Has anyone else had a similar experience?
Yesterday the teller at my local bank branch refused to deposit my check until I removed my Boston Red Sox cap. She pointed to a sign that said that in order to "ensure a secure environment" I would be required to remove any winter hats, ballcaps or sunglasses before the bank tellers could serve me. I just asked for my check back and left the building.
[My Letter to the ACLU Below]
Dear ACLU of Massachusetts,
I have a checking account with Century Bank of Massachusetts. Several days ago, as I tried to cash a check, the teller at my local branch refused to deposit my check until I removed a baseball cap from my head. This is not a ski mask, but a Boston Red Sox baseball cap, and I was in no way attempting to conceal my identity: I gave the teller a check with my account number and signature on the back and I would have provided my driver's license if she deemed that necessary. She pointed to a sign which claimed that in order to "ensure a secure environment" I would be required to remove any winter hats, ball caps or sunglasses before the bank tellers could serve me. The incident ended with my requesting the return of my check and I exited the building with my cap still on my head.
The bank's claim that this policy creates a "secure banking environment" is clearly misleading: the removal of my hat or sunglasses does nothing to make myself, the bank employees, or other patrons "more secure." Any intelligent criminal will know that banks use video surveillance to identify them and will thus put a stocking or mask on to obscure his/her face from view. Further, cameras do not prevent crime, they merely help us identify and punish people who commit criminal acts after the fact. And as robberies frequently involve deadly weapons, or threats to use concealed weapons, the bank is in a very weak position to demand that bank robbers comply with their dress code.
Century Bank's rhetoric of "safety," so prevalent in our post-911 America, is here being used to obscure the true purpose of the policy: to record a clear, unobstructed view of all patron's faces for use in any future criminal investigations or proceedings. The policy, therefore, functions with the presumption that every person who enters the bank is at least potentially guilty of a crime and gathers "pre-evidence" against any future acts. If and when a crime occurs, the video of legal, innocent banking transactions then becomes "evidence" for criminal ones. For example, an idiosyncratic gait, unique pieces of clothing, or biometrics, recorded on video and obtained during legal bank transactions, could be used to identify individuals recorded during future illegal ones. While Century Bank's rhetoric tries to persuade us that they are providing a "more secure" environment, it is actually designed to distract us from the invasion of privacy being perpetrated.
This policy originated with the Bank Robbery Working Group formed by the Massachusetts Bankers Association and is apparently being used by several banks in the state. My research also indicates that this idea has spread to several other states. While I agree that this invasion of privacy pales in comparison to other violations of the 4th Amendment perpetrated on the American public after the passage of the Patriot Act, I believe that my experience is not insignificant and that this is becoming a pervasive issue in the country.
Yours sincerely,
Stockphrase