wearing a swastika

[justabubba]

Brawl erupts after elderly man confronts Orange County woman over her swastika armband: report

Authorities in Orange County, California, are recommending hate crime charges against a woman who allegedly hurled anti-Semitic insults at a man who asked her to remove a Nazi armband she was wearing, the Los Angeles Times reports. The woman was sporting the armband while walking around a local...

www.rawstory.com

Woman wearing Nazi emblem made antisemitic comments in Laguna Woods, authorities say

Orange County authorities are recommending hate crime charges against a woman who allegedly yelled antisemitic comments at a man.

www.latimes.com

... The woman was wearing the armband while walking around outside Clubhouse 1, a multi-use community center, on the afternoon of March 7, Carrie Braun of the Orange County Sheriff’s Department said Saturday.

A man confronted the woman and she responded with antisemitic comments, Braun said. A physical altercation then ensued as multiple men tried to remove the woman’s armband, Braun said. One of the men was in his 80s, she said. ...

A complaint was forwarded to the district attorney’s office recommending the woman be charged with criminal threats, offensive words used to provoke a reaction and a hate crime enhancement, Braun said. She had not been charged as of Saturday ...

Along with the statement, the [ADL] organization tweeted a photo of the woman, which it said was submitted by a citizen who wished to remain anonymous. She was dressed in all black, an outfit that appeared to mimic that of a Nazi SS officer.
“We demand that Laguna Woods leaders speak out against this outrageous act of Jew-hatred and condemn acts like this which can and do inspire further incidents of antisemitism and bigotry of all kinds,” Levi [ADL representative] said. ...

i defend the right of such assholes to engage in reprehensible acts of political speech, such as publicly burning the American flag or conducting a KKK parade. and for that reason, i would also defend this woman's right to wear a swastika in public

while i find her actions deplorable, they remain legal. what is not legal is attempting to remove her armband by force ... as was the indicated response of 8 men when she refused the request to remove it herself. they were provoked. her actions provoked them
while she has the right to make the political statement of her choice in wearing that nazi armband, that does not give those 8 men sanction to deprive her of her property OR to chill her political speech

when reading the comments ensuing the raw story cite, it became apparent that i may be in the minority on this topic. which then made me wonder, who gets to be the arbiter of political speech/expression when we view it as acceptable to silence those whose political views most of us find to be so distasteful that they are seen as aberrant?

please share any thoughts you may have about this situation

 

[Chillfolks]

I kind of agree with you. She has the right to wear the stupid arm band if she wants, those who it pissed off need to keep their hands to themselves.

 

[DiAnna]

To me this is about the same as having a person in a hooded KKK robe hurling the n-word at a group of black individuals. It's hate speech, pure and simple... but in America nowadays, nothing about hate speech is either pure or simple. Creative interpretations are used to muddy the waters, so to speak.

Did they have the right to try to remove the armband? No. But I'm not sure she had the right to display it while using anti-semetic language either.

 

[Perotista]

Brawl erupts after elderly man confronts Orange County woman over her swastika armband: report

Authorities in Orange County, California, are recommending hate crime charges against a woman who allegedly hurled anti-Semitic insults at a man who asked her to remove a Nazi armband she was wearing, the Los Angeles Times reports. The woman was sporting the armband while walking around a local...

www.rawstory.com

Woman wearing Nazi emblem made antisemitic comments in Laguna Woods, authorities say

Orange County authorities are recommending hate crime charges against a woman who allegedly yelled antisemitic comments at a man.

www.latimes.com

i defend the right of such assholes to engage in reprehensible acts of political speech, such as publicly burning the American flag or conducting a KKK parade. and for that reason, i would also defend this woman's right to wear a swastika in public

while i find her actions deplorable, they remain legal. what is not legal is attempting to remove her armband by force ... as was the indicated response of 8 men when she refused the request to remove it herself. they were provoked. her actions provoked them
while she has the right to make the political statement of her choice in wearing that nazi armband, that does not give those 8 men sanction to deprive her of her property OR to chill her political speech

when reading the comments ensuing the raw story cite, it became apparent that i may be in the minority on this topic. which then made me wonder, who gets to be the arbiter of political speech/expression when we view it as acceptable to silence those whose political views most of us find to be so distasteful that they are seen as aberrant?

please share any thoughts you may have about this situation

I’m not sure where I come down on this. I’ve always thought I was one of those who followed the old motto when it came to speech, “I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend your right to say it.” Or in this case wear it. Symbols can mean different things to different folks. The swastika in both Hinduism and Buddhism has good meanings such as universal harmony, prosperity, wellbeing, eternity with many other meanings. The stars and bars, the confederate battle flag when I grew up was known as a rebel flag which was flown during a protest, especially against the government in protesting the Vietnam War. It has since become more of a symbol of the KKK and racism. I’m sure this woman wasn’t wearing the armband in a religious aspect.

But on further thought, I agree with you. Which goes back to my original adage.

