what would you do with a masked woman?

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - what would you do with a masked woman?

Posted: 5/28/2002 10:40:47 PM EDT

The Fl. dmv just issued a license to a devout Muslim woman who insists on wearing her full head covering at all times when out of the house.

As she has been issued a license with that head covering on, the question is this.

If you stopped her for a routine moving violation, and when approaching the car notice the full head and face covering, and when handed a license with the same face covering on it.
1, would you feel comfortable with her id if the license matched the registration on the vehicle and the insurance card?

2, would you make her provide more id than is usual,such as a thumb print?

3, would none of the above work for you and you do not feel comfortable with her under any circumstances?

Of course under felony circumstances we are going to remove the headdress with or without her consent. But are we opening ourselves up to lawsuits for infringing on her religious freedoms.and are people with less than honorable intentions going to demand the same and have a state full of criminals who get their id photos taken with their face covered.

If so then we are going to need a fingerprint id system in patrol cars and quick!![>:/]

edited for spellcheck cause i arnt named webster

Posted: 5/28/2002 10:45:57 PM EDT

[#1]

"I'm sorry ma'am. If you insist on covering your head I'll have to see your tits."

Yeah sure, a head covering is great. That way they can all share one ID between 100 of them - oh and that one terrorist with feminine eyes can use it too.

If they can cover their faces, so can I right?

Posted: 5/29/2002 12:41:31 AM EDT

[#2]

Shadowblade,

This isn't GD. It's a serious question deserving of a serious answer.

Posted: 5/29/2002 12:52:04 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Shadowblade,

This isn't GD. It's a serious question deserving of a serious answer.

View Quote

Lighten up, Francis.

Posted: 5/29/2002 12:58:12 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Shadowblade,

This isn't GD. It's a serious question deserving of a serious answer.

View Quote

My apologies, I picked it off the home page and didn't look at which forum it was in. I was going for sarcasm but if it is inappropriate feel free to delete it.

Posted: 5/29/2002 8:05:15 AM EDT

[#5]

In Texas it's simple. Don't want a picture, (or thumbprint) you don't get a DL. There are alternative means of transportation. The legislature addressed this very thing a couple of years ago.

Posted: 5/29/2002 8:32:46 AM EDT

[#6]

Shadowblade,

No problem...

Gunbert,

You Member, me Moderator. Here BOTS, not GD. Dave not know how to lighten up on BOTS. Mongo like Candy-Gram...

Posted: 5/29/2002 8:53:43 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Gunbert,

You Member, me Moderator. Here BOTS, not GD. Dave not know how to lighten up on BOTS. Mongo like Candy-Gram...

View Quote

[:D]

Sometimes we reprobates escape the GD and just can't help ourselves. [:D]

Posted: 5/29/2002 8:57:38 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

You Member, me Moderator. Here BOTS, not GD. Dave not know how to lighten up on BOTS. Mongo like Candy-Gram...

View Quote

IS THIS AN ATTEMPT AT HUMOR ???

I am astounded! Dave is finally coming out of his shell- way to go!

Posted: 5/29/2002 9:01:12 AM EDT

[#9]

As someone studying law in FL, this problem is sure to find its way to the FLSC. People such as fundamentalist Muslims will probably be required to provide some alternative form of ID on their license, such as a thumbprint.

Of course, implementing a new system would be financially burdensome, and the civil rights attorneys will be all over this. Heaven forbid that they should have to do things "Our Way."
Speaking of which, our women could not go to their country and walk around uncovered, but we can't ask them for special consideration when they don't fit our norm. Ain't PC bullshit great?

Posted: 5/29/2002 10:43:18 AM EDT

[#10]

Sorry. I left out part of the "Mongo" post. It was a late night (actually morning) and an early morning. It should have read:

"You Member, me Moderator. Name not Francis. Name Dave. Here BOTS, not GD. Dave not know how to lighten up on BOTS. Mongo like Candy-Gram..."

Sometimes humor works better...sometimes not...

Posted: 5/29/2002 10:47:01 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
The Fl. dmv just issued a license to a devout Muslim woman who insists on wearing her full head covering at all times when out of the house.

