German Politician charged for Auschwitz Tattoo

bodice ripper

jimgoose wrote: »

It has nothing to do with what I find acceptable to look at, you'll find that this whole tale pertains to Germany. Strafgesetzbuch section 86a applies there, not here.

Sounds like back peddling to me.

I have friends with swastika tattoos. Do you think they ought to be charged?

K-9

bodice ripper wrote: »

I think that's pretty fascist.

Yep, for those of Jewish heritage effected by things like Auschwitz.

jimgoose

bodice ripper wrote: »

Sounds like back peddling to me.

I have friends with swastika tattoos. Do you think they ought to be charged?

I do, as it happens. My first assumption about a person sporting a tattoo like that is that they're psychologically disturbed in some way, or attention-seeking fifteen-year-olds, or both. And I neither back-peddle nor sport a chip on my shoulder, thank you.

bodice ripper

K-9 wrote: »

Yep, for those of Jewish heritage effected by things like Auschwitz.

I don't believe that trumps this guy's right to do as he wishes with his own body. And as previously pointed out - it makes it easier to spot the assholes anyway.

osarusan

Nodin wrote: »

but he should be entitled to put that stuff on his own skin.

Again, he is allowed to put it on his skin.

He was arrested for publicly displaying it.

What exactly that means I don't know - is every instance where such a tattoo/symbol is visible automatically deemed a public display?

Nodin

osarusan wrote: »

Again, he is allowed to put it on his skin.

He was arrested for publicly displaying it.

What exactly that means I don't know - is every instance where such a tattoo/symbol is visible automatically deemed a public display?

Seeing as he was at a swimming pool and not doing an aul 10 pint goose step down the strasse I'd imagine so.

Nodin

bodice ripper wrote: »

Sounds like back peddling to me.

I have friends with swastika tattoos. Do you think they ought to be charged?

Depends on how many hours ye put in, I suppose.

BattleCorp

So, are all the lads that collect war memorabilia breaking the law? Old Nazi war medals and things like that?

Are museums who put that kind of stuff on display breaking the law?

osarusan

Nodin wrote: »

Seeing as he was at a swimming pool and not doing an aul 10 pint goose step down the strasse I'd imagine so.

In this instance yes - but I'm not sure about say, a guy who pulls up his sleeves and inadvertently reveals such a tattoo.

Not that I'd have too much sympathy tbh, but it seems like there'd be cases where it would be difficult to determine intent.

EDIT: From reading a bit about it, it seems that they'd need to determine that there was an intent to:

further the aims of a former National Socialist organization

bodice ripper

jimgoose wrote: »

I do, as it happens. My first assumption about a person sporting a tattoo like that is that they're psychologically disturbed in some way, or attention-seeking fifteen-year-olds, or both. And I neither back-peddle nor sport a chip on my shoulder, thank you.

The lady protests too much, I feel.

Where does this end, btw? Shall we charge people for tattoos of skulls and Kalashnikovs and tricolours? Celtic knots? - very popular with white supremacists. Tshirts with political slogans? Who will be deciding the cut off for acceptability?

jimgoose

bodice ripper wrote: »

The lady protests too much, I feel.

Where does this end, btw? Shall we charge people for tattoos of skulls and Kalashnikovs and tricolours? Celtic knots? - very popular with white supremacists. Tshirts with political slogans? Who will be deciding the cut off for acceptability?

Drop the hard-man act. You know as well as I do that the Swastika is a still-fresh symbol of one of the greatest horrors in recorded history. If you want to annoy people get a pair of ear-rings. Or else just grow up.

Nodin

BattleCorp wrote: »

So, are all the lads that collect war memorabilia breaking the law? Old Nazi war medals and things like that?

Are museums who put that kind of stuff on display breaking the law?

In Germany? You can display stuff for "educational" reasons certainly. generally sites that sell memorabilia from Germany don't display Nazi symbols unless you log in. This goes to the bizarre extent of blurring hitlers mush, or blanking his eyes ('I wonder who that man is..?'). Fairly sure its legal to collect. I think in France its illegal to collect Nazi gear. The Italians don't give a crap, and no idea about Spain.

bodice ripper

jimgoose wrote: »

Drop the hard-man act. You know as well as I do that the Swastika is a still-fresh symbol of one of the greatest horrors in recorded history. If you want to annoy people get a pair of ear-rings. Or else just grow up.

There's that chip again. I amnt even a bloke. And I don't have any swastika tattoos.

c_man

bodice ripper wrote: »

I have friends with swastika tattoos.

Are they Nazis? What's the story?

osarusan

BattleCorp wrote: »

So, are all the lads that collect war memorabilia breaking the law? Old Nazi war medals and things like that?

Are museums who put that kind of stuff on display breaking the law?

