Support NeoGAF

[TheShadowLord]

I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner when Charlottesville happened.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/396404-unmasking-antifa-act-includes-15-year-prison-term-proposal

The “Unmasking Antifa Act of 2018,” legislation introduced in the House, carries a potential 15-year prison sentence for those caught engaging in behaviors typically associated with the “antifa” movement of anti-fascist activists.
Under the act, anyone “wearing a mask” or in disguise who “injures, oppresses, threatens, or intimidates any person … in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege” would be subject to a fine or up to 15 years in prison.


The bill was introduced in the House last month but received renewed attention on Tuesday after alt-right personality Mike Cernovich encouraged his followers to call their representatives and "let them know what you think" about the legislation.

Antifa activists, who often wear masks, have gained nationwide attention for engaging in violent clashes. Many activists in the movement have also disrupted actions planned by white supremacist groups.

 

[Ke0]

Seems like a pretty dangerous proposal honestly

 

[AaronB]

That will make things very difficult for Batman.

Anyway, I'm not a fan of Antifa's tactics, but 15 years is absurd. That's on par with sentences for some of the worst crimes people can commit.

 

[Corderlain]

Sounds good to me considering they're domestic terrorists with a history of property damage and assaults.

 

[MamaRice]

If the same is applied to anyone that ever expouses any Nazi or white supremacist rhetoric, a lengthy jail sentence, I’d have to acquiesce.

In fact this bill has just enough vague language that I change that to anyone saying anything racist ever. I’m sure you guys would love that.

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

Yes, please! Antifa are domestic terrorists, moreso in Eastern and Southern Europe at that, and should be treated as such.

Hope this comes to other countries, as well.

 

[MamaRice]

Reading this again it just looks like it’s saying that if anyone does the things Antifa and Nazis both do while wearing a mask, it’s up to 15 years. So they just want everyone exposed and public.

I have some problem with that, in that I care more about the life of Antifa members than Nazis, and want them and their families to stay safe. But I do want all Nazis exposed. But most of them already don’t wear masks anyway.

 

[Zog]

Do we need a special law for people doing harm while wearing a mask?

 

[AfricanKing]

The bill was introduced in the House last month but received renewed attention on Tuesday after alt-right personality Mike Cernovich

This is how you know Antifa are doing a good job at shutting down the alt-right .. keep it up

That bills gonna die once it becomes attached to the white supremacist/ nationalist movements

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

I have some problem with that, in that I care more about the life of Antifa members than Nazis, and want them and their families to stay safe.

Because communism (no matter the label it has chosen to describe itself to) is better than nazism, yes?

Also, there was a similar law, with far less strict penalty in my country, the Red and Black blok managed to override it by wearing biker helmets.

 

[luigimario]

This passes in the house but the Trump administration has slashed funding for agencies meant to combat right wing extremism....

Look at antifa kill count vs neo nazi/ alt right kill count, there's no comparison....

 

[Helios]

Anyway, I'm not a fan of Antifa's tactics, but 15 years is absurd. That's on par with sentences for some of the worst crimes people can commit.

Since it says "potential 15 years" I imagine that's for extreme cases.

 

[TGO]

Reading this again it just looks like it’s saying that if anyone does the things Antifa and Nazis both do while wearing a mask, it’s up to 15 years. So they just want everyone exposed and public.

I have some problem with that, in that I care more about the life of Antifa members than Nazis, and want them and their families to stay safe. But I do want all Nazis exposed. But most of them already don’t wear masks anyway.

But whats the difference? Antifa and Nazis are both shitty people.
Only difference really is Antifa is against anyone regardless of race,sex or gender preference if they disagree with them.
As for your previous post you can't put a law on what people think or say, There's a word for that and it's completely against what most far left say they stand for, but it's also the most common thing they ask to be a law.

 

[infinitys_7th]

If the same is applied to anyone that ever expouses any Nazi or white supremacist rhetoric, a lengthy jail sentence, I’d have to acquiesce.

