Gun shows and Nazi paraphernalia


PDA






Rockrivr1
April 19, 2005, 03:42 PM
I attended the Concord, NH gun show last weekend. It was a good day and the arena the gun show was at was filled to capacity. As I was entering the arena with my fiance a younger couple was leaving. The girlfriend/wife seemed to be visably upset and at first I thought they were just having a fight. As they both passed me I overheard her say how discusting it was for these vendors to sell Nazi paraphernalia so openly seeing what they stand for and did. As she was just about out of earshot she asked why someone doesn't do something about it right in front of the police officer standing guard at the door.

I go to many gun shows and to be honest I never really pay much attention to these vendors or their wares that they are selling. But because this lady had mentioned it I started to count how many vendors were selling this stuff. By the time I left I had counted 21 different vendors.

I started to think at that time that we as gun owners want to be shown as normal everyday warm blooded Americans, who strongly believe in our 2nd Amendment rights. As I was looking at all the Nazi stuff for sale, I was wondering how this effects the way the antis think of us as gun owners. As I thought more on it, I couldn't see how it has any positive effect on our image. I would bet that the couple that left were new to the gun world or were just interested in finding out what we are about. I'm thinking they left with a completely wrong idea.

What do you think?

If you enjoyed reading about "Gun shows and Nazi paraphernalia" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jobu07
April 19, 2005, 03:44 PM
I think they are just catering on the novelty factor that you can buy things that once belonged to the enemies of america. Able to buy your own museumesque pieces of history maybe? I guess it goes for the same reasons that those of us who collect old war rifles want to have a genuine german mauser in our collections. Eh. Just my .02

GreenFurniture
April 19, 2005, 03:47 PM
I don't know. I guess there are a few vendors today that sell legitimate Nazi items for collectors of WWI and WWII memorabilia. I don't understand, however, why anyone would be selling newly minted Nazi crap. An example, at a gunshow in town last year I saw a vendor who was selling nothing my Nazi stuff and large burlap "pot" bags. Blew my mind. I walked a little closer and noticed that the Nazi flags were in mylar bags with "Made In China" on them. Gave me a laugh.

Control Group
April 19, 2005, 03:55 PM
I think that you may be right about their impression, but I also think that if we worry too much about the impression we make, we're going to compromise away everything that makes the gun culture interesting. Part of that culture is recognizing the value of WWII-era relics, from both sides of the war.

I'm no gun show expert, but when I've gone to a gun show, the Nazi paraphernalia I've seen has been actual Nazi paraphernalia - as in, manufactured for use by Nazis in the war, or replicas thereof. It has historical value and collectible value, just like GI equipment from WWII does. It is unfortunate if someone comes away from that thinking that gun collectors as a whole are Nazis, but that sort of wrong-headed thinking can't adequately be addressed.

Rebar
April 19, 2005, 04:04 PM
It's called the 1st Amendment. It's not just for things you agree with.

El Tejon
April 19, 2005, 04:04 PM
I am shocked and disgusted by the Nazi and Confederate stuff, but I look at it as an unfortunate consequence of a free society. Besides a lot of guys are just history geeks or young and want "cool stuff" to share with their friends.

rangemasta
April 19, 2005, 04:07 PM
This stuff does have historical value, id love to build up a collection of German WWII gear, uniforms, flags whatever. This stuff is expensive. Its going to be more expensive in 10, 20, 50, 100 years from now

Havegunjoe
April 19, 2005, 04:08 PM
Like that killer is someone to be proud of. The vendors I see at gun shows here are selling WWll collectables. The Nazi ones are more recognizable than the Japaneese, but no real difference when you think of all the innocents killed by both countires. I have not seen anyone selling new Nazi merchandise. That I would not stand for either but WWll collectables I don't have a problem with.

Crownvicman
April 19, 2005, 04:22 PM
I've never bought Nazi paraphernalia but I do like and collect Soviet Russian relics. It is an interesting piece of history and feels like dancing on a dead enemie's grave.

cuchulainn
April 19, 2005, 04:25 PM
Bear baiting is very rude, El Tejon ;)

crucible
April 19, 2005, 04:36 PM
I'm a military history buff, with a special intereset in WWII combat aviation; as I type this, I have several Michael Howard prints in my office looking at me including autographed Joe Foss, and several Gunther Rall (highest still living ace at 275 kills...later West German Air Force General). I can appreciate and respect history and the courage of men involved in it, and I understand the collectability of it's items, whether one agrees with it or not.

That said. Several months ago, I helped man a gun right's organizations booth at a large gun show here in Viriginia. Next to us was a a dealer that sepcialized in selling WWII artifacts, particularly German and Nazi ones. That's ok and and of itself, but everytime I looked in that general direction (was only two directions to look), I got an original portrait of Hitler that was for sale staring at me. A large one.

I gotta tell ya, it got old. And a bit creepy. And I'd preferred that it have been elsewhere.

But I'm not arguing that it should be banned however. And I don't care one whit about the sensibilities of the anti's or liberals-they can pound sand.

Chris

entropy
April 19, 2005, 04:45 PM
I collect Warsaw Pact items and Mosin and SKS rifles, yet I am not a communist. I have owned Nazi relics in the past, yet was never a nazi.(Biker, yes, Nazi, no.) My Dad owned a samurai sword his uncle took from a dead Japanese NCO, (it was his familiy's blade set in the standard NCO Tsuba, Hamon, and scabbard.), yet I'm pretty sure he holds no big love of Japan. I am disgusted with the guys who have one K98k on their table, and piles of shirts that say stuff like "Mien Erhe heist Treue" with SS runes. The rifle is in their four hundred pound wife's name for legal reasons. :p And yes, I find the CheGuevara t-shirts as annoying, also.
Perhaps a small amount of self-policing at gunshows wouldn't be a bad thing, but it probably isn't going to happen. If the anti's were smart they'd take a "hidden camera" to a gun show, it'd "scare the straights" , as it were.

Bulldozer
April 19, 2005, 04:56 PM
I hit the Syracuse, NY gunshow this past weekend. There were more vendors of non-firearms c--p than there was anything else.

The most offensive thing going there was the stench of all the guys who had not bathed in weeks (had hoped days, but phew)!

Standing Wolf
April 19, 2005, 05:08 PM
I hardly ever go to gun shows any more: too much worthless junk, very little of which has anything to do with shooting.

If I want genuine wild rice, I'll go to the grocery, thanks all the same.

Derby FALs
April 19, 2005, 05:13 PM
It's amazing what will offend a yankee. :neener:

patent
April 19, 2005, 05:19 PM
I am disgusted with the guys who have one K98k on their table, and piles of shirts that say stuff like "Mien Erhe heist Treue" with SS runes. T. . . And yes, I find the CheGuevara t-shirts as annoying, also.

Gotta agree with that. They can sell that crap if they like, but I tend to avoid tables that have junk like that on them, regardless of what else they have. They have their clientelle, I'm just not a part of it.

patent

GEM
April 19, 2005, 05:19 PM
There are two types of dealers.

One might sell legitimate WWII items. That's ok with me but folks who solely focused on the nazis with an implication that they were great guys are troublesome. It is not hard to figure them out.

Then - there are the guys selling new Nazi stuff and usually have modern Nazi oriented books and literature. They are rather despicable characters.

It is not a matter of being a Yankee or a Southerner. That latter type is not a worthwhile contributor to the RKBA or much of anything.

Derby FALs
April 19, 2005, 05:23 PM
If people weren't buying it they wouldn't be selling it.

bogie
April 19, 2005, 05:34 PM
I don't mind the "collector" tables. In fact, I think the stuff is kinda cool, in the historical sense.

I really, really hate those !@#$%^&*() Illinois Nazis... If I see a "new nazi" table at a gun show, I _will_ go find the person running the overall show, and grouch 'em out. Same with the tables selling klucker crap, the turner diaries crap, etc.

A while back at a local show, some skin-lookin' guy had "his woman" selling shirts, coffee mugs, etc., with pix of nazi/ss officers on 'em... Chatted with the promoter, and then left - dunno if anything happened. My father went to great effort to make sure that those folks weren't allowed to prevail, and it sickens me that some obviously twisted folks idolize them.

ZeroX
April 19, 2005, 05:37 PM
I'm reminded of an episode of King of the Hill where Cotton tried to sell Hitler's canoe to raise money for the VFW.

SmershAgent
April 19, 2005, 05:51 PM
I'm very interested in WW2, and I have a modest collection of items (many of which were from the Third Reich). However, these are a manifestation of my historical interest as opposed to supporting an ideology. As others have pointed out, it's very easy to distinguish the types of vendors that cater to each at shows.

I look forward to browsing the tables where people are selling history books, authentic WW2 items, medals/badges/etc, and weapons. I think it's a nice bonus when you arrive at a show and discover for every 8 or 9 tables of guns, there's 1 full of WW2 artifacts. And as someone else pointed out, how many of us own a firearm used by a Warsaw Pact Army? The fact I like shooting my SKS and CZ-52 doesn't mean I condone despotic Communist governments.

It seems the vendors who have shaved heads, Aryan Nation T-shirts, and white supremacist literature are the ones who contribute to gun owners getting a bad reputation.

That said, if they want to pay for a table and sit behind it, it's their right to be there, just as it is my right to ignore them.

Phil Ca
April 19, 2005, 06:13 PM
I am a member of a German knife forum and recently a new member from Germany posted a Hitler Youth knife photo and offer for sale. The admin ripped him a new one and reminded him of a 1980's law against Nazi regalia. He let him know straight up that there would be no postings of that sort on the forum.

When I used to attend the gun shows before we moved I could not but help noticing the WW2 tables with all sorts of items on them. The true collector stuff is OK but the new ne-nazi stuff does not belong there IMO.

I was stationed in Germany for 30 months in the mid 50's and never saw much in the way of WW2 regalia. In 1999 i visited Munich with my wife and son and went to a surplus store. It was filled mostly with US GI equipment and camping items. In Normandy a smilar store was selling equipment from all participants in D-Day. The prices were totally out of whack and a person would have had to be a tad crazy to buy any of it. I settled for some sand and shells from Utah and Omaha beaches and a replica of the famous, "Clicker" ID device used by the GI's that were dropped in by parachute.

BYW, the church in the square in St. Mere Eglise still has a dummy in a chute on top where an actual soldier was trapped for several hours. In the movie,
"The Longest Day" the part was played by Red Buttons. (search: St. Mere Eglise and Musee Airborne St. Mere Eglise)

GEM
April 19, 2005, 06:20 PM
If people weren't buying it they wouldn't be selling it.

Works for heroin, meth and kiddy porn.

jobu07
April 19, 2005, 06:29 PM
Bulldoozer, I hear ya man! :p There were some real winners at that 'cuse show. It was interesting, though, there was a few people selling racks full of old war uniforms. Nazi and others as well. It's fun to see old relics though.

