Helmets must be removed.

Cougar, stop being stupid.

(Is Purgenacht still going or am I going in the cooler?)

So if I was to go into a store wearing a balaclava because it was really cold out it would be unfair of the staff to be a bit concerned about it?

What this boils down to on the side of the staff is that a lot of robbers obscure their face while committing their crime, whether that be by wearing a helmet, a hoodie, or otherwise. It’s therefore going to make staff feel safer if they ask anyone entering the store not to obscure their face (not going near the niqab issue with a barge-pole).

What it boils down to on the side of the bikers is that it’s inconvenient to take your helmet off.

Point is, you’re judging people by the way they look. You can dress that how you like, but it’s not cool.

but what if a nudist walked into a shop or someone with neo-nazi/ISIS type supporting clothes on? there has to be a certain amount of governing over what people wear so as not to offend others or to break the laws that are already in place.
but going back to your original question…if helmets are banned for whatever reason i.e. for security/cctv reasons or to stop staff from feeling intimidated then any other item such as a hoody, niqab etc should also be treated the same. if not then helmets should be allowed into shops the same as the others.

(not going near the niqab issue with a barge-pole).

i’ll do it for you…the burqa and niqab should be banned everywhere…not just the UK but in every country. its use is wrong as it is a way of suppressing women into thinking that they are doing the right thing by covering themselves up. it is wrongly interpreted by those who enforce/believe in its use and the subject that wrong understanding onto the women around them and fool them into thinking its use is correct.
there is no text in the Quran that says a woman should cover her face…she should only cover her body and head and only show that which is necesary i.e. hands, feet and face…the the hijab is correct.
my wifes sister in law wears one as she has been instructed by her husband…i’ve questioned his interpretation of this many times and he’s never been able to logically or correctly justify it….the guy goes as far as saying she cant sit in the presence of other men including family members…when in the Quran it says a woman should cover herself in public but can appear less covered in the presence of male family members.
its worse at public event such as weddings…i see a group of them all dressed the same and ask myself how do their husbands know they are even taking the correct wife home?? 😯

Are Drac and Cougar being encouraged to troll the forum now? Has website traffic been declining recently or something?

i’ll do it for you…the burqa and niqab should be banned everywhere…not just the UK but in every country. its use is wrong as it is a way of suppressing women into thinking that they are doing the right thing by covering themselves up.

I feel pretty uncomfortable with the idea of the burqa and niqab but I really don’t think telling people what they are allowed to wear in the name of freedom is the way to go.

If it’s one of these

then, yes, take it off

The simple fact is that some robbers DO wear helmets (see below), so surely you can imagine how staff would feel when they see someone approaching them wearing a helmet?

Dunno about you but my first thought is “oh, here’s a motorcyclist” *

I’ve read through this thread and noticed on a couple of occasions mention has been made to staff enforcing policy not setting it, and also to overzealous enforcement.

This bit warrants extra discussion as precisely what Couger was on about is that the rule or policy is “no helmets”, not “no face coverings”, yet we have reports of people in open face helmets or with visor/chin up and still being asked to remove them.

That is strict adherence to the “no helmets” rule and nothing to do with face covering.

If the rule is rooted in a need for security, needing to see faces and such, then it *should* be “no covered faces” but we’ve singled out a particular type of (not always) face covering based on a minor correlation between helmet wearers and robbers.

And we’ve already conceded that it does nothing to actually stop the determine robbers as once you’ve crossed the line to deciding to rob somewhere the small matter of disobeying a store policy isn’t going to trouble you much, so why are we doing it…

If it truly is for the benefit of the staff then we’ve created a situation where we now assume that anyone in a helmet is potentially up to no good, arguably this is worse than before!

Before you had the the fear of being robbed by someone in a helmet (which has not decreased as we’ve already agreed that the actual robbers won’t care)

Now you have the fear of being robbed by someone in a helmet + the fear of *anyone* in a helmet + the fear of being robbed by people with other face coverings.

Personally I find this slightly unsettling, even though on the face of it I can understand the reasoning behind the rules.

But in that same vein I can also understand the justification for extending the rule to hoodies, balaclavas, scarves, or other religious or non-religious face coverings, but this unsettles me even more as I find the concept of assigning suspicion, and assumption of intent to people based purely on what they are wearing even more unpleasant, especially as it will breed increased fear of anyone with a covered face.

Ultimately the fear of other members of our own society of is the issue, but I don’t know how you deal with that 🙁

Point is, you’re judging people by the way they look. You can dress that how you like, but it’s not cool.

