Virginia Police arrest "sword-wielding man" for wearing make-up.

[PursuePeace]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/virginia-po...ry?id=46365754


This guy is a weirdo, but this makes no sense. He wasn't even wearing a mask, he was wearing make-up. Even if he WERE wearing a mask, so what?

Felony? Up to to 5 years in prison?

Guess we can't have anyone fooling all of the facial recognition cameras in Virginia, can we?

Bizarre story.

[jmdrake]

Wait a minute. Carrying a sword is legal but wearing a mask is not? So....what does Virginia do every October 31st?

[sparebulb]

Great!

Can we expect the Virginia cops to start arresting everyone violating this law?

I didn't think so.

[Suzanimal]

[Lamp]

That looks SO..........boss!

[Suzanimal]

Wait a minute. Carrying a sword is legal but wearing a mask is not? So....what does Virginia do every October 31st?

Arrest the trick-or-treaters and claim their candy as asset forfeiture?

[PatriotOne]

I wonder if he's part of the creepy clown thing. Someone should have taken a baseball bat to the guy. That creepy clown thing is terrifying.

[ChristianAnarchist]

I wonder if he's part of the creepy clown thing. Someone should have taken a baseball bat to the guy. That creepy clown thing is terrifying.

Sorry but everyone should have the liberty to be as creepy as they want as long as they don't hurt anyone or take property that isn't theirs. I don't recall anything about having a right to not be creeped out...

And 5 years for a mask?? What crazy statist wrote that law?? I hope the courts overturn this nonsense...

[PatriotOne]

Sorry but everyone should have the liberty to be as creepy as they want as long as they don't hurt anyone or take property that isn't theirs. I don't recall anything about having a right to not be creeped out...

And 5 years for a mask?? What crazy statist wrote that law?? I hope the courts overturn this nonsense...

The story could obviously use a bit of context. Was there a purpose for his appearance and sword? Was he on his way to a play? A masquerade ball? Making a movie? Or was he purposely trying to terrify people like the "creepy clown" thing. If the later, I say beat him with a baseball bat and run him over for good measures. My right not to be terrorized trumps his right to be creepy.

Are you familiar with the creepy clown thing? Certainly would like to know more of the story though.

[ChristianAnarchist]

The story could obviously use a bit of context. Was there a purpose for his appearance and sword? Was he on his way to a play? A masquerade ball? Making a movie? Or was he purposely trying to terrify people like the "creepy clown" thing. If the later, I say beat him with a baseball bat and run him over for good measures. My right not to be terrorized trumps his right to be creepy.

Are you familiar with the creepy clown thing? Certainly would like to know more of the story though.

Yes, I'm familiar with it. I don't believe you have a right to "not be terrorized" if your definition of "terrorized" is being scared by some action that does not do actual harm. If you think dressing up as a creepy clown harms you in some way I would like you to quantify that harm...

That said, if someone punches a "creepy clown" that's a risk the guy takes and he will have to deal with that in whatever manner he seems just.

[PursuePeace]

The story could obviously use a bit of context. Was there a purpose for his appearance and sword? Was he on his way to a play? A masquerade ball? Making a movie? Or was he purposely trying to terrify people like the "creepy clown" thing. If the later, I say beat him with a baseball bat and run him over for good measures. My right not to be terrorized trumps his right to be creepy.

Are you familiar with the creepy clown thing? Certainly would like to know more of the story though.

The whole "beat him with a baseball bat and run him over" comment has me a bit uh... flummoxed.
Why so violent?

[PatriotOne]

I don't believe you have a right to "not be terrorized" if your definition of "terrorized" is being scared by some action that does not do actual harm.

So your okay with, say, someone brandishing a gun or a sword threatening to kill someone as long as they don't actually kill them? People have a right to terrorize others as long as they don't shoot or cut their heads off with said weapon? Okee dokee.

[jmdrake]

Arrest the trick-or-treaters and claim their candy as asset forfeiture?

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Suzanimal again.

[jmdrake]

Yes, I'm familiar with it. I don't believe you have a right to "not be terrorized" if your definition of "terrorized" is being scared by some action that does not do actual harm. If you think dressing up as a creepy clown harms you in some way I would like you to quantify that harm...

That said, if someone punches a "creepy clown" that's a risk the guy takes and he will have to deal with that in whatever manner he seems just.

Okay. I assumed PatriotOne was being a little sarcastic (still do), that said yes you have a right to try to scare people and the people who are scared have a right to beat your ass if they feel they are in imminent danger of harmful contact. Putting someone in fear of imminent danger of harmful contact is against the law and it's called assault. Actually making the contact is called battery. And in some cases the "creepy clowns" were running after children. So if a parent thought this clown was about to abduct a kid he would have a natural right of self defense, which includes the right to defend others, to baseball bat Mr. creepy clown.