Now, as someone said, a large original portrait of hitler. I dunno. Maybe it can be classified as art as it is an original painting. But that is borderline... It's not as much a relic as it is propaganda that belongs in a history museum exhibit of nazi germany. Not hanging on someone's mantle now.

jsalcedo
April 19, 2005, 06:38 PM
If you don't like it don't buy it.

I think thats what happened at the San Antonio gun shows.

There used to be many "colorful characters" at the TWCA shows but now it seems the fringe people don't participate like they did back in the 1980's

I'm not sure if the Neo nazis were run out on a rail or they didn't get enough sales to stay in business.

Last gunshow there was a table selling old helmets and I was tempted by a nazi one with a .30 ventilation hole but $90 was a little steep with no documentation.

spacemanspiff
April 19, 2005, 06:45 PM
those who take offense at merely viewing a swatstika or german war relics, are not much different than those who take offense at merely viewing a picture of a firearm.

having an interest in WWII relics is a far cry from actually believing in the idealogy of the Nazis. i find myself impressed with german engineering and machining. i am also impressed by how close they really came to winning WWII. still doesnt make me a sympathizer with them.

with that said, i can understand that some people really do have just cause for hating anything german related. just like some people to this day still hate anything to do with the japanese. sometimes hatred can't be let go of easily.

Mannlicher
April 19, 2005, 06:56 PM
Some folks are WAY to sensitive.

I like CSA items very much, and collect more every chance I get. My Great Grandad was the only one of 10 brothers that did not serve the South, and that was due to his age. I am a member of the Sons of the Confederacy, and frankly, I look askance at those that are as disrespectful as some here.

Nazi stuff I can take or leave, but I have no proboem with those that like to collect that type thing. I have never met a collector that set the stuff up in a shrine to the Third Reich.

lbmii
April 19, 2005, 07:10 PM
After the Oklahoma Bombing these Neo-Nazi types went back under their rock but I have noticed that they are starting to peek back out. Gun shows should run them out. I would tell them; "Yes you have free speech now go start your own gun show you silly little Nazis."

jefnvk
April 19, 2005, 07:16 PM
I have absolutely no problem with the actual war stuff. If anyone of you do, then I'd sugest never buying a WWII Mauser, because guess what? The little swastika (or at least the eagle) is stamped on it.

I don't really care for the guys selling newly manufactured Nazi stuff, though, UNLESS sold strictly as a replica for use in a collection. I know some wartime stuff can be hard to find, and I have no problem with replicas designed to replace missing parts or fill a hole in a collection. What I do have a problem with, is $5 Chinese pocket knives with swastikas, minature Nazi flags, newl Nazi literature, etc. Stuff that isn't geared towards a collection.

As for Confederate stuff, I have no problems whatsoever. I'm smart enough to realize that the Civil war wasn't about slavery (at least, completely). And I'm sure the North has their share of faults in that war, too. Sherman seems to pop into mind.

Speaking of faults on both sides, you may as well forget collecting American WWII stuff, if you are one of those people, too. Seems to me that we had a bunch of Asians in internment camps.

My stance is that the promoters should be the deciding factor on what is there and isn't.

Daemon688
April 19, 2005, 07:30 PM
It's collecting a little piece of history. No different than buying any other antique.

Hkmp5sd
April 19, 2005, 07:46 PM
I collect all kinds of military items from all sides fighting in WWII. That includes Nazi era firearms and daggers, bayonets, medals and other insignia. I also collect USSR memorabilia and they have murdered far more people than Nazi Germany ever considered.

I find it hypocritical that many folks would/do happily own 98 Mausers, Lugers, Walthers and other Nazi marked firearm related items and then say it is disgusting for me to collect SS Daggers and Knight's Crosses.

thorn726
April 19, 2005, 08:07 PM
of course i feel people can sell whatever.
BUT= i think of it this way= buying , selling Nazi or Confederate junk =

having pride in that history. others are gonna see you the buyer or seller as someone who values that history, with enough pride to spend mnoney on it.

i would have no part of it, and selling these items is going to put more antis against the gun society.

think about it.

how would you guys feel about Satan worshippers who were into guns setting up a table full of black magic accessories ???
(heheh i dunno, penatgram sights? who knows?)

guns made by other armies, sure, after all they are tools.
but flags, insignias, stuff like that, it only promotes the ideology it was created for



I'm smart enough to realize that the Civil war wasn't about slavery (at least, completely).

OK= i buy about 1/5 of that. sure its partly true, as much as the war in Iraq is about oil, or WWII was about getting us out of depression.
all wars have economic overtones that are the ultimate driving force, that to me does not diminish the true cause. (ie, freedom for iraq, slaves in south, Jews).

WORSE= in today's world, to think that the confedrate flag has anything to do with trade NOW??? come on.

find me ONE black person who is not deeply offended by the confedrate flag.
(heh- if one is out there, they are probably on this site), and i will change my opinion, but as it stands, that dixie flag stands for racism, to the vast majority, and most importantly, to the people it was used to oppress.

and oh, right, the South was all set to retire slavery on its own right?
the "trade" had nothing to do with the fact that the south was enjoying near free labor? what was the TRADE dispute again? extra tariffs on the south for using slave labor?

hmmmmmmmmmmm. trade. i love it.

Derby FALs
April 19, 2005, 08:17 PM
.

I really, really hate those !@#$%^&*() Illinois Nazis... If I see a "new nazi" table at a gun show, I _will_ go find the person running the overall show, and grouch 'em out. Same with the tables selling klucker crap, the turner diaries crap, etc.

I am glad I live in the USA. Did you know the Turner Diaries are banned in Europe?



Works for heroin, meth and kiddy porn.

Don't you enjoy seeing capitalism at work?

EVIL5LITER
April 19, 2005, 08:34 PM
Originally posted by El Tejon
I am shocked and disgusted by the Nazi and Confederate stuff

I'm disgusted that you are disgusted by Confederate stuff... thems fighting words!!!

Originally posted by an extremely clueless Californian
OK= i buy about 1/5 of that. sure its partly true, as much as the war in Iraq is about oil, or WWII was about getting us out of depression.
all wars have economic overtones that are the ultimate driving force, that to me does not diminish the true cause. (ie, freedom for iraq, slaves in south, Jews).

WORSE= in today's world, to think that the confedrate flag has anything to do with trade NOW??? come on.

find me ONE black person who is not deeply offended by the confedrate flag.
(heh- if one is out there, they are probably on this site), and i will change my opinion, but as it stands, that dixie flag stands for racism, to the vast majority, and most importantly, to the people it was used to oppress.

and oh, right, the South was all set to retire slavery on its own right?
the "trade" had nothing to do with the fact that the south was enjoying near free labor? what was the TRADE dispute again? extra tariffs on the south for using slave labor?

hmmmmmmmmmmm. trade. i love it.

I know the Civil War is a sore topic that is constantly debated in here, but I've got to set this guy straight...

The war was about States' Rights. In other words, the Confederacy KNEW what the constitution was about and wanted to protect it, whereas the Union wanted to continue to exploit the south.

Slavery was on it's way out. Who needs to feed 40 slaves when you have machinery that can do the work of them, cheaper?

But of course, you're in a completely unbiased area of the country, that knows ALL about the Civil War... how many Californians were involved in that again?

And as for Blacks who are offended by that flag, I've got two comments for you:

1)There are just as many who aren't offended as there are those who are offended. It's not really a big deal here in the South.

2)Last time I checked, there is nothing in the Bill of Rights that guarantees freedom from being offended.

jefnvk
April 19, 2005, 08:43 PM
how would you guys feel about Satan worshippers who were into guns setting up a table full of black magic accessories ???

If the promoters let them, OK by me. I don't have to stop and look at the stuff.

The responsibility lies in the promoter. I'm suprised how many people would be offended that someone proposes a law saying that all private gun show purchases have to be 4473'd, yet say that others should have no right to sell what they want, and would complain to the police that something is being sold that they don't like.

To be blunt honest with you, the last gun show I went to was kind of boring. The promoters cut out almost all non-guns/knives stuff. No military surplus, even if it were gun accessories. No wartime memoribilia. Not even much in the way of surplus rifles, except for all the M1's. The promoters didn't want anything non-gun there, and nothing non-gun was there. Like I said, looking at table after table of commercial deer rifles got boring. I was kinda wishing for something interesting to pop up, but no, just more guns.

And EVIL got my point pretty good. My buddy has a shirt that says 'If this flag offends you, you need a proper history lesson' with the picture of the Confederate flag.

Come to think about, if we wiped out everything from every culture that ever comitted an atrocity, I think the antique market would be small indeed.

R.H. Lee
April 19, 2005, 08:48 PM
I am shocked and disgusted by the Nazi and Confederate stuff What's wrong with Confederate stuff and why would you even equate it to Nazi stuff in the same sentence?

I thought you were educated. Apparently I was mistaken.

cuchulainn
April 19, 2005, 09:13 PM
Meanwhile, back in Lafayette, El Tejon chuckles that baiting the bears was so darn easy.

Byron Quick
April 19, 2005, 09:16 PM
KSFreeman believes that all adherents of the Confederacy should have been executed after the Civil War for treason. And he considers us who revere our Confederate ancestors in about the same light;)


ind me ONE black person who is not deeply offended by the confedrate flag.

:D Sure wish I had a picture of it but I haven't seen him for years. There used to be a black farmer here who drove around in an orange Chevrolet pickup wearing a Treflan baseball cap. His Chevie pickup had one of those Confederate flag decal things that covers the entire rear window. I don't reckon he was offended by the Confederate flag.

H.K. Edgerton is reportedly an ex-president of the Asheville, N.C. chapter of the NAACP, a black, and a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Reckon he's not offended by the flag, it this is fact. Apparently fact: http://www.ncpress.net/mayoral.html

XD40Assassin
April 19, 2005, 09:26 PM
Forget them! If I had a whole bunch of old Nazi stuff you bet your booty Id sell that stuff and to anyone who wanted it!!!

spacemanspiff
April 19, 2005, 09:30 PM
i would think that black people should be more incensed at those who bought the african slaves and sold them over here.

its like hating coca-cola products because thats all you can get at mcdonalds.

XLMiguel
April 19, 2005, 09:40 PM
I like militaria, I like historical relics, I have a few 'intersting items' myself. I am a son of the South. My daddy earned 2 Purple Hearts and a DSC in WW II (all I got is a VN service medal). Granted some gun show offerings are tacky and tasteless, but I can change the channel (i.e. walk away). Some gun shows are better than others, know whut I mean.

Mostly, I come to buy guns, ammo, and supplies, if they don't have what I want, I don't come back. Occasionally, I find other neat stuff, but mostly, I come to buy guns, ammo, . . . . . Get over it. Censorship sucks, the market will out, eh?

gulogulo1970
April 19, 2005, 09:43 PM
I don't have a problem with real Nazi war trophys, that stuff is history. And that is a time period mankind cannot afford to ever forget.

