Announcement

**KrazyHorse** · April 13, 2002, 22:13

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

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...

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

Wrong.

**orange** · April 13, 2002, 22:20

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

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

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"

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

Announcement

The GUTS of some people.

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment