• lightnsfw@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 hours ago

    No, they are law enforcement and should be readily identifiable the community they serve. Including their face. Also being masked makes it harder for the people they’re interacting with to understand what they’re saying. They lose all the non-verbal communication that comes from the face. Them being masked has absolutely zero upside to the public.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Including their face.

      I don’t think this is necessary. What does seeing an officer’s face do that a name and badge number doesn’t? What about undercover cops? What about the winter when it’s cold?

      I think it should only be required that they declare on what authority they’re acting when making official actions, like a stop, detainment, or arrest. They should give their name and badge number upon request, in a form that works for the asker (written or verbal, asker’s preference).

      If we ban law enforcement from wearing masks, that opens the door to banning masks in public. I get that police should follow higher standards (I’m absolutely in favor of ending qualified immunity), but IMO the rules should merely be that police must self identify in a way the public knows they’re legitimate law enforcement when using the authority of their position.

      • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Witnesses who are too far away to see their identification can still see their face to ID them. Undercover cops are a different situation than what ICE is doing and really shouldn’t be making arrests IMO. In winter they can take their mask off to interact with people.

        If we ban law enforcement from wearing masks, that opens the door to banning masks in public.

        It doesn’t. The general public doesn’t need to be identifiable at all times like cops do.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Witnesses who are too far away to see their identification can still see their face to ID them.

          Sure, I just don’t think that’s a reasonable thing to require at all times.

          Instead, the public should be free to approach to a safe distance to film, and then attempt to talk with law enforcement when safe. A police officer is required to identify themselves to the suspect due to the fourth amendment. Whether they are required to identify themselves to the public is up to local law, court precedent, and agency policy.

          The general public doesn’t need to be identifiable at all times like cops do.

          Neither do. Police only need to be identifiable when using their authority, such as when making an arrest or dealing with protests, and in the latter case, only agency affiliation is necessary.