• halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      It’s actually not that vague looking into it. They have to be readily identifiable. They can totally wear masks as long as their identifiable as police and not trying to disguise themselves. So things like SWAT and riot equipment already identify them as police.

      It has an exemption for undercover officers, which already have existing requirements and paperwork associated for oversight. There is zero reason for any other officer to not be identifiable.

      It requires intent to disguise, so effectively this just outlaws plainclothes officers, which should already not be allowed honestly. Too easy for them to escalate a conflict from within to then justify an escalated police response. Protesters aren’t violent enough? Send Jeff and Bobby inside in plain clothes to start some shit.

    • ExtantHuman@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Everything sounds vague if you only read the headline about it, and not the actual law

    • Cruxifux@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      4 days ago

      And it would have to be enforced which it won’t. Democrat do nothing while pretending to do something shit again.