Torching a synagoge NOT an anti-Semetic act in Germany...somehow

[dead0man]

pick your poison

from Vox

You must be logged in to read this quote.

what in the actual funk?  Seriously disgusting.

[Antonio the Sixth]

...yeah, this is an absolutely shameful decision. I hope it will be reversed in appeal.

[NewYorkExpress]

Looks like Germany learned nothing from the Holocaust after all.

[America Needs R'hllor]

...yeah, this is an absolutely shameful decision. I hope it will be reversed in appeal.

Europe seriously needs to reverse its trend of nice freedom fighters when talking about antisemitic Palestinian terrorism.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

The leopard doesn't change its spots.

[mvd10]

A reminder that Tender Branson probably would have gotten a life sentence in Germany for his forum posts, because Germany.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Articles are from January 2017.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Looks like Germany learned nothing from the Holocaust after all.

What I think annoys me the most about your posts is that they usually include an unsolicited, hyper generic yet also non sensical statement, and then concludes with something to the effect “after all” as if your (wrong) opinion on an important matter is nonchalant.

[Antonio the Sixth]

All the Americans commenting in this thread should remember that, under the US "Free Speech" jurisprudence, the perpetrator also couldn't have been convicted of anything beyond arson, because hey, antisemitism is an opinion and therefore is protected by muh First Amendment.

[DavidB.]

All the Americans commenting in this thread should remember that, under the US "Free Speech" jurisprudence, the perpetrator also couldn't have been convicted of anything beyond arson, because hey, antisemitism is an opinion and therefore is protected by muh First Amendment.

Don't judges/juries have the right to take into account the fact that it was a hate crime?

[dead0man]

Articles are from January 2017.

that's your defense?  That we should have made fun of your backward, bigoted country a year ago.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

All the Americans commenting in this thread should remember that, under the US "Free Speech" jurisprudence, the perpetrator also couldn't have been convicted of anything beyond arson, because hey, antisemitism is an opinion and therefore is protected by muh First Amendment.

Don't judges/juries have the right to take into account the fact that it was a hate crime?

Not only is this a hate crime, it's also destroying public property. (Though arson might cover that already...dunno for sure, I am not a lawyer)

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Articles are from January 2017.

that's your defense?  That we should have made fun of your backward, bigoted country a year ago.

Stop criticizing Germany unfairly. Germany isn't 'backward' and isn't anymore bigoted than the typical country.
It just makes you look stupid, sorry.

[dead0man]

Articles are from January 2017.

that's your defense?  That we should have made fun of your backward, bigoted country a year ago.

Stop criticizing Germany unfairly. Germany isn't 'backward' and isn't anymore bigoted than the typical country.
It just makes you look stupid, sorry.

Where did I criticize Germany unfairly?  They're the ones that did this amazingly stupid thing, not me.  (there is a reason "Florida or Germany" is a thing)

And you don't have to apologize to me for the insult, nobody with that many things in their sig could possibly insult me.  It would be like being insulted by some dude driving a PT Cruiser or wearing clown shoes, straight up impossible.

[palandio]

As a German I feel ashamed and don't want to be associated with this. 

Usually I like to think of the views shown by the judges here as existing only as a caricature; made up by neo-con pro-Israel falcons in Germany (like H.M. Broder); and directed against the stereotypical well-meaning lefties and everyone else H.M. Broder doesn't like.

But sadly these views seem to be pretty mainstream in Germany (and elsewhere in Europe) and H.M. Broder seems to be partially right.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Articles are from January 2017.

that's your defense?  That we should have made fun of your backward, bigoted country a year ago.

Mhmm....

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

All the Americans commenting in this thread should remember that, under the US "Free Speech" jurisprudence, the perpetrator also couldn't have been convicted of anything beyond arson, because hey, antisemitism is an opinion and therefore is protected by muh First Amendment.

It would have been felony arson as a hate crime. The hate criminal would have gotten over a decade in prison, most likely.  Violent destruction of property isn't "Free speech".

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

All the Americans commenting in this thread should remember that, under the US "Free Speech" jurisprudence, the perpetrator also couldn't have been convicted of anything beyond arson, because hey, antisemitism is an opinion and therefore is protected by muh First Amendment.

In the US this would've definitely been tried as a hate crime. I have no clue what you're talking about.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

All the Americans commenting in this thread should remember that, under the US "Free Speech" jurisprudence, the perpetrator also couldn't have been convicted of anything beyond arson, because hey, antisemitism is an opinion and therefore is protected by muh First Amendment.

Don't judges/juries have the right to take into account the fact that it was a hate crime?

Yes. Tony is basically just flat out making stuff up out of his blatant misinterpretation. Hell in most states this would even be considered a different crime under a different statute that calls for tougher sentences than simple arson or vandalism. Example: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-loop-synagogue-hate-crime-20170208-story.html

[Antonio the Sixth]

I distinctly remember a case from the 1990s or 2000s where the Supreme Court said that you couldn't take into account racist/hateful intent as an aggravating circumstance in punishing a crime. I don't remember the specifics and I guess it might not apply here, but I'm pretty sure I'm not making this up.

[MaxQue]

I distinctly remember a case from the 1990s or 2000s where the Supreme Court said that you couldn't take into account racist/hateful intent as an aggravating circumstance in punishing a crime. I don't remember the specifics and I guess it might not apply here, but I'm pretty sure I'm not making this up.

If I remember well, the decision was than it cannot be considered as an aggravating circumstrance unless the state law states it.

[Famous Mortimer]

By this logic, you could burn down a mosque and it wouldn't be a hate crime, it would just be a response to the Cologne rape attacks. I don't expect German law to apply equally to White Germans though.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I distinctly remember a case from the 1990s or 2000s where the Supreme Court said that you couldn't take into account racist/hateful intent as an aggravating circumstance in punishing a crime. I don't remember the specifics and I guess it might not apply here, but I'm pretty sure I'm not making this up.

If I remember well, the decision was than it cannot be considered as an aggravating circumstrance unless the state law states it.

If that's the case than the decision had nothing to do with the First Amendment but over legal precedent on aggravating circumstances.

No court has ever ruled that hate crimes are protected free speech. That's a downright absurd statement. Tony is absolutely f[inks]ing ridiculous.