That doesn't at all seem to apply here. There was no assault charge. There wasn't even a weapons charge. (Not sure about Virginia but in some states openly carrying a knife over 6 inches is illegal....which seems silly since you can do more damage with a gun.) The statute, as written, makes it a crime to wear a mask to conceal your identity. So.....these people would be felons...

[jmdrake]

Great!

Can we expect the Virginia cops to start arresting everyone violating this law?

I didn't think so.

I guess if the offender in question had said "I'm part of the church of Joker" he would be okay.

Actually any halfway decent lawyer could get this thrown out.

According to Virginia Code 18.2-422, "It shall be unlawful for any person over 16 years of age, with the intent to conceal his identity, wear any mask, hood, or other device, whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered, so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, to be or appear in any public place, or upon any private property in this Commonwealth, without first having obtained from the owner or tenant thereof consent to do so in writing."

Just put the defendant on the stand.

"Q: Sir. What was the reason you wore Joker facepaint?"
"A: I think the Joker is cool. Doesn't everybody?"
"Q: Was your intent to hide your identity?"
"A: Are you freaking kidding me? Of course not. Putting on white facepaint doesn't hide your identity. I look like myself but with white facepaint. And I'm already white without the facepaint."
"Q: Were you carrying identification?"
"A: Yes."
"Q: Did you show it to the police when they asked you for it?"
"A: Yes."
"Q: Would you have shown your ID any store owner or security guard who asked for it?"
"A: Of course."
"Q: No further questions. (to the judge) Your honor I move that this case be dismissed as there is no way the prosecutor will be able to prove what the intent of the defendant was and further I move that the prosecutor be sanctioned for being a dumbass."
"(Judge): Motion granted on both counts."

[ChristianAnarchist]

I guess if the offender in question had said "I'm part of the church of Joker" he would be okay.

Actually any halfway decent lawyer could get this thrown out.

According to Virginia Code 18.2-422, "It shall be unlawful for any person over 16 years of age, with the intent to conceal his identity, wear any mask, hood, or other device, whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered, so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, to be or appear in any public place, or upon any private property in this Commonwealth, without first having obtained from the owner or tenant thereof consent to do so in writing."

Just put the defendant on the stand.

"Q: Sir. What was the reason you wore Joker facepaint?"
"A: I think the Joker is cool. Doesn't everybody?"
"Q: Was your intent to hide your identity?"
"A: Are you freaking kidding me? Of course not. Putting on white facepaint doesn't hide your identity. I look like myself but with white facepaint. And I'm already white without the facepaint."
"Q: Were you carrying identification?"
"A: Yes."
"Q: Did you show it to the police when they asked you for it?"
"A: Yes."
"Q: Would you have shown your ID any store owner or security guard who asked for it?"
"A: Of course."
"Q: No further questions. (to the judge) Your honor I move that this case be dismissed as there is no way the prosecutor will be able to prove what the intent of the defendant was and further I move that the prosecutor be sanctioned for being a dumbass."
"(Judge): Motion granted on both counts."

I think it also possible to defeat the "conceal identity" part because it certainly should be your right to conceal your identity if that is your desire. You see the rich and famous constantly trying to "conceal" their identity everywhere they go. If one person can do it everyone can do it...

It would be interesting to see how many states have such nonsense. I don't believe many do.

[ChristianAnarchist]

So your okay with, say, someone brandishing a gun or a sword threatening to kill someone as long as they don't actually kill them? People have a right to terrorize others as long as they don't shoot or cut their heads off with said weapon? Okee dokee.

I said before that someone might want to punch or otherwise act against someone doing crazy stuff. That's the incentive to not DO crazy stuff. Making a "law" against such action is nutty. Keep the damn goons out of our lives and let "the people" take care of threats. There will by WAY less violence that way (no, not zero)...

Hell, if you CALL the goons because you see someone "brandishing" a gun you are just as likely to get shot by the goons as they come to the scene!!!

[PatriotOne]

I said before that someone might want to punch or otherwise act against someone doing crazy stuff. That's the incentive to not DO crazy stuff. Making a "law" against such action is nutty. Keep the damn goons out of our lives and let "the people" take care of threats. There will by WAY less violence that way (no, not zero)...

Hell, if you CALL the goons because you see someone "brandishing" a gun you are just as likely to get shot by the goons as they come to the scene!!!

Okay. I'll pass your good advice on to my 14 yr old granddaughter. If you see someone threatening you with a sword while you walk to school just go kick em in the balls. Whatever you do...DO NOT CALL THE POLICE....because they will shoot you.

Your an idiot.

[osan]

According to Virginia Code 18.2-422, "It shall be unlawful for any person over 16 years of age, with the intent to conceal his identity, wear any mask, hood, or other device, whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered, so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, to be or appear in any public place, or upon any private property in this Commonwealth, without first having obtained from the owner or tenant thereof consent to do so in writing."

What the foig?

Is this even serious?

Virginia just made the black states list.

