this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2025
919 points (99.4% liked)

politics

24355 readers
3321 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Mike German, an ex-FBI agent, said immigration agents hiding their identities ‘highlights the illegitimacy of actions’

Some wear balaclavas. Some wear neck gators, sunglasses and hats. Some wear masks and casual clothes.

Across the country, armed federal immigration officers have increasingly hidden their identities while carrying out immigration raids, arresting protesters and roughing up prominent Democratic critics.

It’s a trend that has sparked alarm among civil rights and law enforcement experts alike.

Mike German, a former FBI agent, said officers’ widespread use of masks was unprecedented in US law enforcement and a sign of a rapidly eroding democracy. “Masking symbolizes the drift of law enforcement away from democratic controls,” he said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NoTagBacks@lemm.ee 25 points 1 day ago (3 children)

A major reason police officers wear uniforms is for their obvious identification as a legal law enforcement entity formally trained and endorsed by the state. While it's generally symbolic, it is at least a basic-ass demonstration of good faith identification/adherence to the law. EVEN IF it's just performative, it's still at least saying their actions will be in accordance with the law, and at least implying that their intent is enforcement of that same law.

However, if they not only ditch the uniform, but even literally wear things to mask their identity, the symbolism of good-faith action and intent go out the window. Why would any reasonable person trust such a blatant disregard for clear establishment of authority figures? Furthermore, if such symbolism is reversed in such a manner, how could any reasonable person not assume ill-intent? If they're taking away even US citizens for an indeterminate amount of time and to an indeterminate place, then wouldn't it be in the best interest of the people that encounter law enforcement to resist by any means--even lethal means? And to further compound the problem, there were recent high-profile political murders by someone impersonating a police officer. So not only are we unable to trust legitimate police officers while they're in uniform, we now have(admittedly weak(for now)) evidence that the uniform no longer implies good-faith intent of the person wearing it. Which leads me to one final major issue; if our confidence in officers' law-bound behavior is shattered, and our confidence in our citizen status to ensure our rights is shattered, and our confidence in police uniforms being fairly reliable identification symbolism is shattered, then what amount of confidence is left in any law enforcement officials when they then wear clothing that is symbolically indicative of someone acting in bad faith with ill-intent? And then local law enforcement, in uniform, protect and assist alleged federal law enforcement in their very high-profile raids.

So, moral reasoning aside, it would be unwise to even engage with any law enforcement or anyone that claims to be law enforcement. They can't be trusted and their intent is unknown. They are visibly armed with a variety of weapons and are currently engaging in illegal operations systematically--even though the confines of current law effectively gives them legal means to do whatever they want. All that said, it can reasonably argued that it's effectively a death sentence if you get swept up by someone claiming to be law enforcement, regardless of whether or not they can be confidently identified as such. All that to say: some fed bois are gonna get smoked before the end of the year and they've earned it by undermining themselves in the public eye. I have extreme confidence that things will get better in the long run, but as for the foreseeable future, the worst is yet to come.

Tl;dr: Law enforcement abandoning clear uniform identification for bad-faith/ill-intent symbolism logically justifies lethal resistance. There will probably be multiple shootings of feds by the end of the year at this rate. If some alphabet feds get shot, could be claimed as a cases belli for some real bullshit.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago

It's not a major reason it's the reason.

The first question they ask an officer in any situation with force is did you announce your presence and was it obvious you're police. It's the whole reason you aren't supposed to be pulled over by plain clothes, they're supposed to call a marked unit to effectuate a stop.

[–] driving_crooner 9 points 22 hours ago

This trend didn't started with ICE officers hiding their face but with the police patrols with "ghost marks". I remember from years ago seeing memes of those patrol cars compared with European ones, that are full of bright colors, the message of each one as "I'm here hidden to catch you vs I'm here calling your attention to help you*"

* Obligatory All Cops, even the hot Sweeden and Italian cops, Are Bastards.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 7 points 23 hours ago

Even shorter TL;DR: The lack of verifiable face-value LEOs breaks even the shitty social contract we did have, and it’s gonna create problems.