ISIS bans women from wearing burkas after chiefs attacked by veiled assassins - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51009334]presumably you have this same problem with every other piece of clothing that obscures your identity, like hooded clothing or scarves worn with a puffer jacket and motorcycle helmets[/QUOTE] Are you saying that you wouldn't find it at all suspicious if someone walks into a bank and keeps his motorcycle helmet on the entire time? The two aren't even comparable, where one has the function of keeping you safe and protecting you, the other's very purpose is to conceal.

[QUOTE=Breny;51010366]Are you saying that you wouldn't find it at all suspicious if someone walks into a bank and keeps his motorcycle helmet on the entire time? The two aren't even comparable, where one has the function of keeping you safe and protecting you, the other's very purpose is to conceal.[/QUOTE] Except no one here supports keeping a burka on when entering government property or anywhere that is important for your face to be unveiled? [editline]6th September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Cructo;51010482]Eh, at this point I think european people are going to defend the mandatory use of burkas by muslim women because men might want to deprive them from their rights if they aren't wearing them[/QUOTE] Snip- misread

[QUOTE=Breny;51010366]Are you saying that you wouldn't find it at all suspicious if someone walks into a bank and keeps his motorcycle helmet on the entire time? The two aren't even comparable, where [I]one has the function of keeping you safe and protecting you[/I], [I]the other's very purpose is to conceal[/I].[/QUOTE] Criminal can also use party masks, balaclavas, tights, plastic bags, reenacting equipment, paper, cardboard, and fabric to conceal their face. I guess we've got a long list of things to ban ahead of us.

[QUOTE=Cructo;51009017]One of the arguments for the burka ban is exactly what happened there, you don't know who's really behind the burka. I hope this will move people in the west to ban burkas as well.[/QUOTE] Yea comparing a law that both ISIS and France have now enacted makes France look like a forward thinking tolerant country. [editline]6th September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=DiBBs27;51009038]Does this make countries who haven't banned it [I]less[/I] progressive than isis?? That would be a hilariously awkward designation. But seriously, most countries have banned burkas in government offices and secure locations as well.[/QUOTE] No, France is still way behind because they are enacting laws that dictate what people can and can not wear. At this point, they are literally on the same footing as ISIS in that regard. [editline]6th September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Cructo;51009311]It's not a coincidence like "criminals wore hawaii shirts so let's ban it", it's more of a "these terrorists wore religious clothes that completely conceal the face that helped them flee" thing.[/QUOTE] If you want to justify being a intolerant, xenophobic, bigot on "security risks" because of 3 incidents in 10 years, then go right on ahead dood. If you want to take away someones freedoms so you can have more security, then you deserve neither. [editline]6th September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Breny;51010366]Are you saying that you wouldn't find it at all suspicious if someone walks into a bank and keeps his motorcycle helmet on the entire time? The two aren't even comparable, where one has the function of keeping you safe and protecting you, the other's very purpose is to conceal.[/QUOTE] This would be a fantastic point if a Burka was literally the only thing on earth a person could use to conceal their face. But since theres a million other things someone can use to conceal their face, it's a retarded point. Nobody is robbing banks while wearing a burka.

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;51010850]Criminal can also use party masks, balaclavas, tights, plastic bags, reenacting equipment, paper, cardboard, and fabric to conceal their face. I guess we've got a long list of things to ban ahead of us.[/QUOTE] a guy walking around a bank in a ski mask, balaclava, tights or other mask will attract a lot of attention while a woman in a burka will not

[QUOTE=Sableye;51011099]a guy walking around a bank in a ski mask, balaclava, tights or other mask will attract a lot of attention while a woman in a burka will not[/QUOTE] I beg to differ If I noticed a woman wearing a burqa while I was in the bank then it attracted my attention, and believe me, she would stick out like a sore thumb. If not for diversity, then they should atleast be designed so that you could pull the fabric covering the face down so that it's not concealed when in a security-sensitive place.

[QUOTE=Sableye;51011099]a guy walking around a bank in a ski mask, balaclava, tights or other mask will attract a lot of attention while a woman in a burka will not[/QUOTE] how many banks were recently robbed by people in burkas? i don't fucking get it, how is banning a burka going to stop criminals from covering their faces when committing crimes, what are you going to do, ban fabrics??

