American Man Gives Nazi Salute in Germany, Gets Punched in the Face - Sensationalist Headlines

I wonder if people here would feel the same about someone punching a communist in the face. It's a legitimate question.

[QUOTE=343N;52568390]where do we draw the line where we say 'you're offended enough, so it's ok to hit him'[/QUOTE] [b]Fighting Words[/b] "Words which would likely make the person whom they are addressed commit an act of violence. Fighting words are a category of speech that is unprotected by the First Amendment." - Chaplinsky v New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942). ( The case in question: [url]https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/315/568[/url] ) Even though actual 'words' were not used here, it was nonetheless communicative to the same effect.

[QUOTE=MedicWine;52568387]I'm pretty sure Nazi stuff is explicitly banned in Germany.[/QUOTE] I have no problem with punching Nazis, but you were just in another thread whining about construction workers tying up a thief, yet you have no problem with vigilantes assaulting people for making inappropriate gestures just because the gestures are illegal? Nice one dude.

[QUOTE=LegndNikko;52568449]I mean the salute is literally saying "I support an ideology that abuses people" so[/QUOTE] What many people don't realise is that there is absolutely nothing redeemable about fascism, at it's core it states that violence is desired for some bullshit about keeping the country strong. [editline]13th August 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Zillamaster55;52568542]I wonder if people here would feel the same about someone punching a communist in the face. It's a legitimate question.[/QUOTE] They are not comparable, there are non-violent communists, there are no non-violent nazis, communists don't have racism and hatred at the core of their ideology.

[quote]What many people don't realise is that there is absolutely nothing redeemable about fascism[/quote] It's in fact so irredeemable that said court case above was built from a guy yelling at someone about how they were a 'damn fascist' amongst other things. In their written opinion: [quote][I]Argument is unnecessary to demonstrate that the appellations "damned racketeer" and "damned Fascist" are epithets likely to provoke the average person to retaliation, and thereby cause a breach of the peace.[/I][/quote] More on what 'fighting words' mean to the court: "[...] the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words -- those which, by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace."

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;52568553]I have no problem with punching Nazis, but you were just in another thread whining about construction workers tying up a thief, yet you have no problem with vigilantes assaulting people for making inappropriate gestures just because the gestures are illegal? Nice one dude.[/QUOTE] I'm not justifying anything I'm just pointing out that it's illegal in the country? He said 'Free speech' I was just clarifying that the Nazi salute wasn't covered under free speech in that country. And what's up with dragging my post history around? That has nothing to do with this.

[QUOTE=eirexe;52568564]there are no non-violent nazis[/QUOTE] Explain? Last I checked a large majority of the people at the recent rally in Virginia just stood around and yelled a bunch.

[QUOTE=MedicWine;52568573]I'm not justifying anything I'm just pointing out that it's illegal in the country? He said 'Free speech' I was just clarifying that the Nazi salute wasn't covered under free speech in that country. And what's up with dragging my post history around? That has nothing to do with this.[/QUOTE] if they've no other valid arguments, they'll throw in an ad hominem to try and bolster their point. Just shows the fragility of their argument.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;52568542]I wonder if people here would feel the same about someone punching a communist in the face. It's a legitimate question.[/QUOTE] Communism isn't inherently abusive or violent so that'd be a fucked up thing to do.

[QUOTE=MedicWine;52568573]I'm not justifying anything I'm just pointing out that it's illegal in the country? He said 'Free speech' I was just clarifying that the Nazi salute wasn't covered under free speech in that country. And what's up with dragging my post history around? That has nothing to do with this.[/QUOTE] It has everything to do with it. If you're opposed to tying up thieves because vigilantism is wrong, you should also be opposed to assaulting people for performing the Nazi salute because that's vigilantism and vigilantism is wrong. If you ask me - all Nazis deserve a good whack on the nose, sure. I just wonder why you're not all up in arms about this. Would also like to point out that performing the salute doesn't necessarily make one a Nazi, the guy was drunk and could just as well be a crass dumbass going huhuhuh germans huhuhuh nazis huhuhuh sieg heil.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;52568576]Explain? Last I checked a large majority of the people at the recent rally in Virginia just stood around and yelled a bunch.[/QUOTE] just to note, you are again defending nazis. They did stand about, with weaponry, sheilds, helmets, delibrately provoking violence. By the definition of the ideology itself, there are no non-violent nazis.

[QUOTE=Instant Mix;52568582]just to note, you are again defending nazis. [/QUOTE] How so? By saying you shouldn't hit people that didn't do anything?

If you do this kind of stuff in Germany you're basically saying "I don't give a shit about your country and disregard everything you did in the last 70 years". Americans should know better to not use the N word in front of someone who might get triggered by it.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;52568542]I wonder if people here would feel the same about someone punching a communist in the face. It's a legitimate question.[/QUOTE] Communists don't want to exterminate me and everybody like me for the crime of being born

[quote]you should also be opposed to assaulting people for performing the Nazi salute because that's vigilantism and vigilantism is wrong.[/quote] Why should he be opposed? It's not vigilantism; they were being intentionally provocative. In many courts' opinions, they more or less earned what they got and they didn't have the right to say/do what they did by the First Amendment as they knew what sort of response it'd evoke. In other words: The First Amendment isn't a shield that you can hide behind when you're intentionally trying to start a fight.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;52568576]Explain? Last I checked a large majority of the people at the recent rally in Virginia just stood around and yelled a bunch.[/QUOTE] I think his point was even if they don't go around physically hurting people, the end game of nazism is very much violent and that you can't achieve it's goals without violence. The whole statement of the ideology is basically "if you don't meet our very strict and obscure racial rules, you either don't deserve to be treated like a human being or don't deserve to live at all."

