• autumn_rain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    1 month ago

    “…But Republican legislators continued to express doubt that someone would get in legal trouble for masking because of health concerns, saying law enforcement and prosecutors would use discretion on whether to charge someone. Newton said the bill focuses on criminalizing masks only for the purpose of concealing one’s identity…”

    I don’t have faith that people would not get harassed or feel threatened by somebody because they are wearing a mask for health reasons. The law discourages mask use.

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 month ago

      During the height of Covid, there were countless stories of unmasked people verbally harassing mask wearers in public out of the South. I’m talking frothing at the mouth, in their face, furious that this person would wear a mask. Once the law is on their side, I suspect this will get worse.

    • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 month ago

      I had a mechanic say I was “scary” when I wore a mask into his shop (before telling me my mask was killing me). So yeah, I do not trust these people to judge in good faith.

  • WraithGear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    1 month ago

    Leaving interpretation up to law enforcement is demanding that they abuse it. Its the point of discretion.

    • eatCasserole@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s like a dog whistle. It’s not in writing, but the cops know what they’re supposed to do, and will be happy to oblige.

  • Bluefalcon
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 month ago

    It warms my heart when people realize how shit NC is. They wrote the book on gerrymandering , sheirffs having immunity, crazy ass governers, and so so much more. It fucking sucks here. Plus their BBQ taste like shit. Vineager is not a bbq sauce!

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Opponents of the bill say it risks the health of those masking for safety reasons. But those backing the legislation say it is a needed response to the demonstrations, including those at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill that escalated to police clashes and arrests.

    The bill also further criminalizes the blockage of roads or emergency vehicles for a protest, which has occurred during pro-Palestinian demonstrations in Raleigh and Durham.

    I feel like if you just told them this criminalizes klan hoods they’d back off…

    • mynachmadarch@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s not stated well in that article but the bill actually has an exception for secret societies to request permits to wear masks for parades and such. A Democrat state rep (forget her name) pointed out this explicitly would protect the KKK but not regular folk wanting to, say, legally protest Palestine murders, because everyone knows they would be denied permits.

      Earlier versions of this bill kept failing until they added what people are calling the KKK exception.

      • eatCasserole@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s fuckin wild. How many ‘secret societies’ wear masks for parades and such? This stuff is getting so close to open fascism.

          • eatCasserole@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            It’s still got this plausible deniability veneer, but you’re absolutely right. We need to be seriously organizing to combat it.

  • Makeitstop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t doubt that the intent is not specifically to harass people who are wearing a mask for health reasons and just going about their normal routine. But only because I’m certain the intent is to use it as an excuse to harass and arrest peaceful protestors even when they aren’t breaking any laws. Because speech should only be free when they agree with it.

    But even if the intent isn’t to go after people that choose to value human life, they are leaving that door open and they fucking know it. All they have to do is make the law a modifier that can be tacked on to existing felony charges, but can’t be charged separately. But they aren’t doing that, or anything else to prevent the law from being used to target people for not belligerently opposing anything that might benefit public health.

  • thesohoriots@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    “Before it moves to the house”

    And guess who controls the house, and then it gets vetoed by the democrat governor, who then gets overridden, and then the goddamn state Supreme Court decides to have that shit etched in stone. Sherman should’ve made one more pass.