The GUTS of some people. - Page 3

KrazyHorse · April 13, 2002, 21:58

Quote:

Does that mean I can take other people's banners, flags, instruments, floats, etc. and try to destroy them? Where do you draw lines? Whenever it's convenient? I'm willing to bet that had the situation been reversed and this was a parade that pro gay rights then there would be a huge witch hunt with demands for reparations on whatever was attacked plus the full extent of the law

Somebody asks for trouble then they get it. It's a nuisance crime and all it'll get you is the police separating you from your target. Don't try and claim that trampling a gay-rights banner will get you dragged in front of a judge, because that in itself won't.

orange · April 13, 2002, 22:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Hueij
Sorry Orange, I'm not even trying to give a serious answer on this one.

It's a legitimate question

Quote:

By asking this you show that you haven't got a clue about the sentiments in Western Europe about Communism and Nazism. We didn't have a Gulag but we did have Belsen...

Consider Eastern Europe instead of Western Europe. How about Lithuania or Ukraine. Should someone in those countries have their USSR flag destroyed simply because the person believes that Communism is the correct system?

DinoDoc · April 13, 2002, 22:01

Quote:

Originally posted by orange
Maybe you can expect that, but that does not justify the sign being taken from you.

It's either that or you get to be held responsible for any of the violence that ensues when some of of them decide to give you a good kicking.

KrazyHorse · April 13, 2002, 22:02

Quote:

Originally posted by orange
Though legally, they shouldn't. I'm with you that Nazism is wrong, where I separate is where you say that someone cannot promote Nazism because we feel it's wrong

Legally speaking, we're all gay *****.

orange · April 13, 2002, 22:02

Quote:

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Somebody asks for trouble then they get it. It's a nuisance crime and all it'll get you is the police separating you from your target. Don't try and claim that trampling a gay-rights banner will get you dragged in front of a judge, because that in itself won't.

Whether or not it would be brought in front of a judge is not an issue. We're discussing whether or not the person would have a case.

Caligastia · April 13, 2002, 22:03

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22
If this is not GUTS I don't know what it is.

It seems kinda stupid to me. He could have been killed.

KrazyHorse · April 13, 2002, 22:03

Quote:

We're discussing whether or not the person would have a case

When did we decide that?

You and DF probably get along well...

Hueij · April 13, 2002, 22:04

Quote:

Consider Eastern Europe instead of Western Europe. How about Lithuania or Ukraine. Should someone in those countries have their USSR flag destroyed simply because the person believes that Communism is the correct system?

I don't know. For all I know is that Communism never set up a burocratic/industrial system to exterminate unwanted human beings...

Dr Strangelove · April 13, 2002, 22:04

Quote:

Originally posted by MacTBone
Look, the best way to get people to stop joining groups like the KKK, is to ignore them. I live in Indiana, which IIRC is the bithplace of the Klan and they still have a mrach every couple of years. Everyone makes a big deal about it, but everything's legal. The best way to get your message across to these groups is an empty street.

I don't care what your message is, you have the same rights as everyone else. We don't have special laws requiring bigots to wear patches and we don't let people destroy other people's property no matter who you are.

The KKK is believed to have originated in Jackson, Tennessee. It was a byproduct ( or maybe a waste product ) of the Civil War, founded in late 1865. It's original purpose was to counteract black civil rights and the encroachment of northener "scalawags", so why would it have originated in Indiana? By the early 1870s the US government became very concerned about its activities. The state governments of the former CSA were told in so many words that the end of reconstruction and the restoration of full rights in the south would be contingent on the suppression of the Klan. The southern states used reconstituted militia and the influence of prominent men like Robert E. Lee and quickly suppressed the Klan. Though a clandestine organization persisted for years the Klan rose out of obscurity in the 1920s by adding Catholics and immigrants to its list of enemies. This gave the Klan a common ground with northern bigots allowing the Klan the chance to open branches outside the south,

orange · April 13, 2002, 22:05

Quote:

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

Legally speaking, we're all gay *****.

Look, I don't know why I'm getting the sarcasticness...

The moment a peaceful protester crosses the line and becomes a violent protester or terrorist, they are breaking the law. But, a person should have the right to peacefully protest or promote WHATEVER they feel like! Why do you get to decide what they can and cannot promote with legal protection for their property? And why do you feel that someone deserves legal protection for taking a stand against what they feel is wrong, but only when it's what you and I believe is wrong?

orange · April 13, 2002, 22:08

Quote:

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
When did we decide that?