It’s not comparable!!! It’s not even close to being comparable! You have a real victim complex over this, and to compare it to racial or religious prejudice is verging on the offensive. You’re doing yourself no favours, man. Think about what you’re saying.

This shit has to be a troll. Nothing else makes sense.

*

I wanted to clarify my asterisk bit as it’s something that troubles me in general…

My mother has great fear of crime, she gets anxious very easily, she wont take her eyes off her bag even when sitting in a sleepy seaside cafe with 3 other old dears, she’s at the window the instant she hears a helicopter etc.

My Girlfriend to some degree is the same, she wont go running after dark (even at 5pm in winter), even on safe routes with lots of foot traffic and by major roads, and chiefly because of the fear of being attacked/mugged etc, despite these being very rare occurences and especially in the areas she would be.

But the fear is there, even reading about someone being mugged or attacked, while running along unlit quiet paths at 11pm, in another city 50miles away is enough to make her think twice about going out at 4-5pm in a nearby well lit park.

It saddens me that we live in such fear, bad things will and do happen, but they are far from the norm and to live in fear is a terrible thing, especially in this relatively safe country.

I used to work in a bank in my yoof (Lloyds as it happens, bastids)

counter staff had discretion, full face with dark visor? take it off please chap, open face? Generally no problem as you can see their face, same with old biddies in bobbly hats, and yoof in hoodies

Man in Balaclava: ME “you not going to rob us are you, ha ha? [smile to indicate joke and conversion between humans…]

Him “How dare you impinge my human rights, and doubt my good name and rights etc etc etc [for 5 minutes at volume,] I want to see the manager, and I’m going to be shouty and unreasonable…

My Manager “Here Nick have this written warning…”

It’s not the Helmet wearers, it’s the knitted hat and face coverers you’ve got to watch!

Blimey Three Fish, calm yourself down, you’re gonna pop a bollock at this rate!

It’s not comparable!!! It’s not even close to being comparable! You have a real victim complex over this,

All right, forget “comparable” for a minute. Being punched in the face isn’t comparable to being murdered but that doesn’t mean it’s cool to go round thumping folk. Can’t you see why this is an issue?

If staff feel “intimidated” by someone because they wear a helmet, or a leather jacket, or are a punk, or have piercings, or are male, or are youths in hoodies, or have a beard and a rucksack, or are overweight, or have any other affectation that makes them different or a look a bit funny, then these views need challenging, people need educating. Because it’s prejudice, pure and simple. You know nothing about a person yet you’ve already passed judgement. The problem isn’t the bloke with the helmet, it’s others looking down their noses at them.

And seeing as so many people seem to be struggling with this I’ll tell you why it’s so important. If these views don’t get challenged, if people don’t realise that this sort of thinking is unacceptable, then you get cases like Sophie Lancaster.

Hell, come to that, I’ve been walking through town minding my own business and been set upon by a gang of lads for the heinous crime of having long hair and a leather jacket. Is this acceptable behaviour that we should be encouraging?

the burqa and niqab… its worse at public event such as weddings…i see a group of them all dressed the same and ask myself how do their husbands know they are even taking the correct wife home??

🙂

Nice bit of levity.

All right, forget “comparable” for a minute. Being punched in the face isn’t comparable to being murdered but that doesn’t mean it’s cool to go round thumping folk. Can’t you see why this is an issue?

If staff feel “intimidated” by someone because they wear a helmet, or a leather jacket, or are a punk, or have piercings, or are male, or are youths in hoodies, or have a beard and a rucksack, or are overweight, or have any other affectation that makes them different or a look a bit funny, then these views need challenging, people need educating. Because it’s prejudice, pure and simple. You know nothing about a person yet you’ve already passed judgement. The problem isn’t the bloke with the helmet, it’s others looking down their noses at them.

And seeing as so many people seem to be struggling with this I’ll tell you why it’s so important. If these views don’t get challenged, if people don’t realise that this sort of thinking is unacceptable, then you get cases like Sophie Lancaster.

Hell, come to that, I’ve been walking through town minding my own business and been set upon by a gang of lads for the heinous crime of having long hair and a leather jacket. Is this acceptable behaviour that we should be encouraging?

I find the concept of assigning suspicion, and assumption of intent to people based purely on what they are wearing even more unpleasant

Precisely. Let’s reword that statement you replied to, see if it’s a bit clearer.

The simple fact is that some robbers DO wear helmets (see below), so surely you can imagine how staff would feel when they see someone approaching them wearing a helmet?

