Talk:Anti-mask law

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anti-mask laws. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141018035022/http://dcist.com/2012/10/occupys_halloween_party_might_break.php to http://dcist.com/2012/10/occupys_halloween_party_might_break.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:47, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested: World Map

I am requesting a world map of all anti-mask laws by country ... if someone could either make this or provide advice on how I can do this myself, I would be very thankful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mapmaker345 (talk • contribs) 02:07, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Problem in Intro

The introduction paragraph currently (12 March 2020) runs:

Anti-mask or anti-masking laws are legislative or penal initiatives that seek to stop individuals from concealing their faces, who do so often to not be identified or out of religious practice.

The last two clauses implicitly justify those who conceal their faces, and presumes that there can be no matters of civil rights, public safety, or other goods that the government is required to protect that can trump otherwise protected expressions, such as religious expression

The claim that individuals who wear masks "do so often [my emphasis] not to be identified" cannot be verified, since the author cannot know why particular individuals mask their faces unless he asks them. More importantly, he again presumes that citizens' or denizens' reasons for a practice can limit or restrict government interest in and action on behalf of public goods that the charters of the political order require them to provide, supply, secure, or protect.

The paragraph must be revised to indicate the most general reasons, or some typical reasons, that governments have to consider that wearing masks represents an obstacle or threat to or the destruction or nullification of a public or civil good that the charters of their political order require them to provide, supply, secure, or protect. Wordwright (talk) 02:35, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Wordwright. Please feel free to be bold! :-) It looks like this sentence got rewritten in this edit. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:43, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Separate mask law article?

Hi. Currently mask law redirects to anti-mask law, but I'm wondering if it would make more sense to have a separate article now. Parts of the world are beginning to mandate the use of masks in public to combat the spread of coronavirus disease 2019. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:48, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

COVID-19

I know there's the thing at the top, but shouldn't the article have at least some mention of the coronavirus pandemic? I'm guessing most if not all of these laws are not currently being enforced (often the opposite is) and I think that's pretty relevant to the article. flarn2006 [u t c] time: 19:23, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Illegal to use or illegal NOT to use?

According to this article, it is now illegal NOT to use face mask in France. How can it be both illegal and obligatory? --84.215.133.169 (talk) 10:47, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Australia

Does any one have a link verifying the statement on the page that, "It is legal to wear a mask in public in Australia"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:6E00:48F:C6F1:15AA:B1E2:C8BA:9795 (talk) 12:58, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

The policy document: "M2012-01 Policy on Identity and Full Face Coverings for NSW Public Sector Agencies". arp.nsw.gov.au. Department of Premier and Cabinet, NSW Government. 12 January 2012. Retrieved 4 June 2022. - would suggest it is "not illegal" to wear a mask in public, but if one is worn by a person and they need to prove their identity then removing may be required. If a person cannot prove their identity they can be denied services, but there may be other ways to prove identity than showing one's face. The replacement policy: "C2021-06 Identity and Full-face Coverings for NSW Public Sector Agencies". arp.nsw.gov.au. Department of Premier and Cabinet, NSW Government. 16 March 2021. Retrieved 4 June 2022. - adopts a similar position. Western Australia Police adopt a similar position on "Face Coverings". www.police.wa.gov.au. Western Australia Police. Retrieved 4 June 2022. - any face coverings, not just masks, may need to be removed to prove identity. But the wording of these sources would suggest it is "not illegal" wearing a mask in public because no specific law prohibits doing so, at least in NSW and WA. Presumably it is the same situation in the other Australian states. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 05:59, 4 June 2022 (UTC)