I too hate the newly manufactured Nazi and some Confederate stuff. That stuff sells to white power morons, for the most part. But I've learned to accept the fact that being in the "big tent" of gun owners there will be people whose beliefs I don't agree with or even hate with a passion. But its America and you can do and think what you want.

I do think alot of Nazi vendors make the rest of us gun owners look bad to newbies at gunshows. When you are trying to gain second ammendment converts its best not to look like a bunch of crazies.

azrael
April 19, 2005, 09:56 PM
Confederate Flag?? Havent gandered at to many of those...OHHHH you mean the BATTLE FLAG...

Guess I am not a good southerner...I do not have a single "Battle Flag" any where in my home or in my truck...Well of course I do have a holster with the image of the flag in it, so I guess that counts...If I new that people were so easily offended by it, I would have had one on my truck YEARS ago! :neener:


Well I do not take offense at any of the Nazi stuff...History is history...IF ya wanna collect it fine...It isnt my thing, although I do have a certain LOVEEEE of Mausers..

For those that LIKE to "poke the bear"..I gotta suggestion for ya...Last year I went to the local "head" shop and bought 2 t-shirts

First one says...I am NOT GAY!! But my girlfriend is!!<~~Wear that one with SWMBO...She thinks it's funny :D

Second one says...I AM NOT GAY!!But my boyfriend is!!<~~~wear that one to the range and gunshow's to annoy my buddies (they dont see the humor) :evil:

trickyasafox
April 19, 2005, 10:20 PM
Yeah, why don't we try coming up with some content that is in keeping with the ideals of a place called, ya know, "The High Road?" Thanks. Justin

Detritus
April 19, 2005, 10:40 PM
find me ONE black person who is not deeply offended by the confedrate flag.

just for the record there WERE small a number of Mixed and even ALL black confederate units. and no i am NOT referring to labor units, but to units that in at least one case saw extensive combat.

unfortunately at this time i am unable to pull the unit numbers from the deep recesses of my memory.

the one unit that i KNOW saw combat was a Texas Cavalry unit (21st Texas?? some similar designation) the personel of this unit ran the gamut of nationalities that could be found on the texas gulf coast at the time of the war, Whites (including germans/"dutch" that had not yet fully learned english), Blacks, Mexicans and Even Filipinos (sp?) (listed as "Chinese" in unit rosters). decendants of the men of this unit and others of all walks and races are at this time active in a re-enactment group based on the men and history of the unit.

Nor do we hear much mention of the Unit raised soon after secession In New Orleans, that had a fairly large number of Black officers (to be completely clear Black Slave owners) my understanding though is that this unit stayed in and around N.O. as part of the defensive units for that port.

the decendants of these men are not very likely to be as vehemently against the display of the Confederate battle flag as you seem to think ALL non-white americans are/should be.

It's a shame they don't teach ENOUGH about the Civil war to give not only or children but a larger portion of US in general a better idea of what really did occur in that war.

YES the war was about slavery..... Economic slavery.

Slavery in the south didn't die out, it was simply renamed "Sharecropping" all that really changed was that now the profit margins were down and the poor whites were just as much fair game to be exploited as the blacks.

i do not agree with a large portion of how i see the CSA battle flag used in modern Amercian society. No to a modern america the "rebel flag" does not stand for states rights, a prolonged and it seems continuing propaganda campaign started after the war, and it's use by such groups as the Klan have demonized it into a symbol of oppression. yet i'm willing to bet that most HS kids today can't identify the other flags used by the confederacy.

this does not keep me from remembering what it stood for to MOST of the men who fought under it, ie freedom from having the will of an industrialized North forced upon the agrarian based economies of the south.

now i better shut up before i get wound up and someone thinks things of me that are not true.

Derby FALs
April 20, 2005, 12:16 AM
[QUOTE]find me ONE black person who is not deeply offended by the confedrate flag.
(heh- if one is out there, they are probably on this site), and i will change my opinion, but as it stands, that dixie flag stands for racism, to the vast majority, and most importantly, to the people it was used to oppress.QUOTE]


The man behind the Rebel flag

by Clint Parker

The Asheville Tribune

Sept 26, 2002

An interview with local Southern heritage activist H.K. Edgerton on his
upcoming march to Texas, on his critics, and more

Editor’s note: On a fall afternoon Confederate flag waver and concerned Southern
historian H.K. Edgerton sat down with Tribune reporter Clint Parker for
an interview about his October walk to Texas.

H.K. Edgerton is a man of strong opinions, who is not afraid to speak his
mind. This was the case this week when Edgerton was interviewed about his
October walk from North Carolina to Texas.

Edgerton, the former head of the Asheville branch of the NAACP and for the
last five years a defender of the Confederate flag and other related causes,
plans to leave for Austin, Texas Monday, October 14th by foot. When asked
what he was doing, Edgerton responded with a big smile, “Walkin’ across Dixie.”


The official title of the project is “March Across Dixie” and,
according to Edgerton’s press release, has three purposes.

First, Edgerton says he wants to expand the awareness of the need to defend
Southern heritage, history and the rightfulness of the Confederate cause
here in the South and across the entire United States. The south had every
legal right to secede and never should have been attacked for wanting to do so.

Second, Edgerton views the walk as part of an educational effort to show
that Southern symbols are part of a proud heritage that should be defended,
not scorned, as many liberal politicians, media and special interests would
have you believe, he says. Southerners have a cultural experience of their own,
and that culture needs to be defended from historical revisionists. The current
‘segregation’ of Southern culture, and particularly the Flag, by the uneducated
liberals is no different from the ‘segregation’ that the blacks faced earlier.

Third, he plans to raise money and gain support to build a permanent heritage
defense fund to be split between the Southern Legal Resource Center and the
Sons of Confederate Veterans to guarantee “...our heritage and history
survives and prospers despite the current attacks.” “Lying about the south and
re-writing history so the people remain ignorant of what really happened only
continues to separate the races.” Edgerton says he hopes to raise $2 million.

According to Edgerton, the Southern Legal Resource Center, a non-profit law
firm that defends Southern heritage cases such as the flying of the
Confederate Flag, currently has 12 cases that are about to go before the US
Supreme court with hundreds of cases being phoned in “...all the time.”
“I’ve influenced a lot of babies across the south land to stand up,”
explains Edgerton, “Now they’re being sent home from school or forced to
remove their Cross of St. Andrew (the original name of what’s now known as
the Confederate Flag).” They’re calling on legal help from the center and
Edgerton wants to help raise money for their defense.

The 1,300 mile walk is a tall order for the 55-year-old man. He’ll be
carrying a Confederate flag the whole way. Edgerton plans to take the
journey 21 miles a day, six days a week. He plans to attend a local church
on Sundays, give speeches and “kiss a lot of babies.” He thinks the journey
will take about four months to complete.

Edgerton considers his crusade a “fight for civil rights” and says, “I’ve
fought for civil rights all my life and it doesn’t get any worse than this.
It’s high time to have education for black and white folks about Southern
history.”

Edgerton’s knowledge of the Civil War era differs greatly from what the usual
textbooks, which he calls northern propaganda, teach.

Edgerton instructs that secession was an act provided for in the U.S.
Constitution. No state had ever agreed to enter into a perpetual Union when
it ratified the Constitution, and the South was not the first to discuss the idea.
According to Edgerton, the New England states talked about secession during
the War of 1812, and in 1814 the New England Federalists even held a secession
convention in Connecticut.


Here are a few other insights Edgerton presented about the Civil War:

“Blacks fought for the South.”

“Lincoln fought the South to keep all the Southern tax money.”

“Southern generals have been made out to be traitors when they were very
honorable men.”

“Blacks could certainly walk around the south, but not around Lincoln’s
Illinois.”

“America will never ever be great until the truth (about the Civil War) is
told.”

“The only thing Lincoln did was to pit black and white against each other”

"The Constitution is what started the Civil War - taxes and states’ rights -
not slavery.”

“Many blacks were free and they even owned slaves.” (This was documented in
an Asheville Tribune article about the 1800s Sulfur Spring Resort in West
Asheville.)

“Most white folks didn’t even own slaves.”
“The first legalized slave was owned by a black man.”

According to Edgerton, the greatest Union desertion rates occurred just after
Lincoln announced his Emancipation Proclamation. Edgerton asserted, “Union
Soldiers said they didn’t get into to this war to save the ******s.”

He believes the United States did a great disservice to the South after the
war. Edgerton points out, “We (the United States) rebuilt Germany and Japan
(after World War II), but we never rebuilt the south land. We need a
Marshall plan for the South and we need it now.” “If you want to understand

today’s race problems, you have to understand what went on during the
‘reconstruction.’ Anyone who knows nothing of that era is simply ignorant.”
Edgerton has his own ideas about reparations too.

“The idea of reparations (for slavery) is a joke. It’s a way to drive a
wedge between blacks and whites. The only hope they (the blacks) have is to
hold their white southern brothers’ hand and join in calling for Southern
reparations,” explains Edgerton.
“My ultimate goal is to seek reparations for all Southerners.” Edgerton is not
just talking about money either, but the South’s history that Edgerton says
has been rewritten by the victors - the North.

Edgerton talked about some of his exploits and told of when he was standing
on a bridge in Alabama with his Confederate Flag. He said a black woman
stopped, jumped out of a car, hugged his neck and told him that she could
now bring her grandfather’s uniform down out of the attic. It was a
Confederate uniform.

He notes that when his zeal was put to work in the black community, he was
called “a radical, loose cannon,” yet when he turned his attention to
defending his Southern heritage he is called a “lackey and Uncle Tom.”
“It’s ridiculous that a Nazi, Ku Klux Klan skinhead would use the Cross of
St. Andrew to try and intimidate anyone. That’s my flag,” states Edgerton.

Edgerton says that in the Southern heritage circles he’s been affiliated
with, “I’ve not run into one person who believes slavery was a good thing.”
When it comes to defending Southern Hertiage, Edgerton admits “Southerners
always will try to accommodate people because we are kind-hearted, but we’ve
backed up too far,” he says.

Edgerton, who says he’s been made a member of the “White Trash Society,”
says with a laugh, “It’s hard to be a white man 'cause we’re guilty of
everything bad that happened.”

One of Edgerton’s detractors, Monroe Gilmour, who was named as a

Coordinator with the Western North Carolina Citizens for an End to Institutional
Bigotry, recently made comments about Edgerton in a national CNSNews.
com story.

Edgerton was asked to respond to Gilmour’s statement that when Edgerton
attended the Martin Luther King peace march with his Confederate flag that
“It feels as if he is there in defiance of what we’re doing.”
“See, here we go again,” responded Edgerton, “I’m there following Martin
Luther King’s dream.” What dream is that? Edgerton says it’s the one where
the son of a slave-owner could sit down with the son of a slave.