“The simple fact is that some terrorists DO carry rucksacks, have beards and a swarthy complexion, so surely you can imagine how staff would feel when they see someone approaching them who’s Asian?”

Still ok? Exactly the same situation, you’re making a snap decision, almost certainly erroneously, based on the way someone looks. Anyone here who wouldn’t react negatively to someone who said they were scared of brown people because they might get a bit explody? So why is it ok to judge someone because they’re wearing a gods damned helmet?

Good grief, and I’m the one that’s supposed to be having a word with myself?

I’ve been walking through town minding my own business and been set upon by a gang of lads for the heinous crime of having long hair and a leather jacket

Perhaps they simply had a dislike of Farscape, though that, too, would be equally unacceptable, obviously.

Perhaps they simply had a dislike of Farscape, though that, too, would be equally unacceptable, obviously.

Yes, these Bialar Crais attacks are getting out of hand.

And seeing as so many people seem to be struggling with this I’ll tell you why it’s so important. If these views don’t get challenged, if people don’t realise that this sort of thinking is unacceptable, then you get cases like Sophie Lancaster.

I think this might be the worst slippery slope argument I’ve ever heard – bravo.

By the way, here’s a quote from you Cougar that applies pretty well in this situation:

A better solution might be for the terminally offended and the offended-by-proxy people to stop taking offence where clearly none was intended.

Clearly no offence was intended with the sign in Tesco.

Okay so parallels are now being drawn between people being asked to remove their helmets and racism/racial profiling. I can sense Godwin’s law coming up soon.

If you can’t understand why people would be intimidated by a faceless man wearing a helmet then you must have very little empathy.

Bored of this now…

If you can’t understand why people would be intimidated by a faceless man wearing a helmet then you must have very little empathy.

That’s not really the argument though is it?

And we’ve not even settled on it being about intimidation, some argue its for the staff, some argue is for security, some say a mixture, either way, the OP’s question was about why we single out helmet wearing and not ‘face covering’

If you must get bored, get bored about the actual topic, not something else you imagined it to be about.

I used to work in a Tesco express, one of the main reasons helmets were asked to be removed was because a large number of the staff are little old ladies just doing a bit of part time work to supplement their retirement. Sort of 50s+.

These women often get intimidated by large blokes dressed in black leathers with a black helmet It can be scary for them, especially at times when there is only two of them in the store.

It’s about making the staff comfortable as much as it is about grabbing CCTV images.

Don’t forget a helmet can add a couple of inches to someones perceived height. Imagine you’re a 5.4 foot 50 year old woman and bloke who looks 6.4″ comes towering over you.

Whilst I may or may not agree on the topic of veils/burkas in general, a piece of cloth draped over a women isn’t really in the same league as a leather glad bloke in terms of the intimidation scale (maybe if you vote Tory it is)

EDIT: It’s kind of on the same theory as to why they ask males to put their shirt on in summer when entering the store.

That’s not really the argument though is it?

It’s not?

I thought the argument is why are motorcyclists being singled out?

I imagine if I went in wearing a ski mask I’d get similar treatment.

@peterpoddy – I tend to think its my eye wateringly bright hi viz vest that marks me out as ‘probably not a robber’

LOL! 😆

I thought the argument is why are motorcyclists being singled out?

Because it’s acceptable, in general.
Bikers bear the brunt of a lot of crap like this:
We don’t conform to accident statistics* so the Government don’t want us
Historically, we have a bit of an image problem so the general public don’t like us
We can pass stationary traffic at the rate of 100 cars/minute, and hit 100mph at will in the blink of an eye, so motorists don’t like us as they just can’t do that, although they want to.

it’s like fat people. It’s acceptable top laugh at fat people, just like it’s acceptable to single out a biker.

*There has however been a massive improvement here over the last few years, far more than for cars, way over target. It’s been a shift in attitude, mostly, that hasn’t happened with car drivers

Some of them get angry really easily too.

I watched a documentary about people who ride motorbikes – it doesn’t quite show the safe, cuddly image some of you are trying to portray.

Good. I like people to be afraid of me. 😆

re staff intimidation, people can feel threatened/be offended by all sorts, I saw a guy the other day whose face and (shaved) head was covered in tattoos, I’ll be there’s shop/bank employees who would feel scared serving him. The people who have various metal work in their face who would upset some, I’m sure many christians would be perturbed by someone with horn implants. I think I’ll steer clear of the emotive disfigurement element for now.

