Man walks around Seattle with swastika armband and gets punched to ground by passerby

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
Remember folks, white supremacists / neo Nazis - need to respect their 1st amendment rights.

Colin Kaepernick - son of a bitch for disrespecting our flag.

Kaepernick made news for 2 reasons:

#1 - First world problems. Nothing more hilarious than someone claiming oppression as an NFL player. Pretty comical, actually - and it's not because he is "standing in" to help the overall cause, he genuinely thinks he is oppressed. This all goes back to the overall notion of "It's not my fault - it's society's fault" It's always easier to play the victim because you're always less likely to be questioned.

#2 - He fucking sucks as a QB. The fact that no one wants him isn't because of his stupid stunt of kneeling, he just legitimately sucks as a player. So what better way to get attention as a backup then to get a media spotlight? Notice - he didn't do this during his prime when he had the starter position did he? Of course not, because you can't claim to be oppressed when you're the starter. Now that he sucks balls and was benched, he can now take the Queen's throne for being "oppressed". It's attention whoring 101, and anyone who disagrees with that is retarded because no one can answer the question "Why didn't he do that for the previous 2 seasons as the starter?" And no, the answer isn't that BLM is recent news, it already had headlines during his prime years.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
17,677
9,524
136
nvm, what's the point in trying to converse with people who employ logic like "only for wearing an armband".
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
The Fifth Amendment Right of Free Speech prohibits Government control of speech not safety from a punched in face by fellow citizens if you use it.
 

MagnusTheBrewer

IN MEMORIAM
Jun 19, 2004
24,135
1,594
126
The issue is that laws and rights are there to protect society. Like all policy, they tend to fall down in individual behavior and, they should. Individuals always have the ability to make their own choices and self determination. It is important to understand that the declaration of independence and the bill of rights is a reflection of our society not, a mandate for personal behavior. It is my belief that those who support hate forego the protection of the society they inhabit.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
94,968
15,106
126
Wow people are seriously defending Nazis. As in, saying they shouldn't get punched in the face. Literally.

Just wow!!! Knock these guys back to reality please.


Nope. Punching damages your hand. Use a bat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thebobo

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,469
4,536
136
Kaepernick made news for 2 reasons:

#1 - First world problems. Nothing more hilarious than someone claiming oppression as an NFL player. Pretty comical, actually - and it's not because he is "standing in" to help the overall cause, he genuinely thinks he is oppressed. This all goes back to the overall notion of "It's not my fault - it's society's fault" It's always easier to play the victim because you're always less likely to be questioned.

#2 - He fucking sucks as a QB. The fact that no one wants him isn't because of his stupid stunt of kneeling, he just legitimately sucks as a player. So what better way to get attention as a backup then to get a media spotlight? Notice - he didn't do this during his prime when he had the starter position did he? Of course not, because you can't claim to be oppressed when you're the starter. Now that he sucks balls and was benched, he can now take the Queen's throne for being "oppressed". It's attention whoring 101, and anyone who disagrees with that is retarded because no one can answer the question "Why didn't he do that for the previous 2 seasons as the starter?" And no, the answer isn't that BLM is recent news, it already had headlines during his prime years.



Did you manufacture that incoherent truckload of manure all by yourself, or did your fellow snowflakes pitch in?
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
Apologies for wasting your time. Get back to us when you actually understand what it means for someone to label themselves a "Nazi".

There is zero evidence the guy wearing the arm band did anything close to what you describe. Yes what happened by the hand of Nazi's is indescribably bad. A terrible time for the world, no denying that. That does not give someone the right to knock a guy out, for wearing an arm band.

Few examples, I think we all know the Westbro Baptist church. They cheer the deaths of all sorts of people, military, gays, miners, just recently the deaths of the hurricane victims. They protest and picket these deaths, show up at funerals. Truly disgusting behavior. That being said, when done legally it is their right to free speech. Would it feel awesome punching out a guy protesting a loved one's death? Hell yeah it would. It would also be illegal, and land us in jail. I do not support their message or how they deliver it, I do support their right to do so however. As bad as it is, I still support it.

From a personal experience. We have a group of individuals who belong to the Israelite Church of God in Jesus Christ.