The Tribune contacted Gilmour to get his reaction to Edgerton’s response.
Gilmour said that Edgerton was not marching with the parade, but standing on
the side and, “It just felt as if he was there in defiance.” In the CNS article Gilmour
said that Edgerton was “a pathetic soul who’s searching for love and has found it with
white supremacists.”

Edgerton responded to Gilmour’s statement by saying that he had found love
among the white supremacists and that Gilmour was the “pathetic soul.”
Edgerton went on to say, “Monroe Gilmour speaks like he’s a black man. What
is Monroe Gilmour? Mr. Gilmour is a liar and I have no respect for him. I
don’t expect a man like that to know anything about history. Gilmour is the
worst bigot I’ve ever met.”

“I don’t think there’s any need to respond to that,” said Gilmour when told
of Edgerton’s response. In the CNS story Gilmour also compared Edgerton to a
Holocaust denier who can be presented with evidence of slavery and its brutality

and just dismiss it. Edgerton says that he’s never denied that slavery happened or
that slavery was a bad thing.

“Well, that’s not the impression that he gives a lot of people,” Gilmour
says, “It seems inconsistent.”

Gilmour further stated in the article that Edgerton has convinced himself
that masters and slaves actually labored together to improve the South.
Edgerton responded that after the Civil War former slave-owners offered freed
slaves pieces of property to work, since Confederate currency was worthless.
“I think he needs to go talk to some real historians,” says Gilmour.

Gilmour stated in the CNS piece that, “It’s our opinion that he is being
used as camouflage for the white separatist and even supremacist use of
folks like [the Southern Legal Resource Center’s] Kirk Lyons.”
Edgerton responded, “I’m tired of people talking about Kirk Lyons. I’d give
my life for Kirk D. Lyons.” To back up his claim that Lyons is not a racist
he points to Lyons’ taking as clients blacks in Waco, Texas, a black man who
was beaten by police in Hendersonville, and his legal help to the NAACP
while Edgerton was president of the local chapter.

“He (Lyons) has always told me to turn the other cheek; damned if I’m going
to turn the other check,” exclaims Edgerton.

Gilmour was asked by the Tribune about his group, Western North Carolina
Citizens for an End to Institutional Bigotry. Asked who was on the board of
directors, Gilmour replied that there were no board members. Asked how many
members the group had, Gilmour said that it wasn’t a membership
organization. Asked how the group was funded, Gilmour said by private
individuals and small grants

So far, Edgerton has had to defend his beliefs with his blood. He was
attacked by black men on two different occasions. Both attacks occurred here
in his hometown of Asheville, NC.

So he continues to march to raise money to educate folks with the truth, to promote
‘heritage, and not hate,’ and to take the fight to the courts when it becomes necessary.

landon74
April 20, 2005, 01:12 AM
+1 to the unfair grouping of Nazis along with Confederates.

I find it more irritating that they allow beanie baby and cell phone accessory vendors taking up valuable space at the gun show....

Just my two cents...

Blackburn
April 20, 2005, 01:17 AM
H.K. Edgerton is a man of strong opinions, who is not afraid to speak his
mind. This was the case this week when Edgerton was interviewed about his
October walk from North Carolina to Texas.

Edgerton, the former head of the Asheville branch of the NAACP and for the
last five years a defender of the Confederate flag and other related causes,
plans to leave for Austin, Texas Monday, October 14th by foot. When asked
what he was doing, Edgerton responded with a big smile, “Walkin’ across Dixie.”


The official title of the project is “March Across Dixie” and,
according to Edgerton’s press release, has three purposes.

First, Edgerton says he wants to expand the awareness of the need to defend
Southern heritage, history and the rightfulness of the Confederate cause
here in the South and across the entire United States. The south had every
legal right to secede and never should have been attacked for wanting to do so.

Second, Edgerton views the walk as part of an educational effort to show
that Southern symbols are part of a proud heritage that should be defended,
not scorned, as many liberal politicians, media and special interests would
have you believe, he says. Southerners have a cultural experience of their own,
and that culture needs to be defended from historical revisionists. The current
‘segregation’ of Southern culture, and particularly the Flag, by the uneducated
liberals is no different from the ‘segregation’ that the blacks faced earlier.

Third, he plans to raise money and gain support to build a permanent heritage
defense fund to be split between the Southern Legal Resource Center and the
Sons of Confederate Veterans to guarantee “...our heritage and history
survives and prospers despite the current attacks.” “Lying about the south and
re-writing history so the people remain ignorant of what really happened only
continues to separate the races.” Edgerton says he hopes to raise $2 million.

According to Edgerton, the Southern Legal Resource Center, a non-profit law
firm that defends Southern heritage cases such as the flying of the
Confederate Flag, currently has 12 cases that are about to go before the US
Supreme court with hundreds of cases being phoned in “...all the time.”
“I’ve influenced a lot of babies across the south land to stand up,”
explains Edgerton, “Now they’re being sent home from school or forced to
remove their Cross of St. Andrew (the original name of what’s now known as
the Confederate Flag).” They’re calling on legal help from the center and
Edgerton wants to help raise money for their defense.

The 1,300 mile walk is a tall order for the 55-year-old man. He’ll be
carrying a Confederate flag the whole way. Edgerton plans to take the
journey 21 miles a day, six days a week. He plans to attend a local church
on Sundays, give speeches and “kiss a lot of babies.” He thinks the journey
will take about four months to complete.

Edgerton considers his crusade a “fight for civil rights” and says, “I’ve
fought for civil rights all my life and it doesn’t get any worse than this.
It’s high time to have education for black and white folks about Southern
history.”

Edgerton’s knowledge of the Civil War era differs greatly from what the usual
textbooks, which he calls northern propaganda, teach.

Edgerton instructs that secession was an act provided for in the U.S.
Constitution. No state had ever agreed to enter into a perpetual Union when
it ratified the Constitution, and the South was not the first to discuss the idea.
According to Edgerton, the New England states talked about secession during
the War of 1812, and in 1814 the New England Federalists even held a secession
convention in Connecticut.


Here are a few other insights Edgerton presented about the Civil War:

“Blacks fought for the South.”

“Lincoln fought the South to keep all the Southern tax money.”

“Southern generals have been made out to be traitors when they were very
honorable men.”

“Blacks could certainly walk around the south, but not around Lincoln’s
Illinois.”

“America will never ever be great until the truth (about the Civil War) is
told.”

“The only thing Lincoln did was to pit black and white against each other”

"The Constitution is what started the Civil War - taxes and states’ rights -
not slavery.”

“Many blacks were free and they even owned slaves.” (This was documented in
an Asheville Tribune article about the 1800s Sulfur Spring Resort in West
Asheville.)

“Most white folks didn’t even own slaves.”
“The first legalized slave was owned by a black man.”

According to Edgerton, the greatest Union desertion rates occurred just after
Lincoln announced his Emancipation Proclamation. Edgerton asserted, “Union
Soldiers said they didn’t get into to this war to save the ******s.”

He believes the United States did a great disservice to the South after the
war. Edgerton points out, “We (the United States) rebuilt Germany and Japan
(after World War II), but we never rebuilt the south land. We need a
Marshall plan for the South and we need it now.” “If you want to understand

today’s race problems, you have to understand what went on during the
‘reconstruction.’ Anyone who knows nothing of that era is simply ignorant.”
Edgerton has his own ideas about reparations too.

“The idea of reparations (for slavery) is a joke. It’s a way to drive a
wedge between blacks and whites. The only hope they (the blacks) have is to
hold their white southern brothers’ hand and join in calling for Southern
reparations,” explains Edgerton.
“My ultimate goal is to seek reparations for all Southerners.” Edgerton is not
just talking about money either, but the South’s history that Edgerton says
has been rewritten by the victors - the North.

Edgerton talked about some of his exploits and told of when he was standing
on a bridge in Alabama with his Confederate Flag. He said a black woman
stopped, jumped out of a car, hugged his neck and told him that she could
now bring her grandfather’s uniform down out of the attic. It was a
Confederate uniform.

He notes that when his zeal was put to work in the black community, he was
called “a radical, loose cannon,” yet when he turned his attention to
defending his Southern heritage he is called a “lackey and Uncle Tom.”
“It’s ridiculous that a Nazi, Ku Klux Klan skinhead would use the Cross of
St. Andrew to try and intimidate anyone. That’s my flag,” states Edgerton.

Edgerton says that in the Southern heritage circles he’s been affiliated
with, “I’ve not run into one person who believes slavery was a good thing.”
When it comes to defending Southern Hertiage, Edgerton admits “Southerners
always will try to accommodate people because we are kind-hearted, but we’ve
backed up too far,” he says.

Edgerton, who says he’s been made a member of the “White Trash Society,”
says with a laugh, “It’s hard to be a white man 'cause we’re guilty of
everything bad that happened.”

One of Edgerton’s detractors, Monroe Gilmour, who was named as a

Coordinator with the Western North Carolina Citizens for an End to Institutional
Bigotry, recently made comments about Edgerton in a national CNSNews.
com story.

Edgerton was asked to respond to Gilmour’s statement that when Edgerton
attended the Martin Luther King peace march with his Confederate flag that
“It feels as if he is there in defiance of what we’re doing.”
“See, here we go again,” responded Edgerton, “I’m there following Martin
Luther King’s dream.” What dream is that? Edgerton says it’s the one where
the son of a slave-owner could sit down with the son of a slave.

The Tribune contacted Gilmour to get his reaction to Edgerton’s response.
Gilmour said that Edgerton was not marching with the parade, but standing on
the side and, “It just felt as if he was there in defiance.” In the CNS article Gilmour
said that Edgerton was “a pathetic soul who’s searching for love and has found it with
white supremacists.”

Edgerton responded to Gilmour’s statement by saying that he had found love
among the white supremacists and that Gilmour was the “pathetic soul.”
Edgerton went on to say, “Monroe Gilmour speaks like he’s a black man. What
is Monroe Gilmour? Mr. Gilmour is a liar and I have no respect for him. I
don’t expect a man like that to know anything about history. Gilmour is the
worst bigot I’ve ever met.”

“I don’t think there’s any need to respond to that,” said Gilmour when told
of Edgerton’s response. In the CNS story Gilmour also compared Edgerton to a
Holocaust denier who can be presented with evidence of slavery and its brutality

and just dismiss it. Edgerton says that he’s never denied that slavery happened or
that slavery was a bad thing.

“Well, that’s not the impression that he gives a lot of people,” Gilmour
says, “It seems inconsistent.”

Gilmour further stated in the article that Edgerton has convinced himself
that masters and slaves actually labored together to improve the South.
Edgerton responded that after the Civil War former slave-owners offered freed
slaves pieces of property to work, since Confederate currency was worthless.
“I think he needs to go talk to some real historians,” says Gilmour.