That's all I've been saying. And if they choose to press charges, criminal or civil, they do have a case.

Quote:

You and DF probably get along well...

SURELY YOU JEST!!!

mactbone · April 13, 2002, 22:08

Indiana borders Kentucky, 'nuff said. Seriously, once you pass a certain interstate a little south of Indy, you're in hick country, drawls and everything. I guess it has something to with all the hills.

KrazyHorse · April 13, 2002, 22:08

Quote:

And why do you feel that someone deserves legal protection for taking a stand against what they feel is wrong, but only when it's what you and I believe is wrong?

You obviously haven't been paying attention to what I've been saying...

Dr Strangelove · April 13, 2002, 22:09

I think it would help if we knew what this organization advocates and what the flags supposedly represented. During WWII the Nazis raised SS formations in many occupied countries, including Greece, and most of those formations adopted their own flags. Is that what these fellows were flying. Personally I think that Austria has the right idea, I have no problem with banning Nazis paraphenalia.

orange · April 13, 2002, 22:12

Quote:

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
You obviously haven't been paying attention to what I've been saying...

yes or no. You think the guy did a great thing, and will not and should not be punished, monetarily or otherwise, for his actions, because they were against a racist group, whom you disagree with. Correct?

KrazyHorse · April 13, 2002, 22:13

Quote:

Originally posted by orange
That's all I've been saying. And if they choose to press charges, criminal or civil, they do have a case

Actually, you'd be surprised what a judge can dismiss as a nuisance charge...

KrazyHorse · April 13, 2002, 22:14

Quote:

Originally posted by orange
yes or no. You think the guy did a great thing, and will not and should not be punished, monetarily or otherwise, for his actions

Okay so far...

Quote:

because they were against a racist group, whom you disagree with. Correct?

Wrong.

orange · April 13, 2002, 22:20

Quote:

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Actually, you'd be surprised what a judge can dismiss as a nuisance charge...

well, in the US, I believe civil cases have to be for a value of at least $20...

My extent of knowledge about Greek law relates to how long I get banned and how big my PCR from MarkG is for posting in Area25, but assuming US law, if the person did want to press charges for destruction of property (assuming it was not his flag) he would and should have a case. He didn't do major damage, so the punishment should not be much....but it should not depend on what his reasons were.

David Floyd · April 13, 2002, 22:36

Here's what it comes down to.

If I march down the street carrying a flag expressing a political viewpoint, I have that right. If someone rips it out of my hands and starts to tear it up (my property), I will beat the **** out of them (and yes, KH, I've been in a fight before

) and I will not get in legal trouble for it.

Therefore, the guy who got his ass kicked deserved it from my POV.

orange · April 13, 2002, 22:41

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd
Here's what it comes down to.

If I march down the street carrying a flag expressing a political viewpoint, I have that right. If someone rips it out of my hands and starts to tear it up (my property), I will beat the **** out of them (and yes, KH, I've been in a fight before

) and I will not get in legal trouble for it.

Therefore, the guy who got his ass kicked deserved it from my POV.

And then you can and should be convicted of assault. You shouldn't take the law into your own hands.

David Floyd · April 13, 2002, 22:45

orange-

If I have a legitimate claim that I felt threatened by the guy, I have every right to act in my own defense.

Further, if he even touched me in the process of taking my flag, he assaulted me.

And finally, I have every right to protect my personal property from theft and destruction by any reasonable means (I can't kill the guy, but I can restrain him).

MosesPresley · April 13, 2002, 23:06

My 2 cents.

I have lived in the US all of my life. I went through the so called liberal sixties to today, and fascism is alive and well here. People here love fascism. If you mention Hitler, they say "You know, he was crazy, but he had some good ideas." Hitler had the "final solution", we had "manifest destiny." Go figure.

So it doesn't surprise me that you will find little sympathy for that man from my fellow countrymen.

orange · April 13, 2002, 23:10

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd
If I have a legitimate claim that I felt threatened by the guy, I have every right to act in my own defense.

Uh, there's a difference between self defense and "I will beat the **** out of them"

Quote:

Further, if he even touched me in the process of taking my flag, he assaulted me.

Not necessarily. Assault involves intend to harm YOU. Your property is not an extention of you. I could pat you on the back while saying hello, and you wouldn't have a right to hit me because of it.

Quote:

And finally, I have every right to protect my personal property from theft and destruction by any reasonable means (I can't kill the guy, but I can restrain him).

Difference between restraining someone and beating the **** out of them.

