Should people be allowed to wear masks in public?
Portland Police Chief Danielle Outlaw thinks not.
Nice name for a police chief, by the way.
According to Oregon Live, at a press conference, Danielle “called for laws that would bar masks worn by demonstrators, allow police to fully videotape protests and give authorities greater control of protests by groups with a history of violence.”
Kind of poetic with the mask thing: a left-wing answer to a left-wing problem.
“We have to do something differently … There were entities that planned a brawl in the city of Portland and no one seems to be upset about that. … Entities came here for a fight. … I don’t even know what they were protesting against.’’
The conference came due to publicity over an attack on web journalist Andy Ngo, perpetrated — presumably at least in part — by members of the pro-fascist organization Antifa. The violent assault reportedly resulted in a brain hemorrhage (here).
It should be noted: Those hurt.
So the answer’s to (danielle)outlaw masks?
On Tuesday, Portland’s police bureau clarified the current permissiveness:
“There is no current law or ordinance prohibiting covering of the face in a protest and commission of a crime, which makes it more difficult for investigators to identify perpetrators of violence. This is exploited by criminals who engage in acts of violence. Per Oregon Revised Statute, 181A.250, law enforcement is unable to record demonstration events unless there is criminal activity occurring.”
Putting aside the notion of banning the Lone Ranger, recording protests, to me, seems like a good idea. More from Oregon Live:
Outlaw also pushed for changes in the law that would allow police to continually record protests, instead of only when crimes are committed, which she said slows police investigations because they only have snapshots of what occurred.
What’s the legality of a war on masks?
As reported by The Daily Wire:
Portland City Commissioner Amanda Fritz’s chief of staff, Tim Crail, stated of a prospective anti-mask law, “We looked into it previously and the constitutional free speech issues are difficult to overcome, at least in Oregon,” adding Fritz is “open to a conversation about the advantages and difficulties created with a mask ordinance, but cannot say at this point whether she would support a ban on masks for protests.”
So what do you think about such legislation?
I have an idea: Instead of passing a law against masks, how about passing one against the violent pummeling of innocent people?
Oh, wait — we already have that law. Guess it needs to be aptly enforced.
It’s like gun control — why ban the gun when you could, instead, ban the mass murder? If someone’s willing to break the murder law, them obeying the gun law is a joke.
Masks don’t hurt people. Nor does the freedom to wear them. In my opinion, if those who do what was done to Andy are appropriately held accountable, the behavior will be considerably quelled.
Am I wrong? Please let me know in the Comments section below.
Find all my RedState work here.
See 3 more pieces from me:
Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below.
If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”