Gilmour stated in the CNS piece that, “It’s our opinion that he is being
used as camouflage for the white separatist and even supremacist use of
folks like [the Southern Legal Resource Center’s] Kirk Lyons.”
Edgerton responded, “I’m tired of people talking about Kirk Lyons. I’d give
my life for Kirk D. Lyons.” To back up his claim that Lyons is not a racist
he points to Lyons’ taking as clients blacks in Waco, Texas, a black man who
was beaten by police in Hendersonville, and his legal help to the NAACP
while Edgerton was president of the local chapter.

“He (Lyons) has always told me to turn the other cheek; damned if I’m going
to turn the other check,” exclaims Edgerton.

Gilmour was asked by the Tribune about his group, Western North Carolina
Citizens for an End to Institutional Bigotry. Asked who was on the board of
directors, Gilmour replied that there were no board members. Asked how many
members the group had, Gilmour said that it wasn’t a membership
organization. Asked how the group was funded, Gilmour said by private
individuals and small grants

So far, Edgerton has had to defend his beliefs with his blood. He was
attacked by black men on two different occasions. Both attacks occurred here
in his hometown of Asheville, NC.

So he continues to march to raise money to educate folks with the truth, to promote
‘heritage, and not hate,’ and to take the fight to the courts when it becomes necessary.



:rolleyes:

pete f
April 20, 2005, 02:21 AM
I have three items of Nazi/German war souveniers, A dagger, a luger and a iron cross, all returned from the War by an uncle. I see items like this as history and legitimate War booty.

I can understand the guy who sells WWII artifacts as just that artifacts.. I can not understand repro's or new production as i find the Nazi concept so reprehensible as to make my stomach turn at the concept. Same with Confederate or Japanese War relics.

I make sure the guys who sell the new stuff understand that i had an uncle, my moms first husband and my wifes extended family killed by the SOB Nazi war. I tell them that just because the Constitution allows them to have such views, does not mean they should excercise those rights. And i make sure the operator of the show understands my position.

Sodbuster
April 20, 2005, 08:42 AM
Didn't Prince Harry legitimize the purchase and wearing of Nazi garb? :rolleyes:

sendtoscott
April 20, 2005, 11:20 AM
When the "historical memorabilia" tables are decorated w/ huge swatstikas and have stacks of "Christians, take back your country" bumper stickers for sale along w/ the 'historical' stuff, I really can't blame anyone for walking away with a negative image of gun owners (and I own several guns myself).

How many business that sell anything like that in stores instead of at gunshows have Nazi flags flying over their front doors?

richyoung
April 20, 2005, 12:22 PM
"...find me ONE black person who is not deeply offended by the confedrate flag."

For your remedial education, there were black units, and even black officers who fought for the South in the War of Northern Aggression. There were even free black men who owned slaves. Naturally, this history is not taught by those that won that illegal war. Think about it - if the war was REALLY about ending slavery, answer me three questions:

1. The war started in 1861. If the war was about ending slavery, WHY was the "emancipation prclamation" not issued until 1863? Why not immediatly proclaim itat the start of hostilities?

2. The famous "Emancipation Proclamation" was so worded that it freed only slaves in territories "in rebellion" that were under the control of the Union army - so essentially, it freed almost no one at the time it was issued. WHY was it wordedin such a way as to allow slavery to continue in Maryland, and other slave territory that DIDN'T seceed? After all, its about "ending slavery", right?

3. Regale me again with how the newly freed black citizens were welcomed with open arms and re-settled in the North, with the same wages and housing opertunities as any other citizen... 'cause I seem to remember they were packed into ghettos and tenement slums, and if they could get work at all, it was at half the wage a similar white person drew for the same job...a condition which prevailed until World War II, except in the military, where blacks were denied proper promotions and awards, and kept in segregated units, until after the Korean war. Seems to me the North treated the freedmen just as shabily as they treated the Irish, Italians, Poles, etc.

richyoung
April 20, 2005, 12:25 PM
How many gun-haters are going to PAY to get INTO a gun show, anyway? Freedom is freedom, even for things and ideas you don't like, and I refuse to get my paties in a bunch over what a bunch of gun-banning libs might think about a guy selling a Nazi flag, when they probably had a V.C., ANC, IRA, or PRC flag in their dorm room - all Commie, all bad, & two of them have the dreaded "assault rifle " on them to boot.

svtruth
April 20, 2005, 01:02 PM
Adolph Hitler was born on April 20, 1889

El Rojo
April 20, 2005, 01:13 PM
I agree, who cares what the anti-gun liberals think. They hate us either way. The ones we need to worry about are the middle of the road crowd, who generally don't show up to gun shows anyway. If you do take a middle roader to a gun show, explain to them that the Nazi's have freedom of speech and even though they hang out at gun shows, it doesn't mean all gun owners behave that way. I would think just ignoring them would be the best course of action. They do have a right to think and believe what they want, just like the anti-gun crowd. And we have a right to oppose them and try to stop them. This is simple politics and human nature. Why sweat it?

El Tejon
April 20, 2005, 01:21 PM
El Rojo, I think many sweat it because they are worried about how it reflects on the gun culture to be associated (however unintentionally) with Nazis or Confederates. Hurts in the PR battle.

CombatArmsUSAF
April 20, 2005, 01:25 PM
Historical Value, and the good old 1st amendment. To reiterate it's not just for things you agree with. If that was the case there wouldn't be anymore liberals in mainstream america

sendtoscott
April 20, 2005, 01:37 PM
The 1st amendment makes it legal; it does not obligate gun show operators to sell table space to anyone. The Klan has a constitutional right to exist, but I'd hope nobody would sell the racist SOBs a table at a show.

El Rojo
April 20, 2005, 01:49 PM
El Rojo, I think many sweat it because they are worried about how it reflects on the gun culture to be associated (however unintentionally) with Nazis or Confederates. Hurts in the PR battle.Everything hurts us in the PR battle. They don't tell the truth and the lie whenever they can to demonize us. So what damage are a few radicals going to do? Actually the most important question is what can we do about it? Short of some gun show vendors not renting out the space, nothing. They have a right to exist and do what they want. We can't change that, so why worry about it?

sendtoscott
April 20, 2005, 01:54 PM
They have a right to exist and do what they want. We can't change that, so why worry about it?

We have a right to voice complaints, which is the first step in getting things changed. Would you rather people just silently stop going to shows because of all the swastikas?

El Tejon
April 20, 2005, 01:55 PM
It hurts among the undecided to see such things displayed. Imagine how seeing a swastika flying high at a gun show goes over in the Jewish community or a Confederate flag goes over in the African-American community.

What can we do? Pressure gun show promoters to set conditions not to allowing the sales of such rubbish at gun shows. The Nazi/CSA advocates may have a right to display their ideology, but they have no right to rent space. Don't rent it to them. That's what we can do. :)

Mugsy90/10
April 20, 2005, 02:08 PM
Lots of things that I see for sale bother me, not just stuff at gun shows but at the mall as well. T-Shirts with Charles Manson's picture on them for instance.

At least I can appreciate the fact that many people can collect Nazi memorabilia as a piece of history, without necessarily subscribing to Hitler's beliefs. What is the purpose of wearing a t-shirt with Charles Manson picture on it? While I don't understand it, I can and do respect the vendor’s right to sell it and the consumer’s right to buy it.

Beav
April 20, 2005, 02:28 PM
Are these stands selling just nazi stuff or just war memorabilia in general? If these stands are only fixated on selling nazi stuff then one might question who they're trying to market. It's pretty easy for anyone on the outside looking in to see that stuff and think of the modern day KKK goobers running around in the woods with their guns and nazi armbands.

GEM
April 20, 2005, 02:30 PM
I have the right to patronize whom I please - thus if a gun show has a significant Nazi presence, I will tell the organizer and not return.

Also, I really don't believe that that many of the folks who say don't sweat it, do that because of some abstract belief in free speech.

Let's give a test case - suppose at the gun show, someone had a table asking for legislation to legalize sex with children and sold t-shirts like that. Would the Nazis are OK folks be OK with that table?

If you say that wouldn't happen, you are ignoring thinking about the issue. On a practical and moral basis, I won't patronize a locale that had either. If you are ok with the Nazi - well, guess what.

sendtoscott
April 20, 2005, 02:30 PM
Are these stands selling just nazi stuff or just war memorabilia in general?

There are booths that fall into both categories. The "just nazi stuff" ones are the ones most people are complaining about.

sendtoscott
April 20, 2005, 02:31 PM
Maybe I should join HCI and try to buy a table at the next show to see people's reaction to "free speech". :)

junyo
April 20, 2005, 02:35 PM
One of the biggest problems I have with guns and gun culture, both for myself and for introducing new people to it, are the prevalence of Nazi and Confederate symbols at shows and on the people there. My girlfriend shoots, but refuses to go to anymore shows after one that was 30-40% Nazi crap. And i don't blame her. If you glory in the symbols of failed regimes that stood for nothing other than genocide and racism, why would you then wonder why people think you're a racist? There's "historical value" in the VietCong too, yet I rarely see tables covered in black pajamas and punji stake kits. There's a reason why in a sport/pastime/hobby that's -let's be real- is dominated by white males these are what interest people. And if there isn't, then somebody really needs to think about the perception. When you're trying to convince people that a perfectly normal person can buy and enjoy firearms, it's kinda hard when you're walking around a room of people that, judging from their wares, would gladly lynch you.
For your remedial education, there were black units, and even black officers who fought for the South in the War of Northern Aggression. There were even free black men who owned slaves. Naturally, this history is not taught by those that won that illegal war.
There were black units when the South was losing, and short of manpower, populated on the promise of freedom for those that served. There were French units in WWII, doesn't mean the French loved Nazis. It means people do what they need to to survive. Regular Confederate units usually massacred black Union units rather than take them prisoner. And it's funny how it's the "War of Northern Aggression" even though the South attacked first. They teach it in school. I was especially impressed by the part where almost the entire Confederate officer corp broke their oaths of allegiance to the country, based on defending the principle of not being told that they didn't have a right to own other people.
1. The war started in 1861. If the war was about ending slavery, WHY was the "emancipation prclamation" not issued until 1863? Why not immediatly proclaim itat the start of hostilities?Because Lincoln wanted to preserve the Union, and the South was fighting specifically for the right to mantain their trade in human beings. Since that was the Union's big bargaining chip, immediately ending that trade would've ended any hopes of reconciliation, and therefore been useless. More on that in a minute...

2. The famous "Emancipation Proclamation" was so worded that it freed only slaves in territories "in rebellion" that were under the control of the Union army - so essentially, it freed almost no one at the time it was issued. WHY was it wordedin such a way as to allow slavery to continue in Maryland, and other slave territory that DIDN'T seceed? After all, its about "ending slavery", right?It was worded so that it freed slaves in territories still under rebellion were freed:
"That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom."
It was again, specifically designed to pressure states back into the Union, by allowing them to retain their most valuable commodity; the free labor for their agricultural base made possible by the trade of human beings as cattle. A stae that hadn't participated in the rebellion, or that renounced it at that point would be allowed to retain their slaves. However, since only a handful of slave states had sided with the Union, the vast majority of slaves in the US were freed by the proclamtion; that the South continued to hold them as slaves was par for the course with initiating a war over the 'right' to buy and sell people.