All of this unjustly* getting upset by people’s appearance is silly and shouldn’t be pandered to.
If it’s a face/cctv security concern then it should be no face coverings, all or nothing and open face helmets should be fine. The rest of the “security” arguments look baseless under a little scrutiny.

*getting upset at someone in a balaclava bulletproof vest holding a gun is probably valid
<edited to add unjustly bit>

Poddy, you are talking rubbish.

We don’t conform to accident statistics* so the Government don’t want us

Is that why they spend so much money on Think Bike ads?

We can pass stationary traffic at the rate of 100 cars/minute, and hit 100mph at will in the blink of an eye, so motorists don’t like us as they just can’t do that, although they want to.

Motorists don’t like you when you perform insane manouvres potentially involving us in accidents. It’s got nothing to do with jealousy. Most of us could very easily afford motorbikes.

it’s like fat people. It’s acceptable top laugh at fat people, just like it’s acceptable to single out a biker.

What the actual **** are you talking about? I have never heard anyone badmouth motorcyclists (unlike pedal cyclists) – only those performing aforementioned insane manovures.

You honestly are living in a fantasy land. Or performing lots of insane manovures without realising how much it stresses other road users out.

I saw a guy the other day whose face and (shaved) head was covered in tattoos, I’ll be there’s shop/bank employees who would feel scared serving him

That’s nothing like not being able to see a face at all. It’s well known how much meta-information is transferred through facial expressions – tattooed or otherwise.

I have never heard anyone badmouth motorcyclists

Out of interest, did you notice many people badmouthing cyclists before you became one?

Motorists don’t like you when you perform insane manouvres potentially involving us in accidents. It’s got nothing to do with jealousy. Most of us could very easily afford motorbikes.

Whilst filtering through traffic I had van drivers looking at me in their mirror and laughing whilst turning into me to stop me going past. Who was performing insane manoeuvres then?

I had van drivers looking at me in their mirror and laughing whilst turning into me to stop me going past. Who was performing insane manoeuvres then?

Did I say all drivers were perfect and all motorcyclists were arseholes? No.

All you’ve shown is that some van drivers are arseholes – a fact that didn’t need proving.

Out of interest, did you notice many people badmouthing cyclists before you became one?

Honestly don’t know. I’ve always been one. However as you can probably tell I tend to notice when groups of people are suffering prejudice even if I do not belong to that group.

Yeah, you do, and it’s commendable, but,

a) you probably don’t notice as much as you might think until it affects you personally. That’s just human nature.

And,

b) you won’t have it directed at you precisely because someone’s found out you’re a biker.

That’s nothing like not being able to see a face at all.

I never suggested it was, my point was about people being put off/upset/intimidated by others appearances.

So what do people say to you?

I never suggested it was, my point was about people being put off/upset/intimidated by others appearances.

I think that people feel the need to read other people’s faces. If someone came in looking aggressive or hyped up, you’d be put on your guard a bit. So in the absence of any information people assume the worst. It’s natural when you can’t see faces – people do it in cars, they do it on here.

It’s also why we have things like manners and social conventions – so people know what to expect.

So what do people say to you?

Broadly the same ill-conceived rash generalisation shite that cyclists get, only without the Road Tax slur. “All bikers are [a menace / shouldn’t be on the road / reckless / power rangers / deserve to be under a bus / overtake “illegally” / dead and I’m glad etc etc] and that’s just when they’re on a bike. Biker friendly pubs are invariably drug dens / rough / always full of fights / dangerous to go near yadda yadda. There’s a very real and common belief that if you ride a motorbike you’re a psycho. Oh, and did you miss the assertion earlier on this thread that motorcyclists tend to be armed robbers?

I think that people feel the need to read other people’s faces.

unless deeply held beliefs are involved (I know I shouldn’t but it’s hard not to use that comparison in this situation) – I broadly agree about the seeing peoples faces bit btw
I’m not saying people should walk around looking like those tools from daft punk but taking off your helmet off, especially in winter, seems a right old faff for a 10sec encounter with a petrol station cashier.
<edit> And seemingly badly thought out policy based on the “he looks a wrong ‘un dressed like that” sentiment is not a good idea IMO

Bikers are awesome.

The transplant service couldn’t function without them.

And seemingly badly thought out policy based on the “he looks a wrong ‘un dressed like that” sentiment is not a good idea IMO

But that’s not what it’s based on!!!

Oh, and did you miss the assertion earlier on this thread that motorcyclists tend to be armed robbers?

Yes!

Darcy… . 😀

Tescos must use Mad Max 1 and Easy Rider as training videos.