# Is doing my daily shopping in a mask sufficient grounds for being arrested? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 6, 2004, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399 "2004-11-06T21:45:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2004, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/1 "2004-11-06T21:45:15Z")
Let’s just say I dig masks, or I’m horribly disfigured. Is doing my daily shopping in a mask sufficient grounds in and of itself for actual arrest, or just being questioned? What determines if I’m legally “arrestable” or not? ---
**Author:** ![Wikkit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c0e974/32.png) [@Wikkit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wikkit)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2004, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/2 "2004-11-06T21:47:32Z")
It depends on where you live. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2004, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/3 "2004-11-06T22:05:18Z")
On what grounds would they arrest you? There is no law that I am aware of that mandates a bare face in public. Otherwise, Tammy Faye would be under house arrest! You might get stopped and questioned, but they couldn’t make a charge stick. ---
**Author:** ![ParentalAdvisory](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/53a042/32.png) [@ParentalAdvisory](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ParentalAdvisory)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2004, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/4 "2004-11-06T22:05:19Z")
> [@Wikkit](#): > > It depends on where you live. What, there are laws against this? ---
**Author:** ![Wikkit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c0e974/32.png) [@Wikkit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wikkit)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2004, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/5 "2004-11-06T22:20:18Z")
Yes. Minnesota Statutes, Chapter Criminal Code, Section 609.735: > [@](#): > > 609.735 Concealing identity. > > A person whose identity is concealed by the person in a > public place by means of a robe, mask, or other disguise, unless > based on religious beliefs, or incidental to amusement, > entertainment, protection from weather, or medical treatment, is > guilty of a misdemeanor. > > HIST: 1963 c 753 art 1 s 609.735; 1971 c 23 s 73; 1986 c 444; > 1995 c 30 s 1 Seems like a hard one to prosecute, but applies to the question. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2004, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/6 "2004-11-06T22:26:10Z")
Holy crap! Minnesota is hard-core! :eek: ---
**Author:** ![TeaElle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8491ac/32.png) [@TeaElle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeaElle)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2004, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/7 "2004-11-06T22:31:47Z")
There are certain jurisdictions which have made it illgal to walk around in public with one’s appearance materially concealed. Exceptions for this sometimes will be applied to balaclavas worn due to extreme cold, bandages worn to cover facial wounds, for Halloween (or the cultural equivalent in that location) and, occasionally, for religious garb which covers the face. Of course, even if it’s legal to do walk around with your face covered, businesses are well within their rights to require you to remove the covering if you wish to enter. Their ability to recognize those within their premises and to protect themselves from the threat of criminal activity carried out by those whose appearances are concealed trump your right to be attired in a mask within their bailiwick. ---
**Author:** ![mike1dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@mike1dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mike1dog)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2004, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/8 "2004-11-06T23:02:43Z")
Slight Hijack: I noticed on Halloween around here that several convenience stores had a sign up that said ‘No Masks’. I assume it was because they were afraid of being held up. I don’t know what they would have done if someone had come in wearing a mask. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2004, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/9 "2004-11-06T23:18:05Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > Holy crap! Minnesota is hard-core! :eek: New York City has a similar statute which dates back a couple hundred years. It was used to arrest a lot of obnoxious mask-wearing protestors during the WTO thing a few years back. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/10 "2004-11-07T00:30:05Z")
> [@](#): > > 609.735 Concealing identity. > > A person whose identity is concealed by the person in a > public place by means of a robe, mask, or other disguise, unless > based on religious beliefs, or incidental to amusement, > entertainment, protection from weather, or medical treatment, is > guilty of a misdemeanor. > > HIST: 1963 c 753 art 1 s 609.735; 1971 c 23 s 73; 1986 c 444; > 1995 c 30 s 1 Which might explain why there are no superheroes operating out of Minesota. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/11 "2004-11-07T01:23:19Z")
I think most anti-mask laws in the various US states were aimed at the Klan, which used to use full-face hoods. After these laws were passed, they took to wearing hoods which left the face uncovered, which allowed you to see that the reason they wear hoods is to cover their point heads. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/12 "2004-11-07T01:40:12Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > I think most anti-mask laws in the various US states were aimed at the Klan . . . That’s entirely correct. All of the laws contain exemptions for medical needs and theatrical and holiday activities. (Yours truly has been known to wear a surgical mask during allergy season, although not usually in public places.) Even if none of the exemptions apply, it’s unlikely you’d be arrested for “masking” alone if you’re minding your own business and not bothering anybody. But in today’s security environment, I’m not sure I’d want to take the chance! ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/13 "2004-11-07T01:54:43Z")
Did a Klansman ever claim a religious reason for his mask, to get around anti-mask laws aimed at Klansmen? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Scrivener](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@The\_Scrivener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Scrivener)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/14 "2004-11-07T02:40:21Z")
There’s still ambiguity in the Minnesota statute re. persons who wish to conceal disfigurement for which they are not currently undergoing medical treatment and where the mask is desired for cosmetic purposes only – i.e., former burn patients, neurofibromatosis sufferers, untreated harelip cases, really prominent port wine stains, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/15 "2004-11-07T02:55:53Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > Did a Klansman ever claim a religious reason for his mask, to get around anti-mask laws aimed at Klansmen? It appears that most challenges to anti-mask laws have been based on [free speech grounds](http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/23/antimask.ruling/), not religion. ---
**Author:** ![TeaElle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8491ac/32.png) [@TeaElle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeaElle)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/16 "2004-11-07T03:49:00Z")
It’s interesting that the Minnesota law also contains no provision for working, which would make my landscaper guilty when he wears the head covering, dark sunglasses/goggles and aspirator mask that he wears when mowing grass. (He’s a landscaper, yet he has big-time grass allergies. Go figure.) If he wore that get up into any store, they’d believe that they were getting held up, for sure. ---
**Author:** ![Wikkit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c0e974/32.png) [@Wikkit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wikkit)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/17 "2004-11-07T03:59:16Z")
It specifically says “in a public place”. If he’s mowing your yard, he’s on private property. I find “incidental to amusement” interesting. If you’re wearing a gorilla suit for the amusement of yourself and your friends, does that make you exempt? There have to be other laws about this. I don’t think Minnesota would be the only one, it was just the one that was pointed out to me most recently. Where are the GQ Google Diggers when you need one? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/18 "2004-11-07T04:05:49Z")
Virginia also prohibits masks in public. ---
**Author:** ![Mathochist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c89c15/32.png) [@Mathochist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mathochist)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/19 "2004-11-07T04:06:58Z")
> [@Wikkit](#): > > Yes. > > Minnesota Statutes, Chapter Criminal Code, Section 609.735: > > Seems like a hard one to prosecute, but applies to the question. I’d find testing this out on a visit to my extended family _highly_ amusing. Unfortunately, that seems to mean I couldn’t test it. ---
**Author:** ![Dr\_Paprika](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr_paprika/32/3042_2.png) [@Dr\_Paprika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr_Paprika)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2004, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399/20 "2004-11-07T04:14:05Z")
Allergies would prob’ly be a medical treatment; wearing a mask for fun could be construed as amusement. I think the law is really looking for people seeking to do dirty deeds anonymusly. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-doing-my-daily-shopping-in-a-mask-sufficient-grounds-for-being-arrested/273399.md?page=2)