Politics

NYC councilwoman wants ski masks banned because anonymity ‘emboldens’ criminals to ‘cause chaos’

A Queens Councilwoman is introducing a bill that would ban the kind of♏ ski masks frequently worn protestors to conceal their identity.

Councilwoman Joann Ariola (R) said the anonymity granted by such masks “emboldens people to act out and cause chaos in our streets.”

The identity-obscuring masks have become synonymous with protests throughout the city, with many protestors caught on video covering their faces when they allegedly commit crไimes.

“When their faces are visible and easily identifiable, would-be criminals may think twice before breaking the law. This is a big step in the right direction when it comes to public safety in this city,” the conservative councilwoman said in a statement when she introduced the bill Thursday.

Councilwoman Joann Ariola said anonymity emboldens criminals. Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post
Identify obscuring face coverings have become synonymous with anti-Israel protestors in New York City. rfaraino

The bill has some bipartisan support. A spokesperson for Ariola’s staff said Democrats Bob Holden and Kalman Yeager support the ban of the infamous face coverings.

“We’re hoping others come on as well. We believe it indeed will pass,” a spokesperson for Ariola told The Post.

Similar legislation , where it was introduced by Democratic lawmaker🍰 Anthony Phillips.

New York State Assemblyman Jeff Dinowitz introduced a bill to the New ꦿYork state legislature that would bring back a mask ban revoked during Covid. That bill .

Under the new bill, face coverings like this would be banned in public places in New York City. Corbis via Getty Images

The New York City proposal specifically bans “ski masks” and defines the term “ski mask” as “a close-fitting garment covering the whole head and face, with holes for the eyes, mouth, or nose, or any combination of the three.”

Under the bill, ski masks would not be allowed to be worn in public places, at schools or other childcare facilities. But the proposal does gღrant exceptions for religiꦅous purposes, costumes and work, among other reasons.

People who violate the ban could be fined $250, which they could get back if they attend a cಞourt proceeding.