3. Regale me again with how the newly freed black citizens were welcomed with open arms and re-settled in the North, with the same wages and housing opertunities as any other citizen... 'cause I seem to remember they were packed into ghettos and tenement slums, and if they could get work at all, it was at half the wage a similar white person drew for the same job...a condition which prevailed until World War II, except in the military, where blacks were denied proper promotions and awards, and kept in segregated units, until after the Korean war. Seems to me the North treated the freedmen just as shabily as they treated the Irish, Italians, Poles, etc.
So, if I understand this correctly, because there were racists in the North, blacks were actually better off as 2/3 human property in the South? Better to be a well cared for dinette set, than a poor human being... That's some powerful logic right there.

I say this as a gun owner, Nazi hater (A trip to the Holocaust Museum in DC is why I own guns), minority, former student at Robert E. Lee Elementary and A.P. Hill Middle schools, native of a state that celebrates Lee/Jackson/King Day because Virginia sees no irony in celebrating one of the great civil rights leaders alongside to people that would've valued him primarily for how much he could carry.

jefnvk
April 20, 2005, 03:14 PM
What can we do? Pressure gun show promoters to set conditions not to allowing the sales of such rubbish at gun shows. The Nazi/CSA advocates may have a right to display their ideology, but they have no right to rent space. Don't rent it to them. That's what we can do.

Bingo. That is what I have been saying needs to happen. Problem is, most promoters care about money. If a guy with Nazi stuff is willing to pay more than a guy with guns to sell, who are a lot of promoters going to go with?

There were French units in WWII, doesn't mean the French loved Nazis.

How many French fought for the Nazi's?

So, if I understand this correctly, because there were racists in the North, blacks were actually better off as 2/3 human property in the South? Better to be a well cared for dinette set, than a poor human being... That's some powerful logic right there.

The point was, that their conditions were no better in the North. They were no longer slaves by being tied as property to one person, but they sure wern't better off. They sure wern't freemen. I don't think you can consider them free until the 1960's or so. Many Northern whites didn't want them free, as they represented a cheap labor source that the whites could be replaced by.

The common stereotype is that the war was fought by the South simply to keep slaves, and that the North was fighting for their rights. That is why people are offended by the Confederate flag. What people should realize is that slaves wern't the top issue on either side, they were just another point that the states conflicted over.

And I'm not even Southern.

El Rojo
April 20, 2005, 03:27 PM
Let's give a test case - suppose at the gun show, someone had a table asking for legislation to legalize sex with children and sold t-shirts like that. Would the Nazis are OK folks be OK with that table?That is a poor analogy that really doesn't fit here. Being a Nazi is not currently illegal. Just because you are a not Nazi doesn't mean you seek to break the law and deprive others of their rights. Might they eventually do that? Sure, then they are criminals and will be treated as such.

Your child example does not work because having sex with children is already illegal. Even if they wanted to make it legal, it is a well-accepted concept that having sex with children is a biological and emotional bad idea. They are two completely different monsters.

Still that being said, if someone wanted to try and legalize having sex with children, that is technically their right too. As with the Nazis I would oppose this and I would vote and voice my opinion in opposition to them. I don't have to demonize them and try and crush their existence by force or coercion. You talk to people and you educate them. It works so much better than brute force. Now if people start going about killing people or having sex with children, that is a crime and lets use the full force of the law to punish them. However, we aren't talking about that. There is a fine difference between theory and practice, but there is a difference and we should recognize that.

If you truly want to make a difference, talk to your middle of the road friends and take people shooting. Show them by example that these Nazis and child sexers are not your stereotypical shooters. Teach them that the best way to handle these demons is through lack of attention and letting them have their pitiful existence and not by getting all fired up and getting all outraged about it. If people think differently than me, I don't get upset and start huffing and puffing about how horrible they are. I recognize their right to be stupid and I counter that with my own arguments and actions. I think knee-jerk reactionarism is more despicable than Nazism or a possible attempt to legalize child sex. People need to toughen up and quit being so sensitive. People are allowed to have opposite opinions from yours or even society.

If I were a gun show promoter, I probably wouldn't sell them a table. A simple, "I don't believe in your cause and I won't help you promote it. Sorry." If you really want to make a difference, talk to your show promoters and try to convince them of the same thing. If they don't want to listen to you, then stop going to their shows and tell your friends to do the same. Good luck and I hope you achieve your goals. Me personally, I don't care and I don't pay attention to those guys or gals. If they tried to interact with me at a show, I would tell them don't bother and I don't agree with them and move on. Giving them all of this attention just feeds their appetite and gives them the publicity they want. No thanks.

Blackburn
April 20, 2005, 03:50 PM
, because there were racists in the North, blacks were actually better off as 2/3 human property in the South? Better to be a well cared for dinette set, than a poor human being... That's some powerful logic right there.


Don't try using logic, people who talk about "the war of northern aggression" and claim that slaves were better off as slaves than freedmen aren't really that well equipped and you know what they say about disparity of force.

Boats
April 20, 2005, 03:54 PM
I do so wish that the Southerners would get off their high horses about the Confederate Battle Flag.

That flag is not controversial because of its design, or that it was a standard waved in the Civil War by the losers, it is what became of that symbol later that has it in the sights of those who'd see it cashiered.

It is amazing that people here willfully will not look at the common linkage between the Confederate Flag and the Swastika. Before its misappropriation by the Nazis, the swastika was a rather innoccuous symbol, appearing as the Hindu symbol for peace, the insignia of the Finnish Air Force, and represented in some architecture in many parts of the world. Now it is toxic. Why would that be? Could it be a racist extermination campaign conducted by the flag bearers? BTW, the Japanese "Rising Sun" flag suffers from a measure of the same oppobrium, but white racists can't adopt that one.

But boy howdy, those white racists, from the originals in the Deep South to the newly minted ones as far north and west as Idaho, sure adopted the Confederate Battle Flag as their own for well over a century and a quarter by now. The battle flag was misappropriated and twisted into something quite distant from where it began, and it was wholly corrupted by native sons in the beginning. It was pressed into duty as one of the greatest public props of the KKK, (along with the flaming cross) and neo-Nazis respect the Confederate Battle Flag to this day. Racists stemming from either camp have loaded down their respective symbols with such a tonnage of historical baggage that they will never emerge from beneath it to become socially acceptable again.

It is not PC run amok, it is basic human distaste for the obliviousness of the full import that lay behind promoting the swastika or the Confederate Battle Flag.

In fact, I think the proponents of the battle flag are worse that the clueless Nazis. At least the Nazis acknowledge that their swastika stands for many things, some of them darker than the deepest pits of Hell. The unreconstructed Rebels are an order of magnitude worse because they know the flag is freighted by its use and misuse throughout its history by the Klan and others, but they refuse to acknowledge a problem with that.

El Rojo
April 20, 2005, 04:33 PM
Boats, I think your analysis is interesting and I agree with parts of it, but my main question is why does it matter? Who cares if someone wants to fly a Nazi flag or a Confederate flag? I don't care why they fly, I don't care the history behind it, I simply do not care. I don't care because I am apathetic or I would engage in that behavior myself. I don't care because flying their flag should have no effect on me. Flying their flag should not irk or ire me or anyone else for that matter. I do care that we are trying to demonize people and tell them they should or shouldn't do something because it might offend me or someone else. TOUGHEN UP! If Jim Bob down the street wants to fly his flag and claim it is for the spirit of Dixie, let em. I don't care either way.

Rotorflyr
April 20, 2005, 04:39 PM
Well Said Boats, Well Said!

As to the original intent of this thread, if the stuff being sold is true WWII material, not stricly catering to the Nazi party and not new/neo hate monger crap, I see no harm in it being sold. I personaly wouldn't buy much of it, other then a Luger or other firearm from the Nazi regime, but would luv to find a "Samurai" sword in good that was actually carried by a Japanese officer during WWII (as a true Samurai sword would cost waaay more then I could ever afford)

gunsmith
April 20, 2005, 05:01 PM
weeks after surviving the beach at Normandy,his last letter to home he was saying how he wanted to kill some "krauts" very politically incorrect by todays standards.
Mom could get offened by hogans heros tv show and and anything nazi or even german, who could blame her?
Nazi's killed alot of people and some people will have a reaction to seeing that stuff,it's only natural.
I plan on buying a k98 they seem like decent rifles at a decent price,my mom cant tell the difference between a k98 or an ar15.

junyo
April 20, 2005, 05:02 PM
How many French fought for the Nazi's? At least 7,000: research the Waffen SS Charlemange Brigade. I didn't proofread my initial statement adequately. I meant to say "There were French units in WWII that fought for the Germans..." These weren't conscripts either, they were French volunteers.
The point was, that their conditions were no better in the North. Except for the whole 'not legally being considered property' thing?
What people should realize is that slaves wern't the top issue on either side, they were just another point that the states conflicted over.What Confederate apologists should realize is, their revisionist history aside, slavery was darn near the only issue. Almost every individual problem had slavery as a common root cause. Northerners opposed allowing additional slaves states into the Union for various reasons; mainly economic, because they didn't want to compete with more free (slave) labor. The South was fearful of Lincoln because they thought he was an abolitionist, and the would immediately take away the free labor upon which their economy depended. Economically, culturally and politically all threads led back to the fact that Southern states didn't want the institution of the trade in human beings threatened. 'States rights' only became an issue (read 'excuse') when it justified their secession.I don't care because flying their flag should have no effect on me. Part of living in society is realizing that all actions have some effect outside ourselves. My yard is my yard, but to leave the grass uncut and have junked cars in the yard while not physically damaging anyone else's property lowers the appeal, and therefore the value of my neighbors property. A couple such houses and it's a slum. Do I have a right to keep my yard however I chose? Sure do. Is it something a nice person would do? Not really. A single booth with Nazi paraphenalia shows tolerance to other viewpoints; a significant percentage of the booths shows a pasttime full of Nazi sympathizers, which would make a reasonable person wonder whether or not someone who engages in that pasttme is such a sympathizer. Therefore the reputation of all participants are damaged slightly.

R.H. Lee
April 20, 2005, 05:03 PM
Boats, I think you infer many things that are not implied. And El Tejon, by all means, let's abolish and erase anything that could possibly be offensive to anyone, now or in the future. Personal liberties be damned. We just can't afford to offend anyone, they might decide to take away our guns. :rolleyes: :barf:

bad LT
April 20, 2005, 05:13 PM
How to piss off a nazi:

1: Make friends with black/latino/asian/etc. people (like me)
2: Take them shooting
3: Help them buy their own guns
4: Go with them to a gun show

No one will burn a cross in their lawns.
Edited to add
5: Buy a Garand - a proven nazi stoper

richyoung
April 20, 2005, 05:24 PM
"There were black units when the South was losing, and short of manpower, populated on the promise of freedom for those that served."