 

[noonereal]

Brawl erupts after elderly man confronts Orange County woman over her swastika armband: report

Authorities in Orange County, California, are recommending hate crime charges against a woman who allegedly hurled anti-Semitic insults at a man who asked her to remove a Nazi armband she was wearing, the Los Angeles Times reports. The woman was sporting the armband while walking around a local...

www.rawstory.com

Woman wearing Nazi emblem made antisemitic comments in Laguna Woods, authorities say

Orange County authorities are recommending hate crime charges against a woman who allegedly yelled antisemitic comments at a man.

www.latimes.com

i defend the right of such assholes to engage in reprehensible acts of political speech, such as publicly burning the American flag or conducting a KKK parade. and for that reason, i would also defend this woman's right to wear a swastika in public

while i find her actions deplorable, they remain legal. what is not legal is attempting to remove her armband by force ... as was the indicated response of 8 men when she refused the request to remove it herself. they were provoked. her actions provoked them
while she has the right to make the political statement of her choice in wearing that nazi armband, that does not give those 8 men sanction to deprive her of her property OR to chill her political speech

when reading the comments ensuing the raw story cite, it became apparent that i may be in the minority on this topic. which then made me wonder, who gets to be the arbiter of political speech/expression when we view it as acceptable to silence those whose political views most of us find to be so distasteful that they are seen as aberrant?

please share any thoughts you may have about this situation

Me, ill be the arbiter of political speech.

 

[vanceen]

Brawl erupts after elderly man confronts Orange County woman over her swastika armband: report

Authorities in Orange County, California, are recommending hate crime charges against a woman who allegedly hurled anti-Semitic insults at a man who asked her to remove a Nazi armband she was wearing, the Los Angeles Times reports. The woman was sporting the armband while walking around a local...

www.rawstory.com

Woman wearing Nazi emblem made antisemitic comments in Laguna Woods, authorities say

Orange County authorities are recommending hate crime charges against a woman who allegedly yelled antisemitic comments at a man.

www.latimes.com

i defend the right of such assholes to engage in reprehensible acts of political speech, such as publicly burning the American flag or conducting a KKK parade. and for that reason, i would also defend this woman's right to wear a swastika in public

while i find her actions deplorable, they remain legal. what is not legal is attempting to remove her armband by force ... as was the indicated response of 8 men when she refused the request to remove it herself. they were provoked. her actions provoked them
while she has the right to make the political statement of her choice in wearing that nazi armband, that does not give those 8 men sanction to deprive her of her property OR to chill her political speech

when reading the comments ensuing the raw story cite, it became apparent that i may be in the minority on this topic. which then made me wonder, who gets to be the arbiter of political speech/expression when we view it as acceptable to silence those whose political views most of us find to be so distasteful that they are seen as aberrant?

please share any thoughts you may have about this situation

I agree completely. Wearing a swastika is an idiotic thing to do. But if free speech doesn't include idiotic speech, a lot of people are in trouble.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Brawl erupts after elderly man confronts Orange County woman over her swastika armband: report

Authorities in Orange County, California, are recommending hate crime charges against a woman who allegedly hurled anti-Semitic insults at a man who asked her to remove a Nazi armband she was wearing, the Los Angeles Times reports. The woman was sporting the armband while walking around a local...

www.rawstory.com

Woman wearing Nazi emblem made antisemitic comments in Laguna Woods, authorities say

Orange County authorities are recommending hate crime charges against a woman who allegedly yelled antisemitic comments at a man.

www.latimes.com

i defend the right of such assholes to engage in reprehensible acts of political speech, such as publicly burning the American flag or conducting a KKK parade. and for that reason, i would also defend this woman's right to wear a swastika in public

while i find her actions deplorable, they remain legal. what is not legal is attempting to remove her armband by force ... as was the indicated response of 8 men when she refused the request to remove it herself. they were provoked. her actions provoked them
while she has the right to make the political statement of her choice in wearing that nazi armband, that does not give those 8 men sanction to deprive her of her property OR to chill her political speech

when reading the comments ensuing the raw story cite, it became apparent that i may be in the minority on this topic. which then made me wonder, who gets to be the arbiter of political speech/expression when we view it as acceptable to silence those whose political views most of us find to be so distasteful that they are seen as aberrant?

please share any thoughts you may have about this situation

I share your respect for the 1st amendment, even when it necessarily permits others to say/do disgraceful and repugnant things.

In this case though, I believe that Brandenburg may apply.

Although the woman initially didn’t say anything, her going into a community center where the local average age is 65, dressed in all black clothing, similar to SS soldiers, and wearing a swastika armband could be considered inciting “speech” likely to incite/cause a violent reaction.

It is illogical, to me, to consider that the woman intended any other response.

I don’t approve of anyone laying hands on her, but I do understand their anger.

Hopefully, she’s the only one that will be charged.

