stranger to remove an article of clothing instead of minding your own business.

This is not comforting.
My dear man, this is England, we have no "freedom" here, we live by the whim of a theocratically sanctioned absolute monarch who, in her benevolence allows us to practice democracy.

As that Ice T. song goes: "Die, die, die, pig, die." Cops shoot people. Cops get shot by people. God bless America.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Only criminals hide their face.

Only criminals encrypt their data.

Only criminals refuse searches.

Only criminals demand privacy.

[Montmorency]

If you come up to me with a rag tied across your mouth and we're not in a sewer I'll ask you to remove it, if you refuse you're being rude - that's the established social convention.

OK, I struggled a lot with this line, but I've found a charitable interpretation at last.

If someone comes to you speaking with their mouth covered, and you ask them to remove the covering because you can't hear to understand what they are saying, and they carry on rejecting your request, then that would certainly be rude of them.

[Pannonian]

Only criminals hide their face.

Only criminals encrypt their data.

Only criminals refuse searches.

Only criminals demand privacy.

Only Americans live in America. Let Americans live in America and have their own way, and we'll have ours.

[Montmorency]

What is "your" way?

[Pannonian]

What is "your" way?

Not something we're trying to impose on Americans. I think some American traditions are lunacy, but I also think they have the right to follow them if that's their wish.

[rory_20_uk]

Only criminals hide their face.

Only criminals encrypt their data.

Only criminals refuse searches.

Only criminals demand privacy.

So...

You sleep with the doors and windows unlocked and the curtains back?
You don't have a password on your phone or computer or bank account?
You happily welcome the police into your house without a warrant?
You openly discuss your medical and financial history with anyone that asks?

If not, you're a hypocrite.