In fact this bill has just enough vague language that I change that to anyone saying anything racist ever. I’m sure you guys would love that.

This bill does not cover "espousing" Antifa rhetoric. It covers Antifa committing violence.

That said, I do agree that this should be a broader law against, ah, microterrorism. Antifa swinging a bikelock or throwing IEDs, a Nazi beating someone with a 2x4, etc., if motivated by their ideology, should be treated the same. 15 years is too much (and, for Nazis, probably self-defeating as they will be radicalized further in prison), but it should be an intensifier on top of assault, like hate crimes.

 

[MamaRice]

But whats the difference? Antifa and Nazis are both shitty people.
Only difference really is Antifa is against anyone regardless of race,sex or gender preference if they disagree with them.
As for your previous post you can't put a law on what people think or say, There's a word for that and it's completely against what most far left say they stand for, but it's also the most common thing they ask to be a law.

At the end of the day all these conversations are just going to be people repeating over and over again that Antifa and Nazis are just as bad, yet the current administration continuously refuses to address and quell the rising threat of only ONE of them. And it’s not Antifa.

A lot of people are going to come in and say “ yes I support anyone in Antifa getting punished” great. When can we do something about Nazis and white supremacists?

 

[off duty ninja]

Labeling this as the "Unmasking Antifa Act" is really stupid and feeds into all the stupid ideological fanboys.

That said, its purpose is a good one. Anybody who is cowardly enough to assault somebody with a mask on to hide their identity deserves the extra punishment. Nazi, Antifa or plain ol' dickhead.

 

[Kacho]

I would definitely support it. That kind of behavior should be strongly discouraged in civilized society.

 

[manfestival]

So a proposal that can be used towards stopping nazis and antifa is somehow only antifa associated? I am so confused. While I find the proposal to be a scary one. I see why they are doing it. Both groups are nuisances to say the least

 

[Straight Edge]

We already have laws against property damage and injuring people.

 

[Texas Pride]

Reading this again it just looks like it’s saying that if anyone does the things Antifa and Nazis both do while wearing a mask, it’s up to 15 years. So they just want everyone exposed and public.

I have some problem with that, in that I care more about the life of Antifa members than Nazis, and want them and their families to stay safe. But I do want all Nazis exposed. But most of them already don’t wear masks anyway.

Can't have a double standard with what is basically a blanket law like this. Laws that apply to everyone should be unbiased. You caring more about one over the other like it or not is prejudice. If you're wrong you're wrong. This should apply to the KKK just as it should antifa. Take your feelings out of the equation.

 

[cryptoadam]

Can someone actually explain this bill without any spin on it?

Does it specifically say antifa activities or just anyone wearing a mask?

Like others have pointed out then this law can be applied to anyone wearing a mask.

I have no issue with hate crimes being punished more harshly as long as its applied evenly to ALL hate crimes and not just one side or the other.

 

[MamaRice]

Can't have a double standard with what is basically a blanket law like this. Laws that apply to everyone should be unbiased. You caring more about one over the other like it or not is prejudice. If you're wrong you're wrong. This should apply to the KKK just as it should antifa. Take your feelings out of the equation.

Lol my first post in the thread is that if it also applies to Nazis and KKK, then I acquiesce. But it’s being touted as a bill to combat Antifa. We need more language and direct action targeting Nazis and white supremacists.

 

[Oner]

Anyone who would be against "AntiFa Unmasking" could be shown how wrong they are easily (with whatever argument they would stand by) simply by asking ~

"You're okay with the KKK wearing masks in public then?"

#CommonSensAbilities

 

[cubicle47b]

The name of the act is bad and the maximum jail time is way too long. I also don't think oppresses or intimidates should be included. If it's just extra penalties for people in masks who threaten or injure people... maybe. I'd need to think about it.

 

[Texas Pride]

Lol my first post in the thread is that if it also applies to Nazis and KKK, then I acquiesce. But it’s being touted as a bill to combat Antifa. We need more language and direct action targeting Nazis and white supremacists.