They like to hang out downtown on nice days, and to go to UT football games. Anywhere that has a large population of civilians where they can shout at people. Where the stadium fits over 100k and many more tailgate, etc. What do they do? They yell at people walking by. Insult them, mock them, etc. Even wives and kids. Wife and I were going by them last year when she was pregnant, and they shouted out that she was dressed like a whore, and our child was an abomination. Can't really get much more offensive than that for a man. Would I have liked to beat his ass? Did I slow my walk and really think about it? Yes, I did. But that is what they want, to bait people into a fight. They had a guy dedicated to recording confrontations. Much like Westbro.

They're allowed to yell at people in public places with their sexism, racism, bigotry and hatred. Why? Protected by free speech. Their entire purpose is to troll people into an argument with insults and personal attacks. Much like a few people here, they just do it irl. Again, I do not support their views, or how they go about it, but I do support their right to do so. They have ruined a few days for us before, you simply cannot enjoy yourself when people like that are yelling like that. I don't want the kids to hear that either. It would have been personally gratifying to beat his ass after he called my wife a whore for how she was dressed, and our unborn child an abomination. It also would have landed me in jail and without a job. There are plenty of videos of them online.

I also support Kap's right to kneel. That is his right. It is also the right of a business owner to not hire him for the fear of losing money via ticket sales and sponsors.

There was a KKK march recently here in town. I forget the exact number, I am pretty sure it was like 70:1, protesters to marchers. One person arrested, no fighting, no property damage. As pathetic as their views are, how little I think of them as a person, they had the right to march. They got the permits, and were within the law. They were far overshadowed by people who disagreed with them, which was a great thing. I don't agree with their message, I do support their ability to be able to deliver that message in peace.

There are countless examples of free speech that can be offensive to people. It comes in many forms, clothing, words, signs, etc. There is no sliding scale of offensiveness to warrant a stern talking to, to an actual assault. We have to allow the bad, to get the good. We cannot dictate on a personal level what someone is allowed to say, allowed to wear, how they look, etc and if they don't line up with our way of thinking, we assault them. No matter how despicable the views of people who really believe in hatred, bigotry, racism, sexism, etc. Which is exactly what the views of Nazi's are. Yet, when they express their views legally, that is their right. I am legally allowed to say I am better than you for whatever reason I come up with. I could call you ugly, fat, short, gay, say my race is better than your race. You are allowed to refute my allegations and argue back to me. We are not allowed to assault each other for these words. There really is nothing else to say, the law backs up my stance. Assaulting someone for what they wear or say, is going backwards. We don't have to like what is being expressed, but we do have to allow it when done legally. I really can't even believe this is a discussion, but seeing how many people support the violence at protests I shouldn't have been surprised.

I rambled a bit, don't have anything else to say. Gearing up for a day of football. Either people support the 1st Amendment, or they don't. There is no pick and choose, depending on who says it and what the message is. That's the bottom line. So no point in me going back and forth about it, this is my stance. Which is founded in our Constitution, backed by laws.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,313
1,214
126
Nope. Punching damages your hand. Use a bat.

Yea why go to jail for assault when you can go to prison for murder.. mob rule is what got many blacks lynched less than a century ago. Did the lynchings stop blacks from getting their rights? Were the white supremacists overcome with beatings? They did the violence and they lost.

If you want to make a difference, move your children into a mixed neighborhood like I did and raise them with black kids as close friends. If you are living in an all white neighborhood, you have indicated in the most potent terms what race of people are acceptable to live by you. That is a much stronger indicator of what you feel about other races than any words you may say.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
94,968
15,106
126
Yea why go to jail for assault when you can go to prison for murder.. mob rule is what got many blacks lynched less than a century ago. Did the lynchings stop blacks from getting their rights? Were the white supremacists overcome with beatings? They did the violence and they lost.

If you want to make a difference, move your children into a mixed neighborhood like I did and raise them with black kids as close friends. If you are living in an all white neighborhood, you have indicated in the most potent terms what race of people are acceptable to live by you. That is a much stronger indicator of what you feel about other races than any words you may say.

I have Italian, Indian, White, Chinese and Burkina Faso (no idea what the population is called) neighbours.

And I would not take a bat to the Nazi's head. Leg or arm.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,313
1,214
126
I have Italian, Indian, White, Chinese and Burkina Faso (no idea what the population is called) neighbours.

And I would not take a bat to the Nazi's head. Leg or arm.

I was using "you" in the generic sense. Sorry if it sounded like I was calling you out.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,313
1,214
126
Shrug.