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;52568592]I think his point was even if they don't go around physically hurting people, the end game of nazism is very much violent and that you can't achieve it's goals without violence.[/QUOTE] Oh, okay. I was getting confused for a second because the morons with the torches didn't out and out do anything.

i don't think it's right for us to be violent towards a certain group of people just because we deem ourselves in the right. if they're an active threat, i get it, you should detain/arrest/deal with him however necessary, but otherwise, we're just helping/justifying their cause. all this conflict is just rising tensions

[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;52568591]We should he be opposed? It's not vigilantism; they were being intentionally provocative. In many courts' opinions, they more or less earned what they got and they didn't have the right to say/do what they did by the First Amendment as they knew what sort of response it'd evoke. In other words: The First Amendment isn't a shield that you can hide behind when you're intentionally trying to start a fight.[/QUOTE] The first amendment also doesn't apply in fucking Germany, where this took place, and isn't being invoked as a defense. The guy got what was coming to him and is lucky he's not facing legal consequences, because he deserves to. I'm just questioning MedicWine specifically because of the stink he made about tying up a thief to restrain him until police arrived in another thread. It seems to me if you are opposed to that, you should also be opposed to punching people for making illegal gestures.

[QUOTE=MarcusSmith;52568400]Try to call a [B]german[/B] guy a nazi or do the nazi salute, he'll punch the shit outta you. And for good reasons.[/QUOTE] Hahahahhahahah Nice one I have met a lot of Germans who got so fed up with the ban everything nazi that they do nazi jokes themselves.

[quote]The first amendment also doesn't apply in fucking Germany, where this took place, and isn't being invoked as a defense[/quote] I'm aware, but they're invoking the first amendment ('Freedom of Speech') in the discussion here as a defense ('Why don't they have the right to say what they want free of consequences' effectively) , so I'm trying to make it relevant. Or at least I can only assume they're invoking the first amendment; I'm not entirely up to speed on Germany's sets of laws so. [quote]all this conflict is just rising tensions[/quote] The ones responsible for raising the tensions are the ones who're attempting to provoke people into violence in an attempt to blame their overwhelming response (gunfire and rioting) on whatever violence people use against them. They're trying to get someone to punch them so that they can pull out their shotgun and blow them apart - they're the crux of the problem.

[QUOTE=LegndNikko;52568449]I mean the salute is literally saying "I support an ideology that abuses people" so[/QUOTE] This is one retarded saying, considering it was probably done in a joking manner (even if people got offended; humour is not universal), or are you saying that telling jokes about blondes/women/gays/jews/blacks automatically means I support sexist/homophobic/racist/nazist views? You must live in a very shallow world if you sincerely do think so.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;52568595]Oh, okay. I was getting confused for a second because the morons with the torches didn't out and out do anything.[/QUOTE] I'm on my phone so I can't pull it up but considering someone plowed over counter-protestors and there was more than one incident of some rally attendees beating up black people, I'd say that they definitely did something. It wasn't exactly a peaceful gathering.

It's illegal to do that in Germany. I don't know if he's getting arrested or not since he's drunk but he still is probably in hot water.

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;52568576]Explain? Last I checked a large majority of the people at the recent rally in Virginia just stood around and yelled a bunch.[/QUOTE] Their ideology is based on violence, of course it would be stupid to apply it before they get to power.

[quote]considering it was probably done in a joking manner[/quote] It isn't about whether you actually support those views, you're still attempting to provoke someone who'd be sensitive to the thing you're doing. Is your defense on that really going to be 'It was just a prank, bro'? Even if it [i]was[/i] 'just a prank' that doesn't excuse what was done.

I'm pretty big on free speech and the particular brand we have in the US, but when you go to another country you're supposed to abide by their customs. I wouldn't go to a muslim majority country and joke about Muhammed, or to Israel and joke about the Holocaust, or... well, this. If I woke up from a drunken stupor and found out I did this, I would definitely feel like a piece of shit. When in Rome, etc.

[QUOTE=DeEz;52568579]Communism isn't inherently abusive or violent so that'd be a fucked up thing to do.[/QUOTE] What? Communist doctrine literally demands "violent revolution" against upper classes

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;52568581]It has everything to do with it. If you're opposed to tying up thieves because vigilantism is wrong, you should also be opposed to assaulting people for performing the Nazi salute because that's vigilantism and vigilantism is wrong. If you ask me - all Nazis deserve a good whack on the nose, sure. I just wonder why you're not all up in arms about this. Would also like to point out that performing the salute doesn't necessarily make one a Nazi, the guy was drunk and could just as well be a crass dumbass going huhuhuh germans huhuhuh nazis huhuhuh sieg heil.[/QUOTE] Again, I haven't justified anything in this thread? I simply pointed something out for clarification. I haven't expressed any viewpoints in this thread and I don't owe it to you to discuss them. At this point I'm glad I haven't said anything because you seem really hostile towards me and I don't feel like I've said anything wrong.

[QUOTE=The golden;52568621]Have you read any history lately? You [I]know [/I]what Nazism is, right?... You do understand what they actually believe in? Because I really don't think you do. They are a direct threat to everything that you hold dear in your daily life - especially if you are a minority person.[/QUOTE] It should still be left to the police to deal with, unless they get violent like those on the loose in the US right now. People have [I][URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/soccer-referees-death-shows-how-dangerous-head-blows-can-be/"]die[/URL][URL="https://archive.is/nSMs7"]d[/URL][/I] from a single punch to the face before, so all the other issues with letting random people commit violence other than self-defence aside, it's definitely not a safe way to punish someone.