KrazyHorse · April 13, 2002, 23:11

I take it back. David's even sillier than you, orange.

orange · April 13, 2002, 23:13

Quote:

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I take it back. David's even sillier than you, orange.

yes well, he's the other extreme. He not only wants protection for the right to protest, but he wants the government to justify his 'right' to assault other people as well

And I am not silly for saying that a person should not destroy another person's property when he is peacefully protesting

David Floyd · April 13, 2002, 23:13

Quote:

Uh, there's a difference between self defense and "I will beat the **** out of them"

If he resists my defensive restraint I can do whatever is necessary to protect myself.

Quote:

Not necessarily. Assault involves intend to harm YOU. Your property is not an extention of you. I could pat you on the back while saying hello, and you wouldn't have a right to hit me because of it.

No, but if you steal my flag and try to destroy it I can hit you.

Quote:

Difference between restraining someone and beating the **** out of them.

See above - I can protect myself by any reasonable means.

orange · April 13, 2002, 23:16

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd
If he resists my defensive restraint I can do whatever is necessary to protect myself.

Yeah, sure. That'll hold up in court!

But your honor, he like, tried to break my half nelson, so I beat him to a bloody pulp. There's nothing in the constitution that forbids that, is there?

Quote:

No, but if you steal my flag and try to destroy it I can hit you.

I'm not so sure about that...i feel that you should report it to the police or attempt a citizens arrest. Restraint does not involve striking the person.

Quote:

See above - I can protect myself by any reasonable means.

yeah, reasonable, meaning you can't beat them up...and besides, property is not an extention of you. So you can't use that argument to protect your property. If you are assaulted, of course...but not if your property is taken from you.

David Floyd · April 13, 2002, 23:22

Quote:

Yeah, sure. That'll hold up in court!

But your honor, he like, tried to break my half nelson, so I beat him to a bloody pulp. There's nothing in the constitution that forbids that, is there?

If I have him properly secured awaiting arrest so I can press charges, of course I can't pound on him. But if while attempting to recover my property he fights back, I have every right to break his nose.

Quote:

I'm not so sure about that...i feel that you should report it to the police or attempt a citizens arrest. Restraint does not involve striking the person.

Congratulations. I, on the other hand, would take the more direct - and legal - approach towards recovering my property.

Quote:

yeah, reasonable, meaning you can't beat them up...and besides, property is not an extention of you. So you can't use that argument to protect your property. If you are assaulted, of course...but not if your property is taken from you.

So if I pass you on the street and you pick my pocket I can't use physical force to recover it? Please

Ecthy · April 15, 2002, 11:10

Yes I'm from Germany, and I find it an extreme insult how Americans (OK Spray, at least those who post there) can valeu their "natural right" to possess things higher than other people's right to live and not being botehred by facists. Guys (esp Floyd and some others, can't be arsed to read all of this reactionary BS), your opinions are an insult to all peoples of Europe, because we have indeed suffered from it a lot. And the fact you're so chilled and easy-going when it comes to national socialism is an extreme insult to the Israeli people and any Jes around the world as well. Hypocrisy!

Sprayber - as a matter of fact, the majorit of all American posters on this board took side with national socialism or similar fascist / atuhoritarian regimes in comparison with communism. Their own reasoning was the higher importance for their damn rights (possession, right to shoot others blah blah) compared to other people's right to live in peace, and that is a shame. Selfishness!

I don't say all Americans are like that, but I think you guys are in the upper class of being able to think and draw real conclusions. And given how brainwashed some people hear appear at times( even some of those who I basically like and respect!), I'm afraid the MOST of Americans are even worse, but I won't even try and estimate that for I'd have no chance, just too little figures given

If I came across like generalizing, then sorry

The essence of laws against certain leanings is the protection of what we call a pluralist system. I can only repeat - it appears false by that, but it will last longer and it prevents very bad things from happening.

And if you don't agree, then discuss. I'm not trolling

mactbone · April 15, 2002, 11:26

My final thought is that the laws have to be obeyed. We shouldn't make special laws that single out ideologies. That's why I have a hard time with "Hate Crime" legislation, you're punishing someone because their political views are stupid. I can murder a person of the same color as I am and be bigoted but if I kill someone of a different color my bigotness adds time. All crimes are hate crimes and should not be distinguished. During the trial the press will let everyone know what an idiot the bigot is and popular opinion will condemn his views, no need for the legal system to step in and punish him.

Oh, DF, you'd be in the right only if he physically assaulted you in a manner which a judge or jury would agree is harmful.