Halibut Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 (2)This subsection confers power on any constable in uniform—. (a)to require any person to remove any item which the constable reasonably believes that person is wearing wholly or mainly for the purpose of concealing his identity;. (b)to seize any item which the constable reasonably believes any person intends to wear wholly or mainly for that purpose.. That doesn't alter BF's point that there is no prohibition on garments that cover the face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 12, 2011 Author Share Posted September 12, 2011 There you go then, so what are we arguing about? Oops just read yr post properly, I'm afraid I believe it's highly unlikely you'd be stopped unless the police had another reason other than you wearing a balaclava to stop you So that's you position now. OK. What say you Halibut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 And pointing this out establishes what? That some people are against the Niqab because they don't like Muslims? That's not my beef my friend. Pointing it out demonstrates a double standard, but not the one you believe existed. I'd never heard of any British citizen calling for a ban on face coverings for crime prevention reasons until the burka was seen on our streets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 12, 2011 Author Share Posted September 12, 2011 There aren't any such laws. Are there any such policing and security procedures, or are they merely a figment of my imagination also.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 So that's you position now. OK. What say you Halibut? About what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 12, 2011 Author Share Posted September 12, 2011 Where did someone else say that we must presume that anyone wearing a niquab is a female muslim?You local?? You must have all been presuming it seeing you all feel perfectly safe in the knowledge that Niqab wearers pose little risk to security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 12, 2011 Author Share Posted September 12, 2011 Hardly restrictive; you could reasonably be asked to remove face coverings to prove your identity - at an airport security desk or in a bank for example. Someone wearing religiously based face covering clothing could also be asked to do so. No double standard. Except in your head. Indeed they could be asked, but unfortunately, no one dare do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 12, 2011 Author Share Posted September 12, 2011 (2)This subsection confers power on any constable in uniform—. (a)to require any person to remove any item which the constable reasonably believes that person is wearing wholly or mainly for the purpose of concealing his identity;. (b)to seize any item which the constable reasonably believes any person intends to wear wholly or mainly for that purpose.. Do you need an eight count BF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 12, 2011 Author Share Posted September 12, 2011 That doesn't alter BF's point that there is no prohibition on garments that cover the face.Being as obtuse as ever I notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted September 12, 2011 Author Share Posted September 12, 2011 Pointing it out demonstrates a double standard, but not the one you believe existed. I'd never heard of any British citizen calling for a ban on face coverings for crime prevention reasons until the burka was seen on our streets.But you're addressing me BF. I don't speak on behalf of anyone else on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.