| 談天說地主旨 ﹝請按主旨作出回應﹞ | 寄件者 | 傳送日期
|
| [#1] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： Forwarded: [邀請各界就《禁止蒙面規例》提交意見書] 勁急！！好似冇乜人知！！ 見到即刻幫推pls!!!!! https://app3.legco.gov.hk/ors/chinese/List.aspx 明日下午5點前！！！ 明日下午5點前！！！ 明日下午5點前！！！ #政府又出賤招 #完全唔宣傳 #鬼鬼鼠鼠 |
tonylaibach 正式會員119.xxx.xxx.187 |
2019-11-04 19:29 | |
|
|
|||
| [#2] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： 第一，此法違反《基本法》27條：「香港居民享有言論、新聞、出版的自由，結社、集會、遊行、示威的自由，組織和參加工會、罷工的權利和自由」。政府將《禁蒙面法》適用於合法遊行集會，令人質疑此舉的真正目的是阻嚇一般市民和學生不要上街抗議，否則承擔被秋後算帳的後果。不少市民害怕在集會露面會影響其工作或私隱，例如公司的政治立場與員工不符，員工擔心參加合法集會會被公司䜔責；同志遊行的參與者希望爭取平權，但礙於社會歧視和壓力，暫時未能露面表態等。因此，此法嚴重損害市民無畏無懼地行使言論自由的權利。 第二，此法對警員及香港市民雙重標準。 《禁蒙面法》生效後，一方面是警員依然遮蓋其委任證，甚至戴黑口罩雙重隱瞞身份。另一方面，普通市民連戴衛生口罩出外也隨時被警員截停查問。例如，不少記者被警員扯下其防催淚彈的面罩。（註一）有患癌症的市民展示其醫生紙卻被警員視為偽造文件等。（註二）法例通過後的穩定社會成效未見，但市民對政府和警方的不滿卻再創新高！ 因此，禁蒙面法只會增加民憤，完全無法做到預期的止暴制亂的效果。希望政府能順應民意，取消惡法。 香港市民 你個名上 註一：-記者遭警強扯面罩 https://www.hk01.com/社會新聞/391108/禁蒙面法-記者遭警強扯面罩-黃定光-記者無特權違反警方指示 註二：癌漢戴口罩 警屈偽造醫生紙 https://hk.news.appledaily.com/local/20191104/GHUMTYKXLOJXF6YRET3ZKZN4RI/ 最後修改時間: 2019-11-04 19:42:35 |
tonylaibach 正式會員 119.xxx.xxx.187 |
2019-11-04 19:30 |
| [#3] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： To: The Subcommittee on Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation Dear Sir/Madam Secretary, I am writing to you to submit my concerns as a regular citizen of Hong Kong, regarding the Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation, and my concerns are as follows: 1) Establishing the regulation via emergency law is a gross overstep in executive branch over our pre-existing legislative branch, as face covering does not directly lead to, nor is able to effectively deter violence. As we have seen since the Government’s announcement, violence has not decreased, nor has the will of the people to protest the multitude of injustices over the past few months. 2) Whilst the Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation provide a reasonable excuse for those who have good reasons to cover their face, the excuse can only be exercised after being charged. There is no clear protection for those with reasonable excuse to avoid unreasonable arrest and/or harassment by the police. We have already seen cases of police using this regulation to harass journalists who have perfect reasonable excuse, and under the current social-political climate, if a regulation can be exploited by those with authority (and apparently, impunity), and does not protect regular citizens with reasonable excuse from arrest and/or harassment from said authority, then it is not in the public’s best interest to be established. Especially considering it has shown no deterrent factor as per point 1, nor is it proven to be the direct cause of any violence. 3) In a society that has seen cases of companies firing and/or punishing staff members for their political views (e.g. Cathay Pacific), there is good reason that citizens who partake in legal protests and when exercising their freedom of expression may wish to cover their faces to avoid being identified by their employers or workplace superiors. Unless there is a regulation to protect citizens from workplace consequences due to exercising their legal freedom of expression, the Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation will strip their personal discretion to remain anonymous, and acts as a tool for those aiming to oppress others’ freedom of expression. 4) Whilst it may assist police work to a small degree, such regulation comes in a much steeper price for the regular law-abiding citizen and their freedom. A regular citizen could now potentially face harassment, unreasonable arrests and workplace dismissals/punishment due to the Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation, left without any protection. I would argue that the price a law-abiding regular citizen may pay is not worth the ineffective deterring of violence and crimes as we have witnessed thus far. In conclusion, the Government’s original theory that the Prohibition on Face Covering Regulation will deter violence has thus far proven untrue, however presents a multitude of issues for law-abiding citizens, none of which the regulation has any protection for. Therefore, I implore the subcommittee and the legco to remove a regulation that does not serve the general public. Yours sincerely, |
tonylaibach 正式會員 119.xxx.xxx.187 |
2019-11-04 19:35 |
| [#4] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： Done |
Delay_no_more 正式會員 222.xxx.xxx.153 |
2019-11-04 19:35 |
| [#5] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： Email sent |
Willai 正式會員 14.xxx.xxx.67 |
2019-11-04 21:29 |
| [#6] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： Done |
wah1080 會員 168.xxx.xxx.9 |
2019-11-04 21:51 |
| [#7] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： Email sent. |
radhk 正式會員 42.xxx.xxx.85 |
2019-11-04 22:41 |
| [#8] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： 唔好個個都一樣, 否則班畜牲話一樣內容唔接受 |
kp76 會員 185.xxx.xxx.252 |
2019-11-04 23:31 |
| [#9] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： 推！ 今日5點截止！ |
笑面男 正式會員 196.xxx.xxx.26 |
2019-11-05 08:23 |
| [#10] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： Sent! 溫馨提示電郵地址是 : kyyeung@legco.gov.hk  |
CodyChan 會員 203.xxx.xxx.82 |
2019-11-05 08:52 |
| [#11] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： sent |
vitz 正式會員 221.xxx.xxx.17 |
2019-11-05 13:55 |
| [#12] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： Done! |
cold-coffee 正式會員 124.xxx.xxx.70 |
2019-11-05 15:47 |
| [#13] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： Done |
唔係阿化 正式會員 49.xxx.xxx.52 |
2019-11-05 15:54 |
| [#14] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： Done |
Miss-piggy 正式會員 113.xxx.xxx.189 |
2019-11-05 16:48 |
| [#15] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： DONE |
marksix2008 正式會員 218.xxx.xxx.223 |
2019-11-05 16:51 |
| [#16] 勁急！！ 本人反對禁止蒙面法。原因如下： Send |
mmxxmm 正式會員 14.xxx.xxx.242 |
2019-11-05 16:59 |
| 按照傳送日期顯示:由舊至新 由新至舊
|