I personally feel that ANYONE who attacks people while wearing a mask are cowards. If your cause is just and you believe in it then you shouldn't hide behind a mask when fighting in the name of it. No matter what your color or Creed it shouldn't matter. Any laws curbing this are encouraged.

 

[Chiggs]

The name of the act is bad and the maximum jail time is way too long. I also don't think oppresses or intimidates should be included. If it's just extra penalties for people in masks who threaten or injure people... maybe. I'd need to think about it.

Yep. My initial reaction to this is entirely negative.

 

[NahaNago]

I think like most have said that 15 years is a bit much but anything targeting this group when they act violently is great.

 

[Coffe Time]

Yes, please! Antifa are domestic terrorists, moreso in Eastern and Southern Europe at that, and should be treated as such.

Hope this comes to other countries, as well.

Hmmm...
https://www.adl.org/resources/reports/murder-and-extremism-in-the-united-states-in-2016

Over the past 10 years (2007-2016), domestic extremists of all kinds have killed at least 372 people in the United States. Of those deaths, approximately 74% were at the hands of right-wing extremists, about 24% of the victims were killed by domestic Islamic extremists, and the remainder were killed by left-wing extremists.

Antifa aren't really that dangerous to other people, unlike alt right extremists. Sure they destroy property, but they arent taking anyone's life.
Also, they arent a unified platform like the alt right who has access to media to spread their shit further. The alt-right is far more dangerous.

Now I shall wait for the "civility" argument.

 

[MayauMiao]

Good. Cowards often hide behind mask.

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

Antifa aren't really that dangerous to other people, unlike alt right extremists. Sure they destroy property, but they arent taking anyone's life.
Also, they arent a unified platform like the alt right who has access to media to spread their shit further. The alt-right is far more dangerous.

Now I shall wait for the "civility" argument.

Do you also put in this equation other Leftist groups worldwide and domestic Terrorist groups worldwide, such as Tamil Tigers and so, or are you focused on USA, because on my reply, I specify that Antifa are more violent and murderous in Eastern and Southern Europe.

And as a matter of further fact, since you seem to be knowledgeable, can you please give me the death toll ratio of islamic extremism vs right extremism, just to be sure.

 

[Joe T.]

Yes, please! Antifa are domestic terrorists, moreso in Eastern and Southern Europe at that, and should be treated as such.

Hope this comes to other countries, as well.

This was applied here in Montreal for a short while, I think in response to student protests when the government threatened to raise tuition, but hasn't been enforced in years and the current mayor is aiming to do away with it.

 

[Ke0]

1. Does your country not already have laws against people committing assault? Like if you wear a mask does that override the laws already on the book so now a new one specifically targeted at masks is needed?

2. One could easily say a counter protest within itself is intimidation if said group is able to rally more people than yours.

3. The title of it isn't in good faith, and suggests there is only one problem. If there was a proposal called "Protect BLM Act" I imagine everyone would be saying "what about X, Y, Z groups?!" And not "well naturally those other groups are covered too"

 

[TheShadowLord]

Can someone actually explain this bill without any spin on it?

Does it specifically say antifa activities or just anyone wearing a mask?

Like others have pointed out then this law can be applied to anyone wearing a mask.

I have no issue with hate crimes being punished more harshly as long as its applied evenly to ALL hate crimes and not just one side or the other.

It's called the unmasking antifa act so I don't see why it would go at anyone else wearing a mask.

With bipartisan sure, but this is not what this legislation is meant for.

how would you define hate crimes?

 

[TrainedRage]

Hopefully this will make those kids think twice before putting on a mask as an excuse to cause violence. Hopefully the law can be enforced easily.

 

[Coffe Time]

Do you also put in this equation other Leftist groups worldwide and domestic Terrorist groups worldwide, such as Tamil Tigers and so, or are you focused on USA, because on my reply, I specify that Antifa are more violent and murderous in Eastern and Southern Europe.

And as a matter of further fact, since you seem to be knowledgeable, can you please give me the death toll ratio of islamic extremism vs right extremism, just to be sure.