As she has been issued a license with that head covering on, the question is this.

webster

View Quote

Well, what good is having her remove her head covering if you have nothing to compare her exposed face to? Her license photo has a picture of her in her head covering.

I think the Fl DMV went too far on this one. I believe your religious freedoms end when we start dealing with public safety. If she didn't want to remove her cover for a DMV photo, then don't issue a license.

Posted: 5/29/2002 10:57:37 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Name not Francis. Name Dave. Here BOTS, not GD. Dave not know how to lighten up on BOTS.

View Quote

Did you happen to see the movie "Stripes?" If not, you should. All will become clear then regarding the "Lighten up, Francis" thang. [:)] It is a classic line.

Posted: 5/29/2002 11:09:08 AM EDT

[#13]

a fundamentalist muslim who required women to remain covered at all times should not allow women to drive. at all. not even camels. they shouldnt even let her out in public unescorted.

Posted: 5/29/2002 11:23:27 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
a fundamentalist muslim who required women to remain covered at all times should not allow women to drive. at all. not even camels. they shouldnt even let her out in public unescorted.

View Quote

You are 100% correct, excellent point!!! Maybe they need to check her background a little more thoroughly, sounds a little off to me.

Posted: 5/29/2002 12:19:01 PM EDT

[#15]

I prefer the Jack Webb DI model to the Warren Oates attempted comedy job. R.Lee Ermy's portrayal of GYSGT Hartman had me laughing so hard the other people in the theater thought I was nuts. Hmmm...Maybe they knew something I didn't...

And my name still isn't Francis...[;)]

Posted: 5/30/2002 5:10:24 AM EDT

[#16]

In one argument I have been in about this I brought up the point that there is no way for me to positively id her for court. A full head dress looks like a full head dress on anybody.

And as we don't have a fingerprint system yet, so currently if I were to pull this person over and have to go to court on it, it would be easy to make a fool of us by having another person in the same headdress in the courtroom.

It is a total absurdity, I hate the fact that anyone gave in on this much less my state.(were still recovering from the whole election thing)

I don't mind the humor but I do want the opinion of others on this(shadowblade, some of us are familiar,and it's psyco, anybody calls me francis and I cut em)

Posted: 5/30/2002 6:30:09 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
a fundamentalist muslim who required women to remain covered at all times should not allow women to drive. at all. not even camels. they shouldnt even let her out in public unescorted.

View Quote

This would seem like a huge point. If these people are sooooooo devout that their women cannot remove their veil for a legally-mandated, required pic, in order to obtain a DL, then they are too devout to be driving around in public, unescorted. This sure seems like a huge red flag to me. [:(!]

Posted: 5/30/2002 8:09:21 AM EDT

[#18]

The driving thing seems to be regional,some countries allow it and some don't.

Also she has said that she does not PLAN to drive but only want's it for id.

It's kinda like mormons and the whole caffine thing, out west it's mostly adhered to but here in fl the best tea I had growing up was from the family of a mormon bishop.

Posted: 5/30/2002 8:44:46 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
The driving thing seems to be regional,some countries allow it and some don't.

Also she has said that she does not PLAN to drive but only want's it for id.

View Quote

Same point--how is it valid/useful I.D. if it cannot be used to determine if the person presenting it is indeed the correct person?

Posted: 5/30/2002 10:58:28 AM EDT

[#20]

Thats exactly the point, her drivers license is not proper id. I can't belive our moron dmv broke down on this one.[:(!]

Posted: 5/30/2002 11:17:57 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

I think the Fl DMV went too far on this one. I believe your religious freedoms end when we start dealing with public safety. If she didn't want to remove her cover for a DMV photo, then don't issue a license.

View Quote

No they don't end, the US Constitution specifically prohibits the government from infringing on religious freedoms....However, since a driver's license is a privilege, not a right, if a person's religious beliefs prevent them from meeting the state's requirements for becoming licensed and exercising that privilege, then they are out of luck, simple as that.

By your reasoning, then an individual's 2nd Amendment rights end and can be freely infringed by government if public safety seems to require it. That's just not Constitutional.

What is expedient is very often, not legal.

At the very least I would require secondary identification...credit cards, and the like. If there is any way to establish citizenship on the florida license and you see that they are non-citizens, ask for their passports, visas, etc.

