It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


FBI wants to ban hoodies from banks

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:10 AM
More bank customers will be asked not to wear hooded sweat shirts, sunglasses and hats as police join the FBI in urging people to avoid clothing items that fit a robber's profile.

Can't argue with this proposal, although it is an encroachment on our rights. Certain styles of clothing really don't belong in banks.

What's weird about this story is that it was written as though it was a local initiative by banks or town police from opposite ends of the US yet it was the FBI pushing it. Why not just let the FBI make the public announcement or press release?

Source (Ohio): FBI wants to ban hoodies from banks

Source (Seattle): FBI wants bank ban on hats, sunglasses

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:20 AM
star, and flag for an interesting article.

I don't see too much wrong with it.

In a free country, I'd have to say it should be up to the individual businesses, or banks, but....................

All banks are subsidiaries of the Fed, so what I see is more rules for the slaves, and more policies to be enforced by the *****policy enforcers*****aka police.

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:22 AM
I cant help but think that maybe this is because they want to make it easier to identify people. Not the robber kind of people, the kind that supports 'extremist views' or such.

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:27 AM
Yeah then the next thing you know once they ban it if you walk in wearing something like this you will probably get a heafty fine and/or jail time. Sounds like a fine plan

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:29 AM
It's with mixed feelings I view proposals like this one. If I see a guy with a hoodie pulled low over his had and shades on waiting in line for a teller, I'd be damned suspicious. Do you call a cop on the guy just for what he's wearing or do you stand there and hope he doesn't try anything, knowing full well that if he does try something, you've lost your golden chance to nip it in the bud.

If they succeed in passing something like this will it extend to ATMs? Other businesses? Gas stations?

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:43 AM
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

Imo it'll leave the door open to more intrusive searches at banks.......

Such as pat downs. Body searches; later it could lead to other venues, but body searches first.

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:54 AM
Great Find

I have two views of this article. My first views is that I think it isn't such a bad idea and can't see how it would be a problem to ban hoodies from banks. A lot of shops already have the "no hoodies" rule in place.

My alternative view is that I can not see how banning hoodies in a bank would deter and prevent robberies. Most bank robbers do not stand in a queue and wait to be served before pulling the gun out, it is usually an in and out operation.

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:15 AM
It probably would inhibit the unarmed types, who only pass notes to the teller knowing they're trained to comply with demands without resisting. I see those types on the news sporting a low slung ball cap and glasses, which are about useless as disguises go. Hoodies and shades are for the less subtle type, as you point out, probably not too concerned with what the rules might be.

It would be interesting to see if security can force a customer to remove clothing before proceeding into the bank - or do they expect a mousy teller to refuse service to someone not dressed appropriately? Good luck with that.

Here's something weird about this story, it appears in many local papers yet in every paper they write the article like it was a local response to "hoodies". Here's another example, this one in Westerville Ohio: Police Crack Down On Bank Robbers, Asks Banks To Ban Hoodies. It beggers the question did the FBI issue talking points to local PDs and papers making the hoodie ban appear to be from a local level and not from a draconian federal level?

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:33 AM
I live near a gas station and the sign on the door of the shop says:


It's just a saftey precaution to deter theives and be able to identify everyone on candid camera IMO. I don't really see a big deal with the head coverings, I always take off a hat inside anyways. However, if you're wearing perscription sunglasses and that's all you have with you, are you expected to go in blind? Even those transition lenses take a while to go back to clear after entering a building. Seems sort of discriminatory to me.

The other problem is that it could become a slippery slope. First banks, then any indoor building, then anywhere where crowds gather. Everyone must be identifiable at all times. Where's your National ID card?

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:38 AM
This doesn't make too much sense, the people who have the intention of robbing aren't going to be deterred from that rule anyway, because they're already breaking the law by robbing. And the only people that would follow the rule are the people who wouldn't have robbed in the first place.
So I don't see the point.

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:52 AM

Originally posted by oneinthesame
I live near a gas station and the sign on the door of the shop says:


It's just a saftey precaution to deter theives and be able to identify everyone on candid camera IMO. I don't really see a big deal with the head coverings, I always take off a hat inside anyways.

So as far as head coverings, does that mean i'm supposed unwrap my turban when i enter and have my dreadlocks hang down and obscure my face?

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 02:10 AM
Such a law would be incredibly stupid, because anyone intending to rob a bank wouldn't follow the rules about what to wear inside a bank. The only possible use for the law would be to spy on law-abiding citizens. I'm glad you pointed this story out.

