Punching a Nazi...

[Canarr]

Apparently, someone punched a guy named Richard Spencer in the face on camera. The name wasn't familiar, but I googled a bit, and there seems to be little question that the guy is, in fact, an asshole, and does more than a bit of sympathizing with Nazi ideology. So, calling him a Nazi seems justified, even if he denies the label himself.

However, does the right to punch him in the face follow from that? Is it truly okay, as a lot of people have been claiming online since it happened, to go and punch a Nazi? Or, more generally speaking: is it okay to use violence on someone whose political ideology I object to?

Personally, I don't think so. In my eyes, it's a serious slippery slope, because who will be next? If it's okay to punch Nazis, and probably the KKK, then how about... I don't know. Donald Trump? Sarah Palin? Michelle Bachmann? Rush Limbaugh?

Where do you draw the line? How do you say, okay, up to here, those opinions are fine. But you go any further, and it's face-punching time?

[Gravekeeper]

I'll just repeat what I've said in this same debate on other forums:

I don't condone it. But I can't say I didn't enjoy that it happened.

[TheHuckster]

I don't have any sympathy for this guy, and what he has said in blogs and elsewhere are reprehensible. Plus, I totally understand why someone would want to punch this guy in the face. Hell, given the opportunity, and if I were given immunity, it'd be hard for me to resist the urge to punch him myself.

That said, the act alone doesn't really help anyone. If there was anything good, it might have been that it gave a whole bunch of people the chance to see what kind of a shit this guy is. But, besides that, it's not going to change his opinion, nor the opinion of his followers. It only serves to release a bit of rage from those who punched him.

If the people who did this don't get arrested, I'll shrug my shoulders and say "meh." If they do, I would hope they only get a slap on the wrist.

[Tanasi]

For the last several years I've been trying to live by the Golden Rule and especially so since we adopted a kid and grandkids have come along. I'll be the first to admit that I frequently fail. I look at it this way I can disagree with someone all day long and that's fine, I don't have the right to assault someone except to defend myself or someone else. That being typed I agree with GK's last statement. I've often said that I wouldn't whiz on Michael Moore if he was on fire, but that's not nice so I would whiz on him.
What was that line from the Blues Brothers movie about Nazis???

[Gravekeeper]

What was that line from the Blues Brothers movie about Nazis???

Not sure it was a line so much as....

>.>

[s_stabeler]

I go by what is, actually, the legal standard, IIRC: if someone makes a comment that would cause an ordinary, reasonable person to so lose control that they would punch somebody, it's acceptable. ( to give an example, once, a moon landing faked conspiracy theorist accused Buzz Aldrin- to his face- of being part of faking the moon landings. Buzz Aldrin punched him. That was acceptable, since the conspiracy theorist's actions arguably rose to the level of being effectively a first punch.(or, to put it simpler: it's arguable the accusation was a deliberate attempt to provoke the punch)

[TheHuckster]

I go by what is, actually, the legal standard, IIRC: if someone makes a comment that would cause an ordinary, reasonable person to so lose control that they would punch somebody, it's acceptable. ( to give an example, once, a moon landing faked conspiracy theorist accused Buzz Aldrin- to his face- of being part of faking the moon landings. Buzz Aldrin punched him. That was acceptable, since the conspiracy theorist's actions arguably rose to the level of being effectively a first punch.(or, to put it simpler: it's arguable the accusation was a deliberate attempt to provoke the punch)

This case is slightly different, in that he's not directly addressing his attackers, but rather giving an interview. I agree that his past statements were deplorable and egregious, but they were written on a blog or at some speech in the past.

To put another way, if Buzz Aldrin had happened upon the conspiracy theorist while he was interviewing somewhere after having written some really bad things about him on the Internet, and punched him right then and there, he likely would have been charged with assault in that case.

[Talon]

...to give an example, once, a moon landing faked conspiracy theorist accused Buzz Aldrin- to his face- of being part of faking the moon landings. Buzz Aldrin punched him. That was acceptable, since the conspiracy theorist's actions arguably rose to the level of being effectively a first punch.(or, to put it simpler: it's arguable the accusation was a deliberate attempt to provoke the punch)

Video of the incident in question:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wptn5RE2I-k

The douche-bag was harassing Aldrin, getting in his face after being warned off repeatedly. He had it coming. Police apparently saw it that way too, and refused to press charges against Aldrin.

[wolfie]

Ironic, since the guy's ideology and the word "backpfeifengesicht" (a face that's asking to be punched) originated in the same country.

[s_stabeler]

This case is slightly different, in that he's not directly addressing his attackers, but rather giving an interview. I agree that his past statements were deplorable and egregious, but they were written on a blog or at some speech in the past.

To put another way, if Buzz Aldrin had happened upon the conspiracy theorist while he was interviewing somewhere after having written some really bad things about him on the Internet, and punched him right then and there, he likely would have been charged with assault in that case.

I don't disagree with you- I'm just saying that I don't agree that it's never permissible to punch someone for something they have said.