True,...but not the WHOLE truth. Black officers (OFFICERS, got that?) served throughout the duration.

"There were French units in WWII, doesn't mean the French loved Nazis."

Yes - it does.

" And it's funny how it's the "War of Northern Aggression" even though the South attacked first."

The south attacked a part of it's own soil that the North refused to vacate after the southern states exercised ther reserved and legal right to leave the Union. The North was determined to keep them against their wishes - so whose the slave?


"I was especially impressed by the part where almost the entire Confederate officer corp broke their oaths of allegiance to the country, based on defending the principle of not being told that they didn't have a right to own other people."

Must not have taught it very well, if that's the version you believe. The Conferate officers considered themselves citizens of their state first, (as did most Notherners), with the federal government dealing only in matters of defense, foriegn affairs, border and immigration enforcement, and the postal system. See, back then it was "THESE United States", not "THE United States". The criminal Lincoln, inbetwixt suspending habeous corpus, wiping his bum with the Constitution, and commiting war crimes against the former states, brought us the over-reaching Federal government we have now, to our misfortune.

El Rojo
April 20, 2005, 05:36 PM
So move or don't go to the gun show. If you aren't at the Nazi table, I won't see you as a Nazi. If the anti's or someone in the middle thinks you are a Nazi because you own guns, how are you going to change their opinion? Opress the Nazis?

The good point you make is that considerate people wouldn't put other people in those positions. However, not everyone is a good and considerate person. How do you make them decent people? Legislate them or force them? It won't ever work. Education is the key. Talk to people. Take them shooting. You need to work on changing the undecided or weak minds, not the knucklehead Nazis.

Control Group
April 20, 2005, 05:38 PM
the southern states exercised ther reserved and legal right to leave the Union
At the risk of sounding combative in the pursuit of information, is/was this right specifically reserved to the states, or was its legality based on the 10th? I'm guessing the latter, since my reading of Article IV doesn't lead me to believe that it's codified therein (though I'm no Constitutional expert, so I may be missing something). I have not, however, read the various state constitutions involved, which may (as far as I know) have specifically reserved the right to secede.

Note that I'm not arguing that the states didn't (or did, for that matter) have the right to secede, I'm just collecting information. I'm a modern-day northerner, and cognizant of the fact that I may have an incomplete view of the facts.

Boats
April 20, 2005, 05:40 PM
I am not advocating the limitation of expression. Goose step in the park--paint a Confederate battle flag on the roof of your car for all I care.

Just don't serve me up a load of crap about how it is all about innocent curiousity or pride in one's heritage. It just might be partly about those things, but certainly not only about the parts of that heritage that make one feel all warm and fuzzy about Nazis or Johnny Reb. It can't be helped that rational people still see the blood soaked into those flags by guys who thought it macho to shoot women and children into freshly dug ditches or hang black men from trees amidst the safety of a white hooded mob.

EVIL5LITER
April 20, 2005, 05:42 PM
A few more points a few people apparently missed:

1)The Civil War was SOOOOO much about slavery that General Robert E. Lee, a man whose own moral beliefs forbade him from owning slaves, TURNED DOWN the chance to lead the Union Army, and instead decided to lead the army of Northern Virginia and protect his homeland.

2)Lincoln freed no more slaves than I did. The emancipation proclimation freed slaves in rebelling states. Now, unless you don't know what an oxymoron is, you cannot free a slave in a rebelling state. It's rebelling. It does not listen to you nor do you hold any power over it.

3)Slaves were darn near the whole issue, except for that whole States' rights thing. Oh yeah, and the economic thing too. Oh yeah, and the importation thing. And the tariffs. And the....

Boats
April 20, 2005, 05:45 PM
Yep, the War of Northern Aggression on the Pastoral Paradise of the Plantation South, was about everything but slavery. :rolleyes:

EVIL5LITER
April 20, 2005, 05:47 PM
Oh, and since the CSA Battle Flag is the symbol of the KKK, why is this the very first image that pops up on their website?

http://www.kkk.bz/Blue_star-eagle.gif

Sure doesn't look like any battle flag for the CSA that I've ever seen.

In fact, when I look all over their site, I see American flags, not CSA battle flags. I wonder why that is?

Well, you know what that means. It means we have to get rid of the American Flag, because racists want to use it as a symbol of hatred.

I'll be waiting for you to start burning your flags, Boats and Junyo.

Boats
April 20, 2005, 05:55 PM
Are you really trying to deny the battle flag has been, and is still, used by the Klan and that they might just be attempting a make-over with Old Glory?

Just go to great grandaddy's trunk and look for the shoulder patch:

http://www.kkklan.com/novelty57.gif

KKK+Stars & Stripes=Nonsense started in the 1920s. Your move. I anticipate a "but all of the official pictures feature the stars and stripes," defense. It will be inconvenient for me that photography in general and at night in particular were not really decent technologies in the 1870s or at Stone Mountain, GA at particular rallies before the effort to take the Klan nationwide in the 1920s.

Anyways, seems that the Klan just couldn't let go.
http://www.bartcop.com/jpg/kkkgram.jpg
http://www.alligator.org/edit/issues/00-spring/000124/klan24-1.jpg

Nehemiah Scudder
April 20, 2005, 06:06 PM
Sheesh still fighting over the Civil War?

Ponder this...

If we hadn't "consolidated" we'd be more akin to the European Union, and would've never achieved "superpower" status. Or rather, certain states would be minor "superpowers".

Nitram68
April 20, 2005, 06:23 PM
The only thing that really bothered me while at a gun show is some beef jerky a guy was selling. It had been marinated in red chili sauce and was very, very hot to eat... which wasn't the problem. Problem was the 2 days of runs it gave me :cuss:

Hkmp5sd
April 20, 2005, 06:44 PM
I may be too laid back, but I believe that anyone selling legal items that in no way cause me physical harm, should be allowed to sell their items at a gun show. I'm more concerned with the guys selling books on how to convert guns to full auto along with parts kits to do it, while not telling the buyer that he is about to do something illegal.

Just because you have a personal dislike for some objects doesn't mean you should have the right to deny those items to someone that does like them. You are doing the very thing you curse the anti-gun groups for doing. Antis don't like guns and instead of merely not owning guns themselves, they attempt to force their beliefs on you by preventing you from acquiring firearms. Now you have found something you don't like and are attempting to force your beliefs on others by preventing them from buying the object of your hatred.

EVIL5LITER
April 20, 2005, 06:44 PM
Ah, how ignorance blinds the coherent thought process.

My great great Grandfather did fight in the civil war. However, he fought for the Union.

I am Southern only by the grace of my birth state. My ancestors are all from Kansas and the North East, going all the way back to my first ancestors arriving here in 1618. I had many that fought in the Revolutionary War as well, but geneology is an entirely different topic.

Education is a wonderful thing though. You should try and get one, rather than believing propaganda that is fed to you with a spoon.

Boats
April 20, 2005, 06:54 PM
In your grand education you must have majored in Issue Ducking. :p

junyo
April 20, 2005, 07:03 PM
The Conferate officers considered themselves citizens of their state first, (as did most Notherners), with the federal government dealing only in matters of defense, foriegn affairs, border and immigration enforcement, and the postal system. Regardless of what they considered themsleves, any officer that had served in the US Army had taken an oath "to bear true faith and allegiance to the United States of America" - Not his state, his city or his neighborhood. It only became "to support the Constitution" in 1862, as the government wondered (and justifiably so considering the number of officers that had commited treason) about the loyalty of the remaining officers, and decided to get real specific.

The Civil War was SOOOOO much about slavery that General Robert E. Lee, a man whose own moral beliefs forbade him from owning slaves, TURNED DOWN the chance to lead the Union Army, and instead decided to lead the army of Northern Virginia and protect his homeland. And that proves what, precisely? There are a lot of people that say 'my <insert cause here> right or wrong'. Because Lee didn't believe in slavery doesn't mean that he wouldn't/didn't fight to preserve it, anymore than the fact that I, detesting Nazis, wouldn't fight to preserve their rights.
Lincoln freed no more slaves than I did. The emancipation proclimation freed slaves in rebelling states. Now, unless you don't know what an oxymoron is, you cannot free a slave in a rebelling state. It's rebelling. It does not listen to you nor do you hold any power over it.Again, the fact that the law was ignored means nothing. Just because a robber is holding you hostage in a store doesn't mean that laws passed in the larger world outside don't exist because the police don't have the ability to enforce them in that area at that exact moment.Slaves were darn near the whole issue, except for that whole States' rights thing.And the main right that the southern states wanted was the right to buy and sell people. What other 'right' was the south concerned about? Legalized gambling? Road construction? Abortion? What other right did they want? If they were so concerned about states rights how come the Confederate Constitution included no provision for legal secession (yet it contained explicit protection of the institution of slavery), and actually gave the national government more power than the US government had at the time?
I'll be waiting for you to start burning your flags, Boats and Junyo. You'll be waiting a long time. Just because someone wraps themselves in an American flag doesn't mean that they represent everything what that flag stands for. However, the people defending the CSA here are attempting to justify what it stood for. We've heard that slavery wasn't so bad, and that Lincoln was a criminal, and you've pointed out that Robert E. Lee didn't own slaves. None of that, not one point of it, changes the fact that the CSA was built, at it's core, on treating people as property. And all of the justifications just show that people support that. There is a fundamental difference between someone appropriating a symbol unjustly, like a racist who claims to love America (except for the brown, yellow, and red parts) and 'proves' it by waving a flag, and a person who furiously defends the core principles of the entity that a flag symbolizes.
So move or don't go to the gun show.
And now, these people have been allowed to dictate my actions, and very possibly cost me money. Which makes the "have no effect on me" thing moot.

I'm not talking about banning Nazis, and wouldn't be in favor of it. I'm saying they're not there handing out "How to be a Nazi" flyers. They're there because business is good. That says something. I'd like to believe that it doesn't say anything bad (...but apparently, I would've been better off as a asset on a plantation than as a free citizen, so what do I know?) If nobody was buying from them they'd stop showing up. Obviously people want what they sell, and for good or ill that reflect on all of us.

AZLibertarian
April 20, 2005, 07:20 PM
Wow. There's lots going on here. Nazi's, KKK, Civil War and other hot buttons. Here's my 2 cents...

The initial question here was whether having Nazi stuff for sale at a gun show might be counter-productive to getting any anti's or fence-sitters to think better of us. The answer to that is obvious: Of course this stuff detracts from the message most of us want to send. [On a side note, someone who gets "visibly upset" at seeing this stuff probably has more issues than we care to get into.] However, the next question also needs to be asked: Are there other items for sale at this gun show which also might provoke a similar response? AKs? 50cals? Ninja knives? Carbon-fiber tactical this-n-that? How-to-make-something-sinister books? I think once we open ourselves up to limiting what gets sold because someone takes serious offense to what it represents, we might not like where that takes us.

