A Chart to Help Those on the Fence About Punching Nazis

Loren Greene did a much better job on Wild Kingdom.

Ur old.

I was gonna say.

"1970s comedians called. They wanted to thank you for using their joke again."

Most of the people who would know that I stole that joke are long dead.

What the fuck are you even talking about? How are you this retarded? Seriously. This isn't about anyone being hung, you idiot, this is about trying to pull a "it's only a joke, bro!" after getting smacked down by the backlash after saying or doing something stupid. Where the fuck are you even getting any of this from? Is this just more lameness in an attempt to avoid that backlash, or are you really this deluded?

Kiss my mongrel ass, racist.

I love it when dipshits can't comprehend something, then act like I'm the idiot.
Another real winner of a strategy.

Did that work for you in school?

You- "WTF are you TALKING about???? You can't BE this stupid!!".

Teacher- "Oh, I'm sorry, I'm so embarrassed I made the question too hard, let me give you an A".

That ever happen?
Bet not.

Also, set off some roach bombs with the windows closed.

Yeah, imagine that, someone wondering what kind of an idiot you are when you go on about something that had nothing to do with what you were supposedly responding to. The fact you're just charging right ahead on that same path shows this to be in the same vein as the "it was just a joke, bro" bullshit.

So far as your dumb ass knows.
Or pretends to know.

Frankly, you can fuck off either way.

https://mobile.twitter.com/timringTV/status/900208730305941504/video/1

I admit it, I laughed. Protester in Phoenix wearing a gas mask kicks away a tear gar cannister and stands at the front of the protest refusing the orders of the riot police to disburse so a cop shoots him with a rubber bullet to the balls.

You are such and angry young man. Did some half Indian guy once touch you in a private place? It is ok, you can tell Uncle Dinner.

I still like the glitter idea.

Funny story - "Uncle dinner" is what my dog enjoyed last time someone tried to touch me in an inappropriate place.

"How do you think he feelzh now? Better, or worsh?"

I find it very funny. So, you want "non lethal" tactics? We can do that! Guarantee you might wish you were dead in a few seconds, but hey, you are very much alive punk!

Yes I can, and I just did. Killing someone is an unacceptable option for me personally in any circumstance.

First of all, you seem to be confused. This isn't a black and white world, there are several shades of grey, and there are varying degrees of threats and acts of violence. I'm drawing a definitive line at "I don't want to kill anyone in any circumstance, even in self-defense." If you have a problem with that philosophy, fine, but don't try to tell me what I should believe. If you want to respond with deadly force against someone trying to slap you, go right ahead, but have fun defending that in court.

Again (going back to page 1, which you obviously failed to read/comprehend), I said that I wouldn't be the one punching Nazis, and that anyone who does punch Nazis should face the legal ramifications. But that I understand their reasons for doing so, which may even be justified as self-defense once it gets to court in the various circumstances that have been described in this thread. Hell, I even understand why someone would resort to deadly force in self-defense in limited circumstances--but for me personally, I find it immoral and just like punching a Nazi, I wouldn't do it. Maybe take a minute to stop defending Nazis and comprehend the words in front of you on the screen.

For YOU. But another person may decide differently.

I'm not saying off the table morally (the point you're defending). I'm saying off the table legally. "I was acting in self-defense" is a legal claim, not a moral one.

Your side is claiming that initiating violence against a marching Nazi is justified by self-defense law because they are an imminent threat to someone else's life.

Hate to tell you, pal, but that claim is a black-or-white statement. It's either true or it ain't. (Spoiler alert: it ain't.)

You're claiming it's true, then trying to back away from the logical implications of that statement. Your "but I wouldn't do it" argument totally fails to acknowledge that other people would.

Good for you. But that's YOU. What about someone else who doesn't draw their line in that place?

The law says you can use deadly force in defense of yourself or another against an imminent threat. Either a marching Nazi is an imminent threat or he is not. If he is, you can't object to another using deadly force. If he's not, you have no justification for initiating violence.

What about using deadly force against someone who is an imminent threat to another's life...as defined by their political rhetoric and symbol usage?

You seem to think that all people will hold to the same moral line you do, regardless of what the law is. You are deeply, deeply mistaken.

Then what are you arguing for? If you agree it's against the law, then there is no legitimate claim that initiating violence against them is an act of self-defense. Unless you want to change the law; in that case, re-read everything I said in this post.

I'm not defending Nazis; I'd say the same about Antifa, who I find almost equally objectionable. I'm explaining how the belief that a protestor--even one expressing hateful or repugnant rhetoric--is an imminent threat to someone's life is being used to justify street violence and lawlessness.

All these arguments would go away if we just had dimensional teleporters shrunk down into raygun shells.

Then we could hose down crowds of Nazis, and vanish them away to some wilderness planet.

Nazis go away like pests, no one dies, everyone's happy.

That's tech we should have by now.
I blame Republicans slashing science every chance they get.

