Neo-Nazi gets punched in the face while handing out racist fliers at campus

[Xeones]

it can be both assault and a freedom of speech issue. if you punch me to take my wallet that assult, if you punch me to stop me from making a political statment that's assault and restricting my ability to speak.

Freedom of speech only applies to the government.

- - - Updated - - -

It's always funny when criminals get punished for their crimes.

You do a really bad job at equating things.

[Wells]

I assume you are talking about the turn of 19th and 20th centuries, in which case this is somewhat weak example because their thoughts aside, they were already engaging in it at said turn of the century, long before the Nazis. Modern day US, somewhat less so.

And in 100 years who knows what monstrosities our great grandchildren will think us guilty of. The point being that contemporarily liberal societies that have thought themselves above base totalitarianism have given way to such practices in rapid order before and we'd be fools to think we're immune to the same now.

[Super Kami Dende]

Because he knows he fucked up.

Passing out flyers isn't illegal though, whereas assault is.

[Wells]

Passing out flyers isn't illegal though, whereas assault is.

The argument made here is one of moral good, not legal.

[Super Kami Dende]

How exactly? Because they are still growing.
They are even publicly flyering now.

So we should feel free to punch anyone we disagree with or think is a piece of shit? Jeez I've been restraining myself all this time due to the Law for nothing!

[Espe]

You mean like how Trump supporters attacked minorities who showed up to rallies? Or the attacks on minorities while people yell "TRUMP!"

Remember the Trump supporter who gunned down two police officers in cold blood just a few days before the election over a confederate flag?

Remember Nazi rallies on the steps of multiple state capitols in support of Trump?

The FBI and DHS both put out statements of concern last year over right-wing groups, who cause the vast majority of domestic terrorism in the US.

Just a few things to think about.

[Canpinter]

Freedom of speech only applies to the government.

maybe in a strictly technical sense but in any practical way dose it actually matter WHO uses violence to stop you from saying what you want? i mean if you put up a pro trump/hillary sign on your lawn and the guy across the street beats you up for it is that significantly different then a cop doing it? sure the government has a greater ability to harm on a larger scale but the individual impact is similar.

[Espe]

So we should feel free to punch anyone we disagree with or think is a piece of shit? Jeez I've been restraining myself all this time due to the Law for nothing!

More right-wingers defending Nazis. Jesus fucking christ, someone please tell me this is their rock bottom.

[Dug]

it can be both assault and a freedom of speech issue. if you punch me to take my wallet that assult, if you punch me to stop me from making a political statment that's assault and restricting my ability to speak.

No because you and I have no agreement that I will allow you to speak. You're never going to see one of these incidents result in any sort of charge to obstruction to speech, only assault because of the two parties neither of them is the government.

But yes in a literal sense I am "restricting your ability to speak" but it's not like you'll get extra charges for doing so.

[Super Kami Dende]

Remember the Trump supporter who gunned down two police officers in cold blood just a few days before the election over a confederate flag?

Remember Nazi rallies on the steps of multiple state capitols in support of Trump?

The FBI and DHS both put out statements of concern last year over right-wing groups, who cause the vast majority of domestic terrorism in the US.

Just a few things to think about.

Remember Antifa beating people with Metal Poles at Berkeley.

or Pepper Spraying people in NYC?

Wow it's as if pieces of shit are on both sides!

[Wells]

More right-wingers defending Nazis. Jesus fucking christ, someone please tell me this is their rock bottom.

Its worth remembering that the Third Reich came into power with significant enabling efforts from non-Nazi conservatives who felt them better than the left.

[Heladys]

maybe in a strictly technical sense but in any practical way dose it actually matter WHO uses violence to stop you from saying what you want? i mean if you put up a pro trump/hillary sign on your lawn and the guy across the street beats you up for it is that significantly different then a cop doing it? sure the government has a greater ability to harm on a larger scale but the individual impact is similar.

Yes, it matters.

If the government punches you in the face to stop your racist claptrap that's a first amendment violation.

If a bystander punches you in the face to stop your racist claptrap that's simple assault with a potential for a small fine and a lot of hearty handshakes.

[Theinquisition]

You come call me when the police stop doing their job and arresting people that are assaulting others. Police in this case were ready and willing to start the investigation and Adolf jr. didn't want to so...

And again^99 free speech is an issue between you and the government. It does not protect you from the consequences in public/private society. No one has to give you a right to spew hate filled rhetoric and while you do have a right not to get punched (assault, not freedom of speech) it's going to happen from time to time.

Lol?

Police have literally been told to stand down in places like Portland and more recently, Berkley, while random people were being beaten in the street with bars and bats.

[Canpinter]

Yes, it matters.

If the government punches you in the face to stop your racist claptrap that's a first amendment violation.

If a bystander punches you in the face to stop your racist claptrap that's simple assault with a potential for a small fine and a lot of hearty handshakes.

thats a matter of legal difference not of ethical one tho, freedom of speech has bot ha legal and ethical aspect.

[Mormolyce]

It's a sad day when free speech is no longer a sacred belief of the left.

I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It. - Voltaire

But his right to say it is not in question here.

Being punched is not a violation of free speech. It's assault.

[Super Kami Dende]

More right-wingers defending Nazis. Jesus fucking christ, someone please tell me this is their rock bottom.

How did I defend a Nazi? I'm defending the Law. Assault is assault regardless of who you punch or why. Hence why I referred to him as a "Piece of shit"

Reading comprehension seems hard for you.

also P.s. I'm not a Right Winger :^)

[Dug]

Lol?

Police have literally been told to stand down in places like Portland and more recently, Berkley, while random people were being beaten in the street with bars and bats.

The laws didn't change and the police, I can assure you, would have stepped in if they were allowed to do so. Bring it up with their superior who made the call to not arrest rioters. Nothing is stopping them from doing so except some harsh twitter words from stupid trolls.

[Canpinter]

But his right to say it is not in question here.

Being punched is not a violation of free speech. It's assault.

if it is used to silence someones ability to speak it is in effect a violation of free speech as the end results are the same.

[Tijuana]

But his right to say it is not in question here.

Being punched is not a violation of free speech. It's assault.

Uh...are you for real?

So, in your mind, punching someone in the face is allowing them to speak? How do arrive at that conclusion?

[Heladys]

thats a matter of legal difference not of ethical one tho, freedom of speech has bot ha legal and ethical aspect.

And the legal view of an action has nothing to do with the morality of an action.