Is it acceptable for non Muslims to wear burkas?

[ronthenekred]

 

OK, I appreciate you are still trying to work it out, They Would Be Banned!

 

So ban sunglasses, hair dye and false mustaches?

[Jim Hardie]

 

Why do you keep continuing with an argument where you have failed to provide any facts and are reduced to talking nonsense?

 

Available to all! You are now talking like a complete clown.

 

What exactly do you think would be the result of everyone adopting the burka?

 

Go on, I know it's not easy for you to use logical thinking, but give it a go.

 

I'll give you a clue.

 

This country has more CCTV cameras installed than any other country in the world.

 

We have a population of 1% of the world and 20% of the worlds CCTV cameras.

 

Over 5.9 billion of them.

 

The police regard them as a major security defence.

 

OK, I appreciate you are still trying to work it out, They Would Be Banned!

 

Exaggerated by a factor of 1000.

[Cyclone]

 

Why do you keep continuing with an argument where you have failed to provide any facts and are reduced to talking nonsense?

 

Available to all! You are now talking like a complete clown.

 

What exactly do you think would be the result of everyone adopting the burka?

 

Go on, I know it's not easy for you to use logical thinking, but give it a go.

 

Are you trying to claim that you are not legally allowed to wear a burka.

 

I think that proves who is a clown here.

 

Edit - I'm not sure what statistics you think I can provide to prove that you can wear a burka. I'd say the burden of proof is on you though. I can't even prove that you're allowed to wear a t-shirt, we don't have a list of "government approved" clothing. What we also don't have, is any clothing that's illegal to wear. So long as you're decent, you're good. Try it now, go out wearing some speedo's or go out wearing a burka, neither are illegal (although speedo's will be chilly today).

[mjw47]

Exaggerated by a factor of 1000.

 

Correct, well spotted, I put a' b' instead of an 'm' there aren't really that many at all, just one for every 11 people in the population.

[Cyclone]

Mostly privately owned.

[mjw47]

Are you trying to claim that you are not legally allowed to wear a burka.

 

I think that proves who is a clown here.

 

Edit - I'm not sure what statistics you think I can provide to prove that you can wear a burka. I'd say the burden of proof is on you though. I can't even prove that you're allowed to wear a t-shirt, we don't have a list of "government approved" clothing. What we also don't have, is any clothing that's illegal to wear. So long as you're decent, you're good. Try it now, go out wearing some speedo's or go out wearing a burka, neither are illegal (although speedo's will be chilly today).

 

I am saying categorically, that if a huge number of people decided to adopt a style of clothing which completely disguised their identity in order to go about their day to day business then the state would ban them for doing so.

 

Councils spend £250,000,000 per anum on CCTV systems. The police budget for England and Wales is over £10 billion a year, and no, that is not an error its 10 billion per year.

 

If you think for one minute that a majority of people could suddenly begin to walk around in disguise and be allowed to do so by the authorities then you are even more obtuse than you have made yourself look to this point.

 

Where did I say it is illegal to wear a burka?

 

Where exactly did I make this claim?

 

I didn't did I?

 

You appear completely unable to comprehend simple English and totally incapable of any kind of logic.

 

I said " what would be the result of everyone adopting the burka?"

 

Where does that suggest that I think it wouldn't be legal to do so?

 

My final four words in that post were " They WOULD be banned.

 

How anyone could read those two points, and then come up with " Are you trying to claim that you are not legally allowed to wear a burka?" is beyond me.

 

I think we have definitely removed all doubt as to the identity of the clown, are you available for Christmas parties?

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2014 at 14:31 ----------

 

So ban sunglasses, hair dye and false mustaches?

 

Are you trying to tell me that if someone you know turned up wearing sunglasses with their hair dyed you wouldn't be able to recognize them?

 

I worked in the electronic security industry for over 33 years, I know a little bit about CCTV.

 

There are software programs that enable facial recognition, and they allow for disguise attempts.

 

The gambling casinos have spent enormous amounts investing in that particular aspect.

 

If you go into a casino in Las Vegas today and are caught counting cards you will be ejected.

 

Should you then travel to Hong Kong tomorrow and attempt to enter a casino

there you will be prevented.

 

One of the reasons I don't gamble, card counting isn't cheating, it's simply that the person possess' an ability which makes it likely that they may win, which the casino owners wont allow.

[boyfriday]

Available to every citizen of this country, since we're all free to wear a burka.

 

Why do you keep inventing weird fantasies wear we aren't all free to do this?

 

Thank you.

