Assuming Britain actually is a secular country- can it remain so?

[danot]

If you want to ask me a question, ask me a question.

Thank you, I will.

 

Could you explain once again why the Niqab poses very little risk to security and why you automatically presume the Niqab wearer is someone that poses very little risk to security?

[Halibut]

Thank you, I will.

 

Could you explain once again why the Niqab poses very little risk to security and why you automatically presume the Niqab wearer is someone that poses very little risk to security?

 

Because there's no evidence to the contrary; because it's worn by religiously observant Muslim women for reasons of modesty and because such women are not known for their criminality.

[danot]

Do you know what the law means?

 

It doesn't place a ban on face coverings, it places a requirement on people to reveal their face to a policeman if they're so required to do for identification purposes.

Exactly, If so required. You still can't be having problems in finding the double standard surely?

[retep]

Thanks, but I'm well aware of its meaning.

 

Then you should also be aware that the officer can tell you to take off the face covering and sieze it, prohibiting you from putting it back on.

 

Try and spin that one.

[Halibut]

Exactly, If so required. You still can't be having problems in finding the double standard surely?

 

I certainly can.

It applies equally to people wearing non religious face coverings as those with them.

 

The key phrase is 'if required'.

The police quite rightly are unlikely to ask your average niqab wearer to prove her identity since she's pretty unlikely to be criminally inclined for reasons that have already been outlined.

 

The law allows them to though, in the same way it allows them to ask your average run of the mill scrote, burglar or mugger to show their face.

 

No double standard there, except in your head.

[Halibut]

Then you should also be aware that the officer can tell you to take off the face covering and sieze it, prohibiting you from putting it back on.

 

Try and spin that one.

 

The fact remains that there's no prohibition on wearing face coverings.

 

If a police officer confiscates my balaclava because he thinks I'm going to use it to hide my identity while I rob the corner shop, I can't put that particular balaclava back on.

 

What I can do is go straight out and buy another, because the sale or indeed wearing of them is not prohibited.

[boyfriday]

Then you should also be aware that the officer can tell you to take off the face covering and sieze it, prohibiting you from putting it back on.

 

Try and spin that one.

 

Provided he has a 'reasonable belief' you're wearing the face covering to conceal your identity.

 

If it was just about a face covering then motorcycle riders and milkmen wearing balaclavas would be routinely stopped and asked to remove their helmet/balaclavas and have them confiscated, but being the common sense guy you obviously are I'm sure you'd agree this rarely happens.

 

See, no spin required.

[danot]

There's nothing technical about it.

There is no prohibition on wearing items that cover the face.

My position is that you are perfectly aware that there are circumstantial restrictions which dictate when and where it is deemed inappropriate to conceal the face with a none religious or cultural face concealing garment, and that You're also perfectly aware that there appears to be no such restrictions on face concealing garments that are viewed as having religious and cultural significance. Stop being obtuse. I'm beginning to like that word, I can see why you use it.

[Halibut]

My position is that you are perfectly aware that there are circumstantial restrictions which dictate when and where it is deemed inappropriate to conceal the face with a none religious or cultural face concealing garment, and that You're also perfectly aware that there appears to be no such restrictions on face concealing garments that are viewed as having religious and cultural significance. Stop being obtuse. I'm beginning to like that word, I can see why you use it.

 

Your contention that there are no circumstances where the wearing of a face covering garment worn for religious or cultural reasons would be restricted is patently false.

[danot]

Because experience tells them that's absolutely the case. When criminals are routinely using the burka to rob, rape & murder their experience will inform them otherwise.

Wouldn't their experience also tell them that security is being compromised due to people automatically presuming that all Niqab wearers are Muslim women that pose very little risk?