Now--with all that said--those that sell Nazi stuff get no business of mine, regardless of what else they may have for sale. I don't care if it is real or reproduction. The past and modern Nazis represent things I want no part of. I am not so offended over this that I would approach a promoter to tell him not to rent to these guys, but do understand that others might do so. However, I do hope that the folks who sell these items go slowly bankrupt in their effort. barbaric[/I] in WWII, and the idea that someone might want to own a Samurai sword which was likely used to behead an American POW is just beyond me.] I agree with bad LT--If I was after something historical, I'd [B]much rather buy a Garand (or better yet, a BAR :p ).

I do see a difference with Civil War items however (but own none--nor do I want to). While I agree that the South was too dependant on slavery, I also think they had a point about defending States' Rights. One of the benefits of winning a war is that you get to write the history books. It is interesting that the idea that States seceeding from the mother country is celebrated when talking about our Revolutionary War, yet reviled when talking about our Civil War. One is free to believe that the Civil War was only about slavery, just as another is free to believe that the South was defending the Constitution as it was written.

Not to further hijack this thread, but I also see parallels between the debate over the morality of slavery in the early 1800s and the strength of opinion on abortion today.

GD
April 20, 2005, 07:34 PM
I have as a friend a WW2 Luftwaffe pilot with over 60 kills. Four of those were American pilots. The rest were Soviet. He is now an American citizen. He is as much of the history of WW2 and the other relics you see at gunshows. I collect some of those relics. It does not mean that I support Nazi idelologies. The material simply reminds me of the sacrifices that were made on all sides by men like my friend. I am sick of the politically correct idiots out there who demand that certain items simply shouldn't be collected (ebay among the idiots). I have set up in a room in my basement, the flags, uniforms, rifles, and other militaria of the major countries of WW2 line its walls. It honors the simple soldier who fought, not for ideology, but for their fellow soldier and countrymen.
The same goes for the criticism of those who collect Confederate militaria.

jsalcedo
April 20, 2005, 07:48 PM
Political correctness and the ease in which folks are offended have increased
a hundred-fold from just 30 years ago.

A friend and co-worker showed me a lamp his parents had bought in the late
30's with a shade made of human skin tatoo and all.

I was apalled to say the least but according to his mom and dad those german lamp shades were all the rage at one time.

Lots of folks brought home human skulls, ears photos of mutilated bodies
as souveniers and trophies.

Boy have things changed......

I'm not super concerned about confederate or nazi crap because it at least serves one purpose, to remind some people of what happened back then and by whom.

El Rojo
April 20, 2005, 08:06 PM
And now, these people have been allowed to dictate my actions, and very possibly cost me money. Which makes the "have no effect on me" thing moot.No, you need to accept responsibility for your own actions. If you can't handle seeing a Nazi or going to a gun show where a Nazi might be, that is your problem. If you chose to do something about these Nazis, then you accept the responsibilities of your actions. If you boycott the gun show, that is the action your chose to do in order to stand up for your beliefs. You are not a victim, you choose to stand up for what you believe in. You choose to spend more money elsewhere in order to send a message to the show promoter that you are not a Nazi fan. I respect that, but I don't respect you trying to play this off on the Nazis or acting like a victim. You dictate your actions and you only.

I guess that is my main problem with this whole arrogant "I hate the Nazis and they need to change" argument. Who are you to tell them what or what not to do? Why do they have to alter their lifestyle or beliefs for you? Again, get some thick skin and deal with it. If you want to do something about it, then do something about it, but accept the responsibility and be honorable about it. When it comes time to fight for something, accept your responsiblity and understand you might have to make sacrifices. However, by definition a sacrifice is "forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to have a greater value or claim". If you hate Nazis enough, you won't mind spending more money somewhere else. If you don't hate them enough, go to your gun show and accept that you aren't as dedicated as you thought you were. Or maybe you are like me and just don't care about them. That is up to you.

If nobody was buying from them they'd stop showing up.Not true. They aren't there just to sell and run a business, if that were all, then this wouldn't be an issue. Afterall, they would just be businessmen/women who were out to make a living. I wouldn't sell Nazi and Confederate merchandise for a mere profit, I would be trying to recruit people and spread my message. Is it possible that there might be a few entrepreneurs out there who are just making a quick, dirty buck? Yes. More likely though, these people are fishing. They don't have to catch a lot of fish, just a few. So you set up at a gun show, sell a few things here and there, but make a couple contacts or more out of the thousands of people that show up. Maybe the day is productive and you get a couple dozen, whatever. Don't mistake these guys for complete fools. They are trying to recruit fresh blood and a way to do that is run a booth at a gun show.

Part of me is having a senior moment, but I think I ran into some skinheads handing out phamplets at a Fairplex (PRK) Great Western Show once (I would have been about 20 or 21 at the time). I took one of the flyers not knowing what it was, then when I saw what it was I am pretty sure I went back to the guy and told him, "I don't want this and I am not interested." I think I did that and I remember feeling pretty good about it. He was polite and not confrontational and I think they realize they are not necessarily in friendly territory even though they are at a gun show. I do remember feeling sort of dirty and not wanting to be associated with him and I was a little offended he thought I might be one of their kind. However, I didn't go off on him and I made my statement clear by returning the phamplet to him immediately in a polite, but firm manner. I am sure I wasn't the only one who gave him an unwelcome feeling. What I like most about my actions is it pretty much showed him he wasn't even worth my time to argue or get upset over. I think if you just shun them you show them the most imprortant thing, they are worthless and not worth your time. When you try to dictate their actions and control them, they realize they are fighting the good fight and that is worth their while. Just my two cents.

Mannlicher
April 20, 2005, 08:17 PM
All the pontificating, and negative pseudo intellectual posturing about the South by non Southerners, sure won't change any minds down here. We know we were right then, and we are right now. I would be willing to bet that most of the anti South rhetoric comes from folks who's families were not living in America at the time.
If you ask me, the yankees made a dogs breakfast out of America, the Constitution, and our formerly wonderful culture.

El Rojo
April 20, 2005, 08:40 PM
See! We can't change their minds so we should crush them! If we don't wipe the Southerners and Nazis from the face of the planet, anti-semitism and slavery will soon be the norm again! Lets outlaw them and their way of life. Penalty for violation is death! Here, here!

I live in the PRK, so where does this put me in the battle? :banghead: WAIT! I know which side I am on. Not the north, not the south, THE LEFT!!! Yes, we are our own entity and we will fight for the LEFT! Long live the LEFT! :lowers head in shame:

Bacon
April 20, 2005, 08:51 PM
Mannlicher,
You are too kind in your sentiments towards the north. I would have put it in stronger terms. That's why I've refrained from posting till now. What I can't help but notice is the "Self Determination" rant when the US gets involved internationally. Yet self determination was completely ignored in regards to the South. Hypocracy anyone?

DorGunR
April 20, 2005, 08:56 PM
And lets not stop with gun shows...........lets have all the libraries burn all their copies of Mein Kampf :rolleyes:

I DO NOT support any of the Nazi ideals, but I would certainly love to own some WWll Nazi stuff. .

R.H. Lee
April 20, 2005, 09:27 PM
Long live the LEFT! Viva la izquerdia! Arriba la izquerdia!
(Did I spell izquerdia correctly?)

Gung-Ho
April 20, 2005, 09:38 PM
I am shocked and disgusted by the Nazi and Confederate stuff

Let me guess....the War Of Northern Aggression was about slavery right? :rolleyes: BTW, I carry a 5 reichsmark Nazi coin in my pocket that my dad took off a German back in '44. He gave it to me right before he died...does that make me a Nazi?

cuchulainn
April 20, 2005, 10:05 PM
Both sides here are filtering the facts to fit preconceptions.

To the pro-Confederates: You are ignoring the fact that the Battle Flag has become a racist symbol no matter its beginning. Whether the South was right or wrong is beside the point because the flag's transformation occurred after the war. The South could have been 100% correct, but the flag nonetheless was usurped by racist murderers. You cannot dismiss that the Battle Flag has that horrible power. Fly the flag. Love the flag. But don't lie to yourselves about what it has become (in part) and what you are telling some people by flying it (whether you mean to or not).

To the anti-Confederates: Equating Nazi symbols and Confederate symbols is legitimate only at a primary level. Yes, both stand for regimes that committed horrible wrongs against entire peoples -- but so does Old Glory (just ask the Indians) or the Union Jack (just ask the Irish). Moreover, the Battle Flag (whether you like it or not) is not a racist symbol for tens of millions of people. That cannot be said of Nazi symbols -- Nazi symbols are not conflicted. Spit on the Battle Flag. Hate the flag. But don't lie to yourselves that it means nothing but racism.

I do see both sides here. I love Old Glory despite its links to genocide. I tolerate the Union Jack despite there being a part of my Irish blood that looks upon it like a black man looks upon the Battle Flag or a Jew looks upon the Swastika.

And, yes, I understand the difference between Old Glory/Union Jack versus the Battle Flag. Old Glory and the Union Jack flew long after the the USA and the UK transcended their racist and genocidal pasts. Had the South won, maybe the Battle Flag would have transcended its link to slavery and become acceptible. But the South lost, and its Battle Flag was usurped by racists. Heck, I suppose that in some alternative universe, the Nazi flag might have transcended its link to genocide had the Third Reich truly lasted a thousand years. But the Third Reich lost, and its flag fell onto the trash heap of history.

But what do we do with the flag of South Africa with its links to Apartheid? Should it be allowed to keep flying, like that flag of genocide, Old Glory? Should it be allowed to move beyond its racist past, like Old Glory? Or should it be thrown on the trash heap of history?

Titus
April 20, 2005, 10:22 PM
I guess that is my main problem with this whole arrogant "I hate the Nazis and they need to change" argument. Who are you to tell them what or what not to do?

In the words of Jesse Ventura, "We won." All these people who are so upset that the United States won the Civil War and WWII should feel free to go where ever it is they think is better.

GRB
April 20, 2005, 11:05 PM
The Civil War is over, or so it would appear to me. So why people want to keep it up is absolutely fragglin ridiculous when we have real enemies to worry about. Whether or not it was a legitimate war, a legal or illegal war, fought to free the slaves or not - it really is over. One side lost badly, the other side won well. So what IT IS OVER!

Grow up - give it up - go on with life and look for your real enemies. They are not other law abiding and loyal US Citizens; they are the rotten filth of the earth who come here (or who develop within our own borders) to destroy us or convert us (and even if they convert us they will wind up destroying anything we once had, were or stood for). Some of you guys argue with one another like little sissies, or little brats. My flag is better than your flag. Get a life, right now this country honors one flag, the Stars