My bad, I was just referring to the US, since this article is about US politics. This proposed law is unecessary.

Also, I dont have those stats, but I can do some research.

 

[off duty ninja]

1. Does your country not already have laws against people committing assault? Like if you wear a mask does that override the laws already on the book so now a new one specifically targeted at masks is needed?

2. One could easily say a counter protest within itself is intimidation if said group is able to rally more people than yours.

3. The title of it isn't in good faith, and suggests there is only one problem. If there was a proposal called "Protect BLM Act" I imagine everyone would be saying "what about X, Y, Z groups?!" And not "well naturally those other groups are covered too"

We should probably drop hate crime laws based on your same reasoning, at least in regards to violence.

The intimidation line is troublesome though because, frankly, all these protests really are is posturing and intimidation of both sides. Here in Portland one group says they will be marching and of course their opposite sided equivalent immediately chooses to counter protest. All they want to do is intimidate the other side into submission. While I think the concept of protest is a must, the way it is acted out these days is just pathetic. Instead of protesting and attacking the actual institutions we just attack each other. And the real criminals continue to run the country unperturbed.

 

[cryptoadam]

It's called the unmasking antifa act so I don't see why it would go at anyone else wearing a mask.

With bipartisan sure, but this is not what this legislation is meant for.

how would you define hate crimes?

Its literally called that? I thought that was just media spin.

Hate crime definition

The Criminal Code of Canada says a hate crime is committed to intimidate, harm or terrify not only a person, but an entire group of people to which the victim belongs. The victims are targeted for who they are, not because of anything they have done.
A hate crime is one in which hate is the motive and can involve intimidation, harassment, physical force or threat of physical force against a person, a group or a property

n Canada it is also a crime to incite hatred. Sections 318 and 319 are the relevant sections of the Criminal Code.
Under Section 318, it is a criminal act to "advocate or promote genocide" — to call for, support, encourage or argue for the killing of members of a group based on colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.
Section 319 deals with publicly stirring up or inciting hatred against an identifiable group based on colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.

You can read more at the link but I think up here in Canada we cover hate crimes/speech pretty well.

 

[Ke0]

We should probably drop hate crime laws based on your same reasoning, at least in regards to violence.

The intimidation line is troublesome though because, frankly, all these protests really are is posturing and intimidation of both sides. Here in Portland one group says they will be marching and of course their opposite sided equivalent immediately chooses to counter protest. All they want to do is intimidate the other side into submission. While I think the concept of protest is a must, the way it is acted out these days is just pathetic. Instead of protesting and attacking the actual institutions we just attack each other. And the real criminals continue to run the country unperturbed.

I don't know how hate crime laws work in your country in any meaningful detail so it's not something I can argue.

I just find it funny that Antifa, a group that didn't exist in the general population's conscious prior to like 2016 is suddenly this scourge that must be dealt with quickly. I don't know, I'm somehow highly doubting statistics on violent protest/attacks/etc are going to suggest antifa are the big bad wolf in America.

 

[off duty ninja]

I don't know how hate crime laws work in your country in any meaningful detail so it's not something I can argue.

I just find it funny that Antifa, a group that didn't exist in the general population's conscious prior to like 2016 is suddenly this scourge that must be dealt with quickly. I don't know, I'm somehow highly doubting statistics on violent protest/attacks/etc are going to suggest antifa are the big bad wolf in America.

This is why the name is stupid and only feeds the ideological trolls. This bill doesn't target antifa specifically but anybody who chooses to hide their identity for the purpose of assaulting or intimidating someone. The only reason I likened this to hate crime laws is because the same argument (laws against assault already on the books) is used regularly against them.

Assaulting someone is wrong. Assaulting someone with a mask on to hide your identity specifically so you can assault someone anonymously is wrong AND cowardly.

 

[Hotel Security]

Doesn't matter.

If it gets passed by Congress (unlikly), the first guy charged with it will appeal and it'll hit the Supreme Court and be struck down.