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 02:14 AM
wow if they past this the next thing is no bikes a newsclip explains
Monday, July 20, 2009
Rockford police are searching for a man who robbed an Amcore Bank office on the city's southeast side. Officials say it happened this morning at the branch near the intersection of Alpine and Harrison. The suspect was armed with a shotgun, and got an unknown amount of cash before leaving on a bicycle. He's described as a black male in his 20s, between 5-10 and 6-2, with a medium build...wearing all black. Anyone with information is asked to call police, or Crimestoppers. link is so yeah instead of trying to make ppl not come n why dont u amke the ppl safe who are already inside i mean a guy on a bike with a shotgun and no one saw him that is the definition of of wtf

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 02:34 AM
And just like Gun Control, only the criminals will ignore the law because they don't care anyway. The logic just doesn't translate on the street. However, if someone was coming in wearing hats, sunglasses, etc (which in Florida is almost everyone) then they might have a few second warning to push the hold up button. Of course, then we would have police being dispatched to 'people wearing sunglass' calls!

This country is swimming in illogical politically correct minutia and laws already. Can you imagine a country with something as simple as a Constitution and a Bill of Rights? I have been in law libraries and wonder how anyone can be held to the "ignorance of the law is no excuse" in court. I suspect that most lawyers don't know all the laws!

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 02:39 AM
You know, I've noticed a trend.

When ever a problem starts occurring the first thought is to "ban it". How about this, instead of banning yet more things, which causes more laws, which has a chance of making more people criminals without even knowing it.

How about getting to the source of the problems. Like let's make it easier for people to make money. Less red tape that sort of thing.

It's really a screwed up mentality(not singling anybody out) as I mentioned earlier, the first thought is to "ban it". Now I'm not saying it is going to stop people from robing banks, but it should be up to the bank if they don't want to allow people wearing sunglasses and hoodies and ball caps.

If anything I could see this making people even more brazen just run up in the joint guns a blazing.

Also another concern is, how many times have people walked into a place or done something they shouldn't have been doing, nothing illegal, like walking into a store that has a not hat policy and you forget that your hat is on because you wear it all the time. You didn't intentionally do it, it just happened, you busy or whatever reason.

The whole "ban it first" mentality is kind of distributing.

My .02 dollars at least.

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 02:47 AM
Some of these hoodies are masks.

check it

Ya wonder why the FBI want's to ban them from banks?

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 02:54 AM
It does make sense. Why would anyone need to wear sunglasses inside anyway?

They should have security just ask anyone with hood/hat/sunglasses to take them down or off before they proceed any further into the bank.

It may discourage robberies if theives knew their mugs were being filmed.

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 03:50 AM
What i should do is walk into my bank wearing a hooded sweatshirt,baseball cap,and sunglasses. And pull the hod up over my hat. Then stand there in line and wait my turn. If i survive long enough, present my info for my account and make a deposit. Ill have my deposit slip already filled out.
I wonder how well i'll be recieved.

Ill have to wait till its a little colder here in Nebraska so when the police taze me i can just say i was cold.

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 05:15 AM
Real or experienced bank robbers are going to wear disguises - maybe it will help catch the first timers, but at what expense? That all citizens must comply with government dress codes regardless of weather etc.

I suppose they can hit the alarm quicker for robbers who don't comply, but I really don't see much difference - except going in a bank will become like going through TSA screening at an airport in order to keep people from actually going into banks and using tellers - maybe to save money on staff for the bank.

What about people who need glasses to see? What's next you have to carry around a prescription or wear a license to prove you need them?

Maybe I should start advertising disguise make up on the websites were bank robbers hang out. After all a wig, hair color, heavy makeup a couple band aids is all you need to keep cameras and staff from getting a good profile of you.

That really bothers me that policing is more important than freedom.

It's bad enough that I can't tint my front seat windows enough to keep to suns glare off me so I can see safely or that I don't get a sunburn (eventually skin cancer) just because cops want to be able to see in our cars for their safety -- not our safety.

We all have to have our bodies covered a certain amount, but now they want to tell us how much? What's next we can't wear blue shirts because they're reserved for cops or government only?

Makes me want to spend a day walking in banks looking like a thug - just to piss them off and keep the pigs busy.

[edit on 11-8-2009 by verylowfrequency]

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 08:16 AM
WOW! Just the other day I went to the bank with a friend of mine and the door on the bank had a pic of what was not allowed in the bank. I laughed when I saw it because it was really ridiculous. The pics had a person with a hat, sunglasses, a hoodies and a couple other things you werent allowed to go into the bank with. I thought it was really weird. I mean a hat?! What does a hat do?!

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in