[phill4paul]

Okay. I'll pass your good advice on to my 14 yr old granddaughter. If you see someone threatening you with a sword while you walk to school just go kick em in the balls. Whatever you do...DO NOT CALL THE POLICE....because they will shoot you.

Your an idiot.

*You're*

[ChristianAnarchist]

Okay. I'll pass your good advice on to my 14 yr old granddaughter. If you see someone threatening you with a sword while you walk to school just go kick em in the balls. Whatever you do...DO NOT CALL THE POLICE....because they will shoot you.

Your an idiot.

The idiots are the ones who call the goons...

Police mistakenly shoot 911 caller during manhunt

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/12/police-mistakenly-shoot-911-caller-manhunt/18901533/

[Ender]

The story could obviously use a bit of context. Was there a purpose for his appearance and sword? Was he on his way to a play? A masquerade ball? Making a movie? Or was he purposely trying to terrify people like the "creepy clown" thing. If the later, I say beat him with a baseball bat and run him over for good measures. My right not to be terrorized trumps his right to be creepy.

Are you familiar with the creepy clown thing? Certainly would like to know more of the story though.

Everybody knows who the Joker is- most people would think it's cool. And you do NOT have a right not to be terrorized- nothing TRUMPS someone else's right to use make up; you DO have a right not to be assaulted- only then do you have a right to carry on with the baseball bat.

[Suzanimal]

So your okay with, say, someone brandishing a gun or a sword threatening to kill someone as long as they don't actually kill them? People have a right to terrorize others as long as they don't shoot or cut their heads off with said weapon? Okee dokee.

That escalated quickly. o_O

He wasn't brandishing the sword and he didn't threaten to kill anyone. From what I gathered, he was just walking around in a costume and someone got scared and called the police. If I saw that guy, I'd probably think he was a weirdo and steer clear but I certainly wouldn't consider beating him with a bat.

[kpitcher]

According to Virginia Code 18.2-422, "It shall be unlawful for any person over 16 years of age, with the intent to conceal his identity, wear any mask, hood, or other device, whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered, so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, to be or appear in any public place, or upon any private property in this Commonwealth, without first having obtained from the owner or tenant thereof consent to do so in writing."

What's substantial? If someone is sick and wears a surgical mask would that land them in jail? I hope no one ever wears a scarf when it's cold!

It would seem like first amendment people would show up with anonymous / guy fawkes masks to protest this.

[opal]

Not that it was ever on the list but Virginia is now even more officially OFF the list of places to property hunt

[phill4paul]

That escalated quickly. o_O

He wasn't brandishing the sword and he didn't threaten to kill anyone. From what I gathered, he was just walking around in a costume and someone got scared and called the police. If I saw that guy, I'd probably think he was a weirdo and steer clear but I certainly wouldn't consider beating him with a bat.

Would you consider beating him with a Batman? He was dressed like the Joker.

[PatriotOne]

That escalated quickly. o_O

He wasn't brandishing the sword and he didn't threaten to kill anyone. From what I gathered, he was just walking around in a costume and someone got scared and called the police. If I saw that guy, I'd probably think he was a weirdo and steer clear but I certainly wouldn't consider beating him with a bat.

We were just talking hypothetical scenario's at that point....not this particular guy...especially since the article itself lacked any context to what said weirdo was doing.

[Weston White]

I think this is all taken out of context, and points to the ever-expanding abuses of statutory context and the ineptness of law enforcement personnel that have no business proactively enforcing such statutes on behalf of the state and which lack corpus delicti.

In this instance, we have the qualifier "intent to conceal his identity," so is one by merely wearing a mask or excessive makeup raise to the level of intending their identity or would it not require more context such as in premeditation to commit a crime or to provide false information to law enforcement personnel when questioned? If police arrived and said give me your ID and what is your name and he gave the proper information, was he intending to conceal his identity?

Otherwise, if we apply this statute literally, then surely all street performers, clowns, street corner costumed sign advertisers, adult costume parties, etc., have a valid lawsuit under the I and XIV Amendments.

[AZJoe]

So your okay with, say, someone brandishing a gun or a sword threatening to kill someone as long as they don't actually kill them? People have a right to terrorize others as long as they don't shoot or cut their heads off with said weapon? Okee dokee.

This has got to win the prize for the most absurd argument. Not one of those things occurred per the story. They did not arrest, charge or accuse him of any of that. They arrested him and charged him with a felony for "wearing a mask in public."

Saying its Ok to arrest people for wearing a mask because people should not be able to commit some other crime like terrorize or threaten is like saying you should not be able to own a gun because people should not be able to blow up buildings, or people who smoke should be charged with felonies because people should not be able to commit arson. These are ridiculously absurd disconnects.

[AZJoe]

Sharia code, Virginia style.

Felony to wear mask in Public? Halloween must be a field day for the cops.


They certainly aren't clowning around in Virginia. No clowns allowed.


Thank goodness we have the Virginia police to uphold the Mask Law.


Thank god our our government is over in the middle east fighting for our freedoms like this.