Classic case of some politician overreacting to a hot meme so he can pretend that he's doing something to stop terrorism. Par for the course these days.

 

[Harksteed]

I can't help but feel like people on the right are hyping up Antifa to be this scary boogeyman that's constantly committing terrorist acts just so they have a counter to right-wing terrorism, white supremacist and neo-Nazis that people on the left call out.

 

[JCK75]

There is no need for this, local law enforcement needs to actually enforce the laws that exist.. Assault is already illegal.

 

[Hotel Security]

I can't help but feel like people on the right are hyping up Antifa to be this scary boogeyman that's constantly committing terrorist acts just so they have a counter to right-wing terrorism, white supremacist and neo-Nazis that people on the left call out.

This country has ALWAYS had some sort of boogeyman that the media uses to scare people. When folks are scared, they tune into the news more (more ratings and clicks) and then politicians can put forth laws like this one to show how "tough" they are. All in the sake of thought manipulation.

It was anarchists in the early 1900s, then it was communists, then it was the Nazis, then it was the Japanese, then it was the Commies again, then it was the Ayatollah, then it was Saddam, then it was Al Qaeda and bin Laden, then it was the Taliban, then it was Saddam (again), then it was Ahmadinejad, then it was ISIS, then it's Putin and Kim, and now I guess it's Antifa. No matter what happens, the media must manufacture a villain for us all to be worried about.

One boogeyman after another and after all of it the US has been just fine. In fact, it's funny that the 9/11 was done by the boogeyman that no one was talking about. Ah, irony.

 

[Gander]

The GOP is feeling the effects of the blue wave THEY ARE SCARED TO LOSE THEIR POWER AND MONEY. So they are on a crusade to attack any remotely left wing organizations they can find.

 

[TrainedRage]

Look at these Antifa stans lol. Y'all need some perspective. Maybe a hit in the head with a bike lock would do it.

 

[Gander]

Let's supply the Iranians with weapons.

- Ronald Reagan

 

[LegendOfKage]

You can read more at the link but I think up here in Canada we cover hate crimes/speech pretty well.

I would have to disagree.

Sections 318 and 319 are the relevant sections of the Criminal Code.
Under Section 318, it is a criminal act to "advocate or promote genocide" — to call for, support, encourage or argue for the killing of members of a group based on colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.

Sounds okay to me, just like in America it's illegal to verbally instigate a riot or threaten to kill someone. Very objective, on/off, yes/no binary topics.

Section 319 deals with publicly stirring up or inciting hatred against an identifiable group based on colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.

And this is where we've entered subjective town. What is considered inciting hatred? Do people actually have to use the word hatred, or can hatred be inferred? What if an aspect of a group is criticized or generalized?

What if an indefinite modifier is used with a still harmful and false generalization and where would the line be? For an anti-Semitic example "a small amount of Jews are greedy" vs "some Jews are greedy" vs "a lot of Jews are greedy" vs "most Jews are greedy" vs "nearly all Jews are greedy" vs "all Jews are Greedy." At what point did that statement become a hate crime? And who even decides what even is a false generalization? I would say the example I just used is definitely a false generalization, but even with that acknowledgement, I couldn't possibly say where it goes from offensive to shouldn't be permitted by law. No one can objectively decide these things. I'm sorry, but you've given far too much power to your government.

 

[Catphish]

I think Antifa are a band of roaming fuckwits, but I do not support this.

In the near future, especially as facial recognition settles in as reality, you may, in the course of proper protest and demonstration, need to wear a mask. And you just might, along the way, intimidate someone. Should that automatically qualify you for 15 years in prison?

No. This is a dangerous idea.

 

[idontlikeusernames]

This is how you know Antifa are doing a good job at shutting down the alt-right .. keep it up

That bills gonna die once it becomes attached to the white supremacist/ nationalist movements

They haven't done anything. Antifa are a laughing stock. Every time they get in to a fight with people, they get the crap beaten out of them.

 

[Wulfric]

That's some complete bullshit. What about the nazis and white supremacists?