Hiding one’s face behind a mask or bandana during events like the Stanley Cup riot, or at a protest, should be a criminal offence, says Victoria Police Chief Jamie Graham.
Such a measure would have greatly assisted police trying to control unruly crowds during the three-hour rampage of looting, burning and assaults that followed the Vancouver Canucks’ loss in Game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals, said Chief Graham, who headed the Vancouver Police Department for five years.
“It would have been an additional tool that officers on the street could have used,” he said in an interview Wednesday.
“You could see the ringleaders with these bandanas on, and [such a law] would be important at an early stage of a demonstration or an event like the riot, where things seem to be getting out of hand.”
When trouble starts, miscreants often “balaclava up or mask up” to hide their identities,” Chief Graham said. “We think the act of putting on a mask should be an offence.”
A law could even have targeted those who “pull a blood-stained jersey up over their nose and mouth,” he added. “It’s the intent of why they’re doing that.”
[More]
Afternoon Updates:
1:20 pm EDT, June 30th, 2011 — Barbara Kay: No one needs a disguise at a riot, or a bank
What about burqas? Seriously. If passed, does this law mean all the burqa babes in the riot area are automatically in violation of the criminal code? I can just imagine how our left-tard court system would deal with that issue.
Like Sihk’s wearing turbans and objecting to wearing helmuts on motorcycles.. an interesting clash between laws for all and the exceptions for special groups.
Mr. Floatie(y) is dressed head to foot in “Its” poop-suit to protest Victoria’s waste water disposal system into the Strait of Juan de Fuca. It would therefore have It’s face covered and thus would be arrested at all of It’s demonstrations/protests. We must be careful for what we ask!!
Other informed visitors here can correct me if I’m wrong but it seems to me that there is already a law on the books that covers this somewhere (my memory is fading). Wearing a mask during the commission of an indictable offence (mischief, theft, assault, etc. are “dual procedure” offences. There are many others.) has long been viewed as a very serious matter by our courts.
It seems to me the argument is moot and nothing more is required but I may be wrong. For those interested you can research the matter here.
Yes, but is it enforced as it should be?
I don’t know. Years ago it was but I’m uncertain the law is still on the books because I haven’t kept up.
Doesn’t wearing a mask at a riot target the hard-core? Sort of a “Wear a mask- get thunked” police policy? Especially with helmet-cams documenting that the thunkee was a legitimate target for the thunker.
And your point is?
Jack, you are correct, it is, somewhere on the books, against the law to cover your face to commit a crime.
And ” probably ” also a crime to commit a crime in the first place.
These easy fixes never work because what makes sense in a very specific context turns into something ridiculous when applied generally without common sense, and our laws are rarely written with the disclaimer ” Forbidden, except when applying the law would be stupid ! “….. LOL.
From our criminal code……..
Disguise with intent
(2) Every one who, with intent to commit an indictable offence, has his face masked or coloured or is otherwise disguised is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 351;
R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 48;
2008, c. 18, s. 9.
Gee if a lot of these habitual anarchist showing up at G20 or at any other event to make trouble where wearing masks we missed the opportunity to give them a message with serious jail time ! But the criminal code is full of these potential long sentences that have never been applied even in extreme cases where the maximum would be justified.
On the other hand wouldn’t want to go nuts like Singapore banning chewing gum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewing_gum_ban_in_Singapore
Thanks BTDT…that is what I was looking for.
“Good stuff!”