A fingerprint ain't gonna help much either unless you can fingerprint the person and analyze it instantly in the field. That's beyond the current tech that I know of.

Posted: 5/31/2002 8:51:48 PM EDT

[#22]

Seams like this Is the tail wagging the dog,You should let the public know about this as we don't even think of things like this. Much like the way too dark car windows,wonder how john Q would like to walk up on one of these late at night?

There weomen aren't supposed to be seen,or educated how can they pass the DVL tests.

Do our congressmen know about this?

Bob

Posted: 6/1/2002 10:40:47 AM EDT

[#23]

This was of course big new here for a while. The whole fight to get her picture with the covering and everything.

When the state gave in the news was all over it with basically the same feelings that the vast majority have "what the hell did they do that for"

I wholeheartedly agree that if she is not willing to meet the state standards for the picture then she does not get a license issued.

I think the whold fuss was over her ability to get a job. Without id she could not be employed. So the states policies were preventing her from working and thus we f**k up the whole system because of one idiot.

Lets see how this scenario plays out for religous freedoms.

Bad guy/gal robs a store wearing a black hood.
Same women mentioned above is wearing her headress and today's is black. She just happens to be in the vicinity of the aformentioned robbed store.
Being that she is within a reasonable distance and reasonable time, we spot her and immeditaly go into a felony stop. Well guess what, the headress is coming off this time and it's going to be forced off at gunpoint.

Now we have clearly violated her rights by removing or making her remove a religous headress against her will. She will probably win the lawsuit and we pay her out of court to settle. Because the state is too worried about being pc and not about common sense.[soapbox]

Posted: 6/5/2002 11:11:16 PM EDT

[#24]

IIRC, Dave cracked his first AR-15.com joke on my poor choice of phrasing in a thread I started. Or was that Chuck?

Scott

[:D]

Posted: 6/6/2002 8:24:21 AM EDT

[#25]

This problem isn't going away- now that the DMV has set precedent by allowing one Muslim woman to do this...they have to allow all of them.
Hopefully this case gets brought to trial and expedited to the FL Supreme Court for an authoritative ruling.
The legal consensus is that if you cannot give facial recognition, you may be compelled to provide alternative recognition (ie- a thumbprint).

What Florida and other states may be able to do is this: have the picture taken at the woman's house, by a DMV female employee. I believe Muslim women can show their faces at home to other women.

Then, she keep the ID hidden away in her purse, just as she hides her face.

There must be some way to compromise without offending our local standards of safety- we certainly cannot violate public decency standards in a Muslim country, so they should be equally respectful of our security requirements.

If this state weren't so PC, we could do the right thing and not issue her a license. You wanna have the privileges, you've gotta play the game by OUR rules.

Posted: 6/13/2002 5:58:53 PM EDT

[#26]

Shadowblade's sarcastic memo hit the point completely. Law Enforcement should supercede "religious beliefs". Example? What if it offends one's religious beliefs to have strangers enter your home, but the officer at the door has a search warrant? Sorry Mister, but they're coming in whether your deity likes it or not.

Long argument short, religious concerns should always be handled delicately and respectfully, but [b]must[/b] be cast aside temporarily when proper enforcement is necessary. I think it necessary for the lady, as disgusting to her as it might seem, to show her face for 5 seconds at the DMV, and then 5 seconds for the police officer. For 10 seconds, Allah will just have to play it cool.

Posted: 6/13/2002 11:03:01 PM EDT

[#27]

She doesn't have to show her face at all. But the social price is [b]SHE DOES NOT GET TO DRIVE HERE[/b]. If she wants to hide her face, no Driver's License. LEt her walk everywhere. Mohammed didn't drive...

Scott

Posted: 6/15/2002 11:24:43 AM EDT

[#28]

There are 6 banks in my patrol area. If I'm working day shift, anyone wearing a mask is getting stopped and checked out.

Posted: 6/17/2002 1:25:09 PM EDT

[#29]

i agree that she should not get a license if not willing to show her face.

But the state has already made that a moot point by issuing her one already.

I believe that she should have to show her face.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - what would you do with a masked woman?

General » Brothers Of The Shield

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us