That awkward moment when you accidentally get transported to Nazi wilderness planet because some idiot got a little spray-happy with the dimensional teleporter ray.

I see the confusion. You specifically asked me "are you also okay with shooting them? You better be, because if your symbols-and-racist-rhetoric-equals-imminent-threat philosophy holds, that would follow logically," to which I responded "No. I'm consistently on the record here as not supporting the shooting of anyone, even in self-defense."

"Okay" usually implies a morality judgment, and you also directed the question specifically at me. I can't read your mind, I can only go by the words you post.

That is not what anyone has said, with the exception of @K. (and I even disagreed with him on his strict stance). You once again try to paint the world in black and white ("your side" vs. "my side") because it is easier to understand the world that way, but the world is more nuanced than that.

If you read what I actually posted in this thread, I said that when armed Nazis are issuing threats and actually physically attacking people, it is the Nazis that are initiating the violence, and the counter-protesters could have a legal defense by claiming self-defense. I don't support such acts of violence, but I understand the rationale behind them, and all acts of violence should pass through our justice system to be sorted out. Similarly, I don't support the use of deadly force, but if such actions occurred, they should go through our justice system to determine if they were lawful acts of self-defense.

Again, there are degrees of threats and degrees of corresponding force. The fact that you cannot distinguish the various degrees is very troubling.

Where did I say that everyone has the same moral lines as me? There are 7.5 billion human beings and there are 7.5 billion different moral lines. Again, you would have to ask those other people. I know that I am likely an outlier on this topic. I am a 6'4" white male and I don't experience the same degrees of threats, violence, or hostility as others do. I fully recognize that this particular aspect of my moral philosophy is due in large part to my privilege. I can understand when others need to resort to the use of deadly force in self-defense, but that doesn't mean I need to practice it nor support it.

The same thing that you have always argued for--let courts of law decide if it is illegal, and not a bunch of armchair attorneys on the internet.

No, I understand you are not defending Nazis--I wouldn't paint you with such a broad brush. That was directed at @Captain X. As to your point in this section, I very specifically disagreed with @K. that Nazis by their very presence (absent anything else) constitute an imminent threat. Similarly, Antifa (or any other group, except for maybe Seal Team 6) does not constitute an imminent threat without something more (e.g. armed, issuing threats, and physically attacking people, as Nazis are on video doing in Charlottesville).

oh god too many quote tags I'm Daytoning out

Yeah, I'm waiting until that mess gets untangled before I respond.

I think I un-Daytoned it...but let me know if it's not clear...

That is the strawman by which others misrepresented my stance. I very specifically said that the mere presence of Nazis does not trigger any right to self-defense. That right hinges on an imminent threat. My assertion is that an armed mob chanting specific threats and showing symbols that are intended to indicate ensuing violence amounts to such an imminent threat. That is by no means the same thing as "mere presence".

Except that I'm not defending them either, idiot.

If I misstated your stance, I apologize. That sounds much more reasonable.

Yeah..... that's some grade A bullshit right there.

That was never your assertion. Your assertion was that the idiots show up wearing Nazi gear and it's good enough to immediately attack them and claim self defense. That the Nazi just standing in front of you constituted an imminent threat.

K. - "But when they're fucking marching through your streets, you punch. Moreover, in a lawful state, you would arrest them. Anyone carrying that flag is openly pledging allegiance to enemies of the United States."

I would have no problem arresting them if the law allowed it. But the First Amendment doesn't allow it.

But as we can see there is no qualification in your sentence about an imminent threat. It's clear that if a Nazi shows up marching through your street you should run out there and punch him.

Here's the sentence in context.

The disagreement is not about whether you need to have an imminent threat; all except for @Zombie seem to agree that you do, and even he agrees that it is legally required, though his morals are different. The disagreement is whether an armed mob marching through your streets with the flag of a hostile country and chants and symbols threatening imminent violence threatens imminent violence.

Love how you bold two parts of two sentences to try and make your case but let's look at it the right way:

But when they're fucking marching through your streets, you punch

"The disagreement is whether an armed mob marching through your streets with the flag of a hostile country and chants and symbols threatening imminent violence"

Show the video.

All I saw where stupid fucks marching down a street yelling things like "white power" and "Jews won't replace us"

Show me a single video where any of those Nazi fuckheads were marching down the street chanting that they were going to kill people who were watching them walk by. Show me a video where any of those Nazi fuckheads pointed a gun at anyone. Show me a video where those Nazi fuckheads pointed any type of stick/bat at anyone who was just minding their business.

In such cases it would be perfectly acceptable to punch, kick, beat the shit out of or even kill in self defense.

But there are no videos showing those Nazi shitheads doing any of that stuff that would justify self defense actions or arresting the Nazi for making a threat.

See the problem is that you can not accept that in America we have a First Amendment that also applies to the shittest of people who live in America. That of course being Nazi shitheads.

America is not Germany. Perfectly acceptable if you guys want to arrest any Nazis that dare show their heads over there but here in America it can't be done.