Toronto calls itself the most diverse city in the world.

I have been to Toronto. It is the most impressive city I have ever seen. It was so depressing coming back to Milwaukee.... possibly the least impressive city in America.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
94,968
15,106
126
I have been to Toronto. It is the most impressive city I have ever seen. It was so depressing coming back to Milwaukee.... possibly the least impressive city in America.


It's your beer :awe:
 

greatnoob

Senior member
Jan 6, 2014
968
395
136
ITT: Nazis deserve the right to call and incite for the genocide of people because "first amendment rights."

I don't remember who said this but if the best argument for your case is "first amendment rights" then you really don't have anything of substance to add to the discussion and you'd be best off not making yourself look like an idiot defending neo Nazis (you know, the people who are advocating the killing of semites and minorities).
 

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,209
594
126
Once upon a time I was shocked by rampant racism on this board, and now I find myself shocked by unthinking illiberalism of another kind.

It has been firmly established that incitement of violence is not protected by the 1st Amendment. The main subject here is that a person going about wearing a Swastika arm band was attacked. As far as I know wearing arm bands is a protected speech, just as burning the U.S. flags or taking to knees during National Anthem are.

We could, as a people, have a different system. We could amend the Constitution to ban Nazism (like Germany does), or we could change what is considered to be speech by banning arm bands (or burning flags, taking to knees, etc.). I am open to both solutions but I doubt there is a political will for either. Until then, no one should be subject to violence because of a private (or public for that matter) speech.
 
Last edited:

greatnoob

Senior member
Jan 6, 2014
968
395
136
Once upon a time I was shocked by rampant racism on this board, and now I find myself shocked by unthinking illiberalism of another kind.

It has been firmly established that incitement of violence is not protected by the 1st Amendment. The main subject here is that a person going about wearing a Swastika arm band was attacked. As far as I know wearing arm bands is a protected speech, just as burning the U.S. flags or taking to knees during National Anthem are.

I didn't know Swastika armbands were a new fashion trend. Why do you think he was wearing it other than boldly proclaiming his Nazi beliefs?
 

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,209
594
126
Boldly claiming Nazi beliefs is inciting violence? I know there used to be (maybe still are) losers who beat up their wives who boldly claimed feminist values. Should such violence be tolerated?
 

greatnoob

Senior member
Jan 6, 2014
968
395
136
Boldly claiming Nazi beliefs is inciting violence? I know there used to be (maybe still are) losers who beat up their wives who boldly claimed feminist values. Should such violence be tolerated?

Ah of course, how stupid of me. Nazis believe we should all be respectful and courteous to each other. Please tell us why he was wearing a Swastika armband.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
94,968
15,106
126
Boldly claiming Nazi beliefs is inciting violence? I know there used to be (maybe still are) losers who beat up their wives who boldly claimed feminist values. Should such violence be tolerated?
You didn't just compare femenism to Nazism did you?
 

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,209
594
126
"Inciting violence" has a more specific legal and practical meaning. An offensive speech falls far short from it. I have no doubt the arm band dude is deluded, bigoted, or both. But the remedy against bigoted speech cannot be a private violence. With 300+ million people living with vastly differing views in a country, if people start taking offensive speakers to their own devices, then we no longer live under a rule of law. And it does not leave much to imagination who will be the victims under such a regime. (think about that)

Does that mean our citizenry is helpless against the lunatics spreading offensive speech? No. It is somewhat cliche'd, but an answer to an offensive speech is more (counter) speech. If that does not seem satisfactory to you, there are other means as well: Public shunning is one. (like what we do on this board) Boycotting is another. If he is employed, you can write to his employer exposing his abhorrent views and ask his employer to do his civic duty of disciplining him. Heck, if all of this seems too cumbersome, you could just walk up to him and scorn him loudly for his antisocial ideas (without uttering fighting words).

But punching him in the face? Do you really believe that is an appropriate answer to an offensive speech in a liberal democracy like ours?
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
94,968
15,106
126
No, I compared a violence to a violence.


Man pushing Nazism gets punched.
Woman pushing feminism gets punched.

Sounds like you are comparing Nazism to Femenism.

It is well within his right to push Nazism. Just don't be surprised when someone takes offence.

How soon we forget...
 

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,209
594
126
Pornography is banned in public schools, so is teaching the Bible. There, I compared God to porns. That does not impugn the principle undergirding both banning.