Should protesters be allowed to cover their faces?

I would beg to say that I am very surprised I have not been caught speeding. Very very lucky so far!!

Ha! Alie - Thames Valley Police. It was their cameras that got me on a very quiet Sunday morning, going from family in Didcot to the other family in Hampshire.

I've got caught twice.
Once, sheer non-attendance as I was very pleased at something I got at a boot sale - whizzed downhill into Oxford and a camera got me....once I was lost and looking for the right sign back from Wheatley, and ran into a speed trap with policemen, not thinking how fast I was going. Most annoying! So easily done.

jeni anyone can be done for speeding, at any age, I'll have you know. Not that I'm specially proud of it, but several years ago I did it twice within seven miles. I had to go on a speed awareness course, as have most of my family.

Titter!

I know - I was driving to Geneva airport and the speed limits changed constantly, so I was flashed doing 62 in a 50 zone which was only about 100 metres long! I wasn't even in a hurry as I always leave hours and hours to get to an airport. Grr.....€90 fine - I could have had several lunches out for that!

Speeding! At your age? Dear dear!

Yes, I have looked up the different regulations for people living in France - it is quite complicated. I rang the International Pensions Centre in England to ask about having my UK government pensions taxed at source and the young man who answered didn't seem to be able to grasp the fact that I was already non-resident in the UK and would be moving from France to NZ.

Greatnan NZ immigration wants an ACPO (or presumably the French equivalent) check and, if you are already squeaky clean, keep it that way. They can be very fussy,

Thanks for the tip, absent! I was vetted by the Home Office upon becoming a tax inspector, and I have never had anything worse than a fine in France for being 7 kms. over the speed limit, so I hope I will be acceptable to the NZ authorities!

I cannot afford to have any sort of mark against me or it will prevent me from using my New Zealand residency visa. I am both law abiding and a pacifist so there is no likelihood of my ever doing anything criminal while demonstrating and I have never done so in the past. However, now I feel unable to join a protest march or demonstrate peacefully in case my name/photograph goes on the wrong list and messes up my entire future unfairly. Realist or paranoid? Either way, I'm not taking the risk.

Courts and offices are a different matter. I would cover my face in a demonstration but not elsewhere.

I used to find it quite unnerving when probation clients would turn up for their appointments wearing balaclavas! We would give them a polite note asking them to remove them when they entered reception (didn't tell them the receptionist was freaking because she thought there was going to be a robbery!).

I have worked with one judge who asked a young man ' do you have a medical reason for wearing sunglasses indoors? If not! Please remove them'
Also with the hats young men wear!' do you have a religious or medical reason? '

My pet dislike is appellants or theit accompanying friends, relatives, reps, etc: who sit there chewing gum in the hearing. Or, in spite of the instruction leave their mobile phones on!

I am sitting in what is a court of law. We try to be fairly informal. But!

I don't think the UK is less oppressive it's just more subtle. Under the terrorist laws you can be jailed without trial for years whilst they 'find' the information against you. But the security services get away with it because the prisoners are 'the enemy' even though there is no proof of that.

Remember during the miner's strike when they weren't so subtle and we found out what the police were allowed to do. Suddenly villages were sealed off and no one was allowed to leave. Coaches were stopped on the motorway and not allowed to travel any further. Horses were ridden full pelt into crowds of men.

Those of you who think this is a free country with freedom of speech try this. Stand outside the Houses of Parliament...just you so no form of threat...with a sign saying 'Troops out of Iraq'. See how long you're there before they attempt to move you on and if you don't move see how long it is before they arrest you.

Yes, well done
I don't think that because the UK is less oppressive than other regimes you can afford to allow the police/government/security services to continue the insidious creep against freedom of belief and expression. Why should the police be allowed to photograph citizens who are doing nothing illegal and why should the police object to being photographed themselves?
"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."
The loss of liberty does not happen in one fell swoop, but piece by piece.

Good for you, Joan. Cheers!

In Queensland Australia in the 1980s you got photographed by a form of state secret police when you joined protests against the then very right wing and extremely nasty government. I had my own file, which I eventually saw under freedom of Information" .It contained copies of my letters to the editor, among other things.

Luckily, when i eventually went back to work after my youngest started school, it was in a private firm: I'm pretty sure I would not have got a government job.

So you do take a risk letting your face be seen, but it is a risk that you have to take when you are fighting for a just cause.

That government stayed in power through a blatant gerrymander, but even with this, they lost power after the Fitzgerald Enquiry, which resulted in the Police Commissioner and some MPs doing serious jail time. The incoming Labour government instigated electoral reform, ensuring that boundaries were set by an independent electoral commission. This system remains to this day.

I'm proud that I did my bit to fight the fascists.

I agree about masks, pogs. I don't like them at all except for the kind of face-protection you mention. I wonder if more people are wearing them nowadays when protesting because it's so much more difficult to be an invisible member of a crowd – surrounded by cameras as we are nowadays, and not just CTV; I'm thinking of mobile phones.

I think your first sentence is a bit simplistic, though I understand what you're saying. I think people are often too ready to make assumptions about other people's political inclinations and I'm not sure that's a good idea. Mind you, I do sometimes try and guess the tone of poster's messages on here before I read them, just for fun, so I'm guilty too!

Like a lot of questions asked on G.N. your reply will probably depend on your politics.

For me face masks belong on ski slopes, diving and to keep the cold out.

If you are a demonstrator you will only feel the need to wear a mask or face covering if you do not want to be recognised or you probably know you might do something anti-social or unlawful.Some wear a mask or face covering purely to intimidate and it makes them feel empowered.

Some people say 'good on them', others will see them as weak and cowardly. I only hope nobody on G.N. ever finds someone in their home wearing a mask but if they did then maybe they will understand it is not just a trivial anti-establishment act but a calculated act of intimidation.

As for Britain being a police state I agree with Annobel. If you can't differentiate between Britain and a country like North Korea or China then I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

Having a Special Branch file doesn't just affect your life but other people you're in contact with. In the seventies/eighties my dad was deemed to be a security risk even though he did a perfectly legitimate job and never broke the law. Although I was only a teenager I was a security risk too based solely on what they thought of my dad.

I doubt things have changed. In fact I can't help feeling it's got worse.

More likely that they are aware that Special Branch or MI5 are recording the protest on video and they don't want to be on record as subversive - even if they are.

I have never covered my face when protesting but my protests have not been likely to end in violence. It depends on the protest I think. In the 60s I don't remember seeing faces covered whereas today it seems quite the thing to do, especially for young people. This could be because they wouldn't want their parents / employers finding out or because they are looking to be violent if the opportunity arises and don't want to get caught.

POGS ?? what does that mean?

home