 

It seems the poster (and others) became lost in their own fantasies of burka clad Muslim speeders being in a unique position to create havoc on our roads.

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2014 at 18:10 ----------

 

I am saying categorically, that if a huge number of people decided to adopt a style of clothing which completely disguised their identity in order to go about their day to day business then the state would ban them for doing so.

However burka wearers don't constitute a "huge" number.

 

Are you trying to tell me that if someone you know turned up wearing sunglasses with their hair dyed you wouldn't be able to recognize them?

 

I worked in the electronic security industry for over 33 years, I know a little bit about CCTV.

 

There are software programs that enable facial recognition, and they allow for disguise attempts.

However speed cameras are not designed for that purpose, since the owner of the vehicle is required to identify who was driving the speeding car, whether they were wearing a burka or not.

 

---------- Post added 03-11-2014 at 18:13 ----------

 

It's fairly simple, but apparently difficult for the - I suspect deliberately - obtuse to grasp, wearing a burka provides an anonymity not available to the ordinary citizens of this country.

 

That means that an inequality exists.

 

Could you tell me where the inequality exists if it isn't illegal for non Muslims to wear a burka, if it were you'd have a sound argument which I'd support.

[mjw47]

[quote=boyfriday;10743

 

Could you tell me where the inequality exists if it isn't illegal for non Muslims to wear a burka, if it were you'd have a sound argument which I'd support.

 

I would be absolutely delighted to young man.

 

This country's citizens are the most spied upon in the world.

 

One CCTV camera for every 11 people.

 

That situation did not just 'happen' it came about over many years and with the active support of the Government.

 

The State spends billions every year installing and maintaining CCTV systems.

 

The State has agreed access, via police computers, to many privately owned and installed cameras.

 

It is impossible to travel for any length of time or distance in this country without your image being captured on many occasions.

 

Now, the whole point of this network is for security and control, and in order for that to work the authorities need people to act as they currently do.

 

Should people organize themselves and start appearing in public with their face masked it would be made illegal.

 

If you disagree, then you are supposedly under the impression that the Government would simply shrug it's shoulders and accept the billions they have spent on surveillance could just be forgotten about.

 

In which case you would be naive to a delusional degree.

 

It has already been made against the law to wear a mask whilst demonstrating. Whilst this was temporary, it shows how simply and quickly it can be done as and when required.

 

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-mask_laws

 

The situation with the burka is clearly discriminatory.

 

The term discrimination is usually employed when referring to discrimination by a majority against a minority.

 

In order for it to carry any substance and fairness however, it has to apply both ways.

 

Anti discrimination laws are based upon fairness, and equality.

 

In order to not discriminate you have to treat everyone equally, that is not currently the case with regard to wearing the burka.

 

As it stands, a section of the community are receiving a tolerance that would not be extended to the majority.

 

It could in fact be argued that not only is this discrimination, it is discrimination based upon religious and racial grounds.

 

Do you understand my point?

Edited November 3, 2014 by mjw47

[Zamo]

I think one of the reasons people are struggling to respect Muslims right to freedom of expression (in this case what they choose to wear) is because Muslims are not especially good at respecting freedom of expression when they do not like what is being expressed. Look at the clip linked to by the OP and see how tolerant Muslims were towards others using the burka to make a statement. Think about how Muslims reacted to cartoons that drew attention to the problem that Islam has with extremism.

 

Given that we are also tolerating other serious issues associated with Muslim beliefs and culture (e.g. grooming gangs, extremism, terrorism), I think we are starting to see tolerance fatigue kicking in. I think people feel that the tolerance is a bit too one sided, it is starting to irk and as a result tolerance is waning.

[gimp27]

Or to put it into perspective

 

Got to disagree with mjw on this. An Elvis Impersonator is pretty much unidentifiable, and the chance of the same amount of people wearing a burqa is highly improbable.

 

Mjw has lost the argument over freedoms. Not only is he distraught at the garment he's now reduced it to a means of breaking traffic laws. Propagandists use this ploy to great effect on the weak and mentally vulnerable.

 

My point wasn't about freedom. It was about being unidentifiable. There is a difference. I have a cousin who is staunch about wearing her full veil. I will add that she does not reside in the UK, yet on the rare occasion that I see her, I wouldn't know her from you. That is the reason I agreed with mjw, but it is her choice. Now, if there was an incident, ie coming through customs for example, then she quite rightly removes it for identification. She does this without complaint (except for requesting a female officer, although this not a legal right) and that is the way it should be. It's the people who refuse to remove it that are the problem, as the law is very clear on a person being culpable to the state as a person and not as a religious effigy.