 

[Lovebug]

I’m not sure where I come down on this. I’ve always thought I was one of those who followed the old motto when it came to speech, “I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend your right to say it.” Or in this case wear it. Symbols can mean different things to different folks. The swastika in both Hinduism and Buddhism has good meanings such as universal harmony, prosperity, wellbeing, eternity with many other meanings. The stars and bars, the confederate battle flag when I grew up was known as a rebel flag which was flown during a protest, especially against the government in protesting the Vietnam War. It has since become more of a symbol of the KKK and racism. I’m sure this woman wasn’t wearing the armband in a religious aspect.

But on further thought, I agree with you. Which goes back to my original adage.

The armband along with hurling anti semitic insults?

 

[Chillfolks]

The armband along with hurling anti semitic insults?

It really depends on the insults. Calling someone a Stupid Jew or Christ Killer are insults but don’t raise to the level of placing hands on someone. Saying you got an oven at home waiting for someone’s wife and kids or you have their grandparents in your cars ash tray would probably raise to the level of fists.

 

[Lovebug]

It really depends on the insults. Calling someone a Stupid Jew or Christ Killer are insults but don’t raise to the level of placing hands on someone. Saying you got an oven at home waiting for someone’s wife and kids or you have their grandparents in your cars ash tray would probably raise to the level of fists.

I don't know what she actually said. The combination makes me wonder.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

It has since become more of a symbol of the KKK and racism.

I understand your intended message, but to be clear, the Confederate flag has always been a sign of racism. In fact, it is the United States’ principle emblem associated with racism.

 

[noonereal]

Frankly, I think "hate crimes" are ridiculous.
A crime is a crime. Period.
Same goes for higher penalties for crimes against police.

We should all be the same under the law.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Two thoughts:

"Ass-kicking offense"

"Karl Popper is always right"

 

[Chillfolks]

I don't know what she actually said. The combination makes me wonder.

I don’t either, I know from previous life experiences that when you are in the heat of the moment and everyone is on edge statements tend to get more of a reaction.

I wished more people understood just because you can does not mean you should.

 

[Lovebug]

I don’t either, I know from previous life experiences that when you are in the heat of the moment and everyone is on edge statements tend to get more of a reaction.

I wished more people understood just because you can does not mean you should.

Chill folks, right?

 

[Chillfolks]

Chill folks, right?

The world needs a joint and a pizza

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Frankly, I think "hate crimes" are ridiculous.
A crime is a crime. Period.
Same goes for higher penalties for crimes against police.

We should all be the same under the law.

When it comes to hate crimes, motivation makes the difference.

It is proper and just that certain crimes are dealt with more severely when the victim’s race/ethnicity/gender/sexual preference, etc. was the motivating factor.

 

[Lovebug]

The world needs a joint and a pizza

Count me in. Make mine vegetarian..the pizza that is.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

The world needs a joint and a pizza

And a good hard ****.
I think a whole lotta people aren't getting laid near enough these days, and it shows.

 

[Court Jester]

Like her message or not, her free speech must be protected just like anyone else's free speech deserved to be protected. I believe it is a far reach to claim she was involved in a hate crime, when it was the other men who physically attempted to remove her offensive armband. She has every right to wear a swastika, the same way BLM have a right to their flag, and the gays have their rainbow flag.

I believe people ought to just ignore things they are offended by, and not take the bait. She was clearly out trying to be provacative, and somebody took the bait.

 

[noonereal]

When it comes to hate crimes, motivation makes the difference.

It is proper and just that certain crimes are dealt with more severely when the victim’s race/ethnicity/gender/sexual preference, etc. was the motivating factor.

Bullshit. The motivation should be of no consequence. What was done is all that should be considered.

 

[Hypothetical]

To me this is about the same as having a person in a hooded KKK robe hurling the n-word at a group of black individuals. It's hate speech, pure and simple... but in America nowadays, nothing about hate speech is either pure or simple. Creative interpretations are used to muddy the waters, so to speak.

Did they have the right to try to remove the armband? No. But I'm not sure she had the right to display it while using anti-semetic language either.

she absolutely does and the reason we allow that kind of thing to happen is not because we want to encourage nazis, but because if you start to declare free speech a crime with this caveat, then the definition can become arbitrary an we lose our right to free speech.
basically you can never really trust those given the power to rule over you.

 

[CaughtInThe]

I think in the long run our greatest generation may have died/sacrificed in vain.

 

[Fishking]

To me this is about the same as having a person in a hooded KKK robe hurling the n-word at a group of black individuals. It's hate speech, pure and simple... but in America nowadays, nothing about hate speech is either pure or simple. Creative interpretations are used to muddy the waters, so to speak.

Did they have the right to try to remove the armband? No. But I'm not sure she had the right to display it while using anti-semetic language either.

Hate speech isn't illegal, just assholish. This type of thing has been clearly defined by the courts as being allowed. Hell...the courts ruled Nazis could hold a parade in a town that was specifically targeted for it's high population of Holocaust survivors. It doesn't get much worse than that.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Bullshit. The motivation should be of no consequence. What was done is all that should be considered.

Take your “bullshit” complaint up with SCOTUS. Enhanced sentencing for hate motivated crimes is constitutional. 👍