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51011153]how many banks were recently robbed by people in burkas? i don't fucking get it, how is banning a burka going to stop criminals from covering their faces when committing crimes, what are you going to do, ban fabrics??[/QUOTE] i was going to make a zinger about banning guns, but I already know how it will end up [QUOTE= Person A] Ban Burkas! people can wear them to rob banks![/QUOTE] [QUOTE= Person B]what about other concealing fabrics, like ski masks? [I]whats stopping people from using something else? you are just targeting those that wear the burka[/I][/QUOTE] [QUOTE= Person A] you are missing the point, the fact is that the burka can still be used to rob banks![/QUOTE] [QUOTE= Person C]Why don't we ban guns instead so people have a harder time robbing banks?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE= Person A] Thats stupid! even if we ban guns,[I] criminals would use something else to rob banks, you are just targeting gun owners[/I][/QUOTE] I have seen these kinds of loops here on facepunch and in the reality, no matter where they stand politically on issues. if you hold a set of values in one scenario, but suddenly do a 180 when I change the people we are talking about, [B]you need to step back and reflect on what you truly believe in[/B]

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51010870]No, France is still way behind because they are enacting laws that dictate what people can and can not wear. At this point, they are literally on the same footing as ISIS in that regard. .[/QUOTE] That's most countries though. For example, some US States require people to wear helmets when riding motorcycles, and most places in the US don't allow public nudity. Mind, specifically banning one piece of religious clothing is different from banning all clothing that covers one's face. Specifically targeting an article of clothing because of its religious meaning is wrong. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51011153]how many banks were recently robbed by people in burkas? i don't fucking get it, how is banning a burka going to stop criminals from covering their faces when committing crimes, what are you going to do, ban fabrics??[/QUOTE] The point of banning something is never to prevent a criminal from using it, because a criminal need not obey the law anyway. Rather, at least as far as this goes, the goal is to create contrast. If covering one's face completely was legal, and due to the popularity of a religion where in people tend to cover their face almost everyone covered their face, it would be extremely easy for a criminal who was covering their face to avoid being identified while committing a crime to blend in. Compared now to the exact same situation except concealing one's face is illegal (or, more generally as is the case in most of the US, viewed as suspicious in most conditions), and suddenly the criminal trying to conceal their identity for nefarious reasons stands out.

[QUOTE=DaMastez;51011760][B]The point of banning something is never to prevent a criminal from using it, because a criminal need not obey the law anyway. Rather, at least as far as this goes, the goal is to create contrast.[/B] If covering one's face completely was legal, and due to the popularity of a religion where in people tend to cover their face almost everyone covered their face, it would be extremely easy for a criminal who was covering their face to avoid being identified while committing a crime to blend in. Compared now to the exact same situation except concealing one's face is illegal (or, more generally as is the case in most of the US, viewed as suspicious in most conditions), and suddenly the criminal trying to conceal their identity for nefarious reasons stands out.[/QUOTE] I agree with the bolded part but i do not agree with the rest and here is why. [QUOTE]due to the popularity of a religion where in people tend to cover their face almost everyone covered their face[/QUOTE] This part is actually quite inaccurate. actually a really small percentage of muslims wear the burqa (I dont have the source on me, if someone could post it that would be great, I saw it on FP before). so, keeping that in mind, here is my thinking. By setting the precedent that a government can ban certain clothes of a certain religion/culture, you are going to upset those people. when you try to repress people, it is very common for them to push back. I would not be surprised to see more people wear these burkas now as protest. If however, we just let the situation be, I doubt burqas would last long before the rest of the muslim population does away with them. heck it is already unpopular, with enough time, integration with western ideals would take place and even fewer people would wear such clothing and instead go for a more western look. ironically, by supporting these bans, you are more prone to creating the situation you fear

[QUOTE=DaMastez;51011760]That's most countries though. For example, some US States require people to wear helmets when riding motorcycles, and most places in the US don't allow public nudity. Mind, specifically banning one piece of religious clothing is different from banning all clothing that covers one's face. Specifically targeting an article of clothing because of its religious meaning is wrong.[/QUOTE] Forcing to someone to wear a motorcycle helmet by law is far different than forcing someone to remove religious clothing by law. Laws banning burkas and the like are xenophobia under the guise of security. Theres no real justifiable reason to ban burkas.

[QUOTE=gk99;51009170] Fuck man, we should ban hoodies too! Those can obscure who you are as well! Seriously, legitimate question: what's the difference between two difference pieces of clothing that do the same damn thing? Why do you want to ban one and not the other?[/QUOTE] Fun fact: There are actually dozens of cities across the US that ban hoodies in certain public locations and some even during certain times of the day. There's no state-wide or nation-wide law like that, but there are for cities throughout the US.

Ahh, I get it. It's reverse psychology! ISIS banned Burqas so they must be good! Mandatory burqas for women now please.

[QUOTE=da space core;51009175]80 to 95 percent of pedophiles are men. By your logic, we must ban men because some of them are bad.[/QUOTE] Your initial statistic, im gonna need some source on that because i know it to be factually wrong.