From the link to wikipedia provided earlier:

Subsection (1) shall not be applicable if the means of propaganda or the act serves to further civil enlightenment, to avert unconstitutional aims, to promote art or science, research or teaching, reporting about current historical events or similar purposes.

jimgoose

BattleCorp wrote: »

So, are all the lads that collect war memorabilia breaking the law? Old Nazi war medals and things like that?

Are museums who put that kind of stuff on display breaking the law?

No. But old Luftwaffe aircraft usually have the fin Swastika replaced with a low-visibility outline of the original solid black.

Nollog

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedem_das_Seine

The text below the picture can be read as "you get what you deserve", if so that's quite insensitive.

jimgoose

bodice ripper wrote: »

There's that chip again. I amnt even a bloke. And I don't have any swastika tattoos.

What's with this "chip" business? Is that because I disapprove of the Nazi regime and their symbolism??

Nodin

osarusan wrote: »

In this instance yes - but I'm not sure about say, a guy who pulls up his sleeves and inadvertently reveals such a tattoo.

Not that I'd have too much sympathy tbh, but it seems like there'd be cases where it would be difficult to determine intent.

EDIT: From reading a bit about it, it seems that they'd need to determine that there was an intent to:

...unless swimming the length in a personal best was some form of "national socialist" goal I have me doubts.

BattleCorp

/\/ollog wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedem_das_Seine

The text below the picture can be read as "you get what you deserve", if so that's quite insensitive.

I'm not saying that he is a nice guy, I just think it's going a bit far to be prosecuting a guy for a "crap" tattoo of Auschwitz on his back.

bodice ripper

c_man wrote: »

Are they Nazis? What's the story?

No. There is a huge movement to reclaim the swastika in tattooing. A lot of people who are into geometric tattooing will have them.

bodice ripper

jimgoose wrote: »

What's with this "chip" business? Is that because I disapprove of the Nazi regime and their symbolism??

You didn't even address the question in the post you quoted, you were so busy getting in my face...

AlanG

BattleCorp wrote: »

Are museums who put that kind of stuff on display breaking the law?

In Germany - yes - unless they have a special permit. Even producers making war movies in germany need to have a separate permission to use Nazi symbols outside of a closed studio.

K-9

bodice ripper wrote: »

I don't believe that trumps this guy's right to do as he wishes with his own body. And as previously pointed out - it makes it easier to spot the assholes anyway.

In the case of a Swastika I'd agree but come on, an Auschwitz tattoo? That's celebrating extermination camps.

Free speech has certain responsibilities too and something this downright offensive is one were I think it loses out.

Nodin

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm not saying that he is a nice guy, I just think it's going a bit far to be prosecuting a guy for a "crap" tattoo of Auschwitz on his back.

....far worse Nazi tattoos than that. I remember a lad with what was meant to be an ss soldier on his upper arm. The way the shading was done under the eyes made it look like he had eye liner on. Add to this the hand on the hip......

bodice ripper

K-9 wrote: »

In the case of a Swastika I'd agree but come on, an Auschwitz tattoo? That's celebrating extermination camps.

Free speech has certain responsibilities too and something this downright offensive is one were I think it loses out.

Oh, he is a ****head, no doubt. But I think government interference in your bodily affairs is worse.

jimgoose

bodice ripper wrote: »

You didn't even address the question in the post you quoted, you were so busy getting in my face...

Your question was:

bodice ripper wrote: »

The lady protests too much, I feel.

Where does this end, btw? Shall we charge people for tattoos of skulls and Kalashnikovs and tricolours? Celtic knots? - very popular with white supremacists. Tshirts with political slogans? Who will be deciding the cut off for acceptability?

To which I replied:

jimgoose wrote: »

Drop the hard-man act. You know as well as I do that the Swastika is a still-fresh symbol of one of the greatest horrors in recorded history. If you want to annoy people get a pair of ear-rings. Or else just grow up.

For that is my reply to your question. Let me add the correction that the word "you" above is misleading, meaning a general "you" and not you, personally. I apologise for that.

osarusan

bodice ripper wrote: »

But I think government interference in your bodily affairs is worse.

I guess the government's argument is that his public display of the tattoo is the problem (and what I assume they believe they can make a case for proving is his intent), and they're not interfering in his bodily affairs.

Herb Powell

JupiterKid wrote: »

From reading that article, I was not in the least bit surprised to see that he comes from the former East Germany.

There does seem to be a hardcore of far right wing sentiment in the former East Germany. The politician in question is too young to even remember the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Lot of villages and small towns out east, especially east of Dresden, have a persistent NPD prescence. It's by no means the majority of people out there but they are there and they make themselves known.

Every week there's arson attacks on refugee shelters. Fuccked up. Not as bad as it was in say the 90's, but it doesn't look like it's getting better either.

bodice ripper

jimgoose wrote: »

Your question was:


To which I replied:

For that is my reply to your question. Let me add the correction that the word "you" above is misleading, meaning a general "you" and not you, personally. I apologise for that.

So, no answer then.