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51012256]Forcing to someone to wear a motorcycle helmet by law is far different than forcing someone to remove religious clothing by law. Laws banning burkas and the like are xenophobia under the guise of security. Theres no real justifiable reason to ban burkas.[/QUOTE] How exactly is it different? A motorcycle helmet isn't like a seatbelt; not wearing one doesn't pose a notable additional risk to others (that can't be mitigated with other means). Why should the government dictate something like that? Fundamentally it's a question of personal choice versus government mandate. Moreover, why should one garment receive special treatment just because it's associated with a religion? Furthermore, there is a very good reason to have a general ban on articles of clothing which conceal one's identity in certain public places, a definition which a Burka clearly falls under: It makes it harder/impossible to identify an individual. Mind, specifically banning just Burkas--while allowing for other face concealing garments--there is no justification for.

[QUOTE=DaMastez;51012961]How exactly is it different? A motorcycle helmet isn't like a seatbelt; not wearing one doesn't pose a notable additional risk to others (that can't be mitigated with other means). Why should the government dictate something like that?[/QUOTE] Because the government has to pick up the pieces when someone who isn't wearing a helmet gets splattered over the pavement. Even without socialised healthcare, they have to pay emergency services, they have to close the roads, they need to clean up... The same logic as you suggest could be used for health warnings on food.

[QUOTE=da space core;51011642]i was going to make a zinger about banning guns, but I already know how it will end up I have seen these kinds of loops here on facepunch and in the reality, no matter where they stand politically on issues. if you hold a set of values in one scenario, but suddenly do a 180 when I change the people we are talking about, [B]you need to step back and reflect on what you truly believe in[/B][/QUOTE] i absolutely knew someone would bring up guns snip misunderstood [editline]7th September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=DaMastez;51012961]How exactly is it different? A motorcycle helmet isn't like a seatbelt; not wearing one doesn't pose a notable additional risk to others (that can't be mitigated with other means). Why should the government dictate something like that? Fundamentally it's a question of personal choice versus government mandate. Moreover, why should one garment receive special treatment just because it's associated with a religion? [/QUOTE] because the people who would choose not to wear motorcycle helmets while riding a motorbike are stupid enough that they need the law to convince them to do it and in the case of the UK, the burka doesn't have special treatment with regard to concealing clothing because there's no ban on concealing clothing afaik - if you want to complain about any item of clothing, complain about the fact that sikhs don't have to wear motorcycle helmets because they wear turbans

Pretty sure riding a motorcycle is a very specific situation whereas simply being outside in public isnt.

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;51013374]Pretty sure riding a motorcycle is a very specific situation whereas simply being outside in public isnt.[/QUOTE] if you're talking about the sikh thing, a motorcycle helmet is mandated because it is effective protection, whereas a turban isn't otherwise i'm not sure what you're referring to

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51013517]if you're talking about the sikh thing, a motorcycle helmet is mandated because it is effective protection, whereas a turban isn't otherwise i'm not sure what you're referring to[/QUOTE] I was just throwing out a general thought, mostly as a response to the people comparing banning burkas to mandated motorcycle helmets that it makes no sense to compare the situations.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;51013517]if you're talking about the sikh thing, a motorcycle helmet is mandated because it is effective protection, whereas a turban isn't otherwise i'm not sure what you're referring to[/QUOTE] i think his point is that wearing a motorcycle helmet for seemingly no reason would be suspicious, whereas just wearing a burka like you do every day means nothing

[QUOTE=Cone;51013564]i think his point is that wearing a motorcycle helmet for seemingly no reason would be suspicious, whereas just wearing a burka like you do every day means nothing[/QUOTE] My point is more that enforcing the usage of helmets when riding motorcycles doesn't infringe on human rights in the same way as banning burkas does - owning and riding a motorcycle is in many ways a luxury.

[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51012797]Your initial statistic, im gonna need some source on that because i know it to be factually wrong.[/QUOTE] Heres one source which claims 96 percent, although i have seen quite a range of numbers, so i gave a range as well [url]http://www.yellodyno.com/html/child_molester_stats.html[/url]

[QUOTE=Blizzerd;51012797]Your initial statistic, im gonna need some source on that because i know it to be factually wrong.[/QUOTE] dude shouldn't you have learnt by now that almost everything you think/say is eventually proven wrong when someone more knowledgable comes along

Great to see the ISIS pieces of shit throw the beliefs they've hid behind into the fire the second their own lives are in danger. They rose to power on the back of the very religious ideals (albeit very warped and twisted from their original meaning) they now ignore. How long before they cast away the real mask, and are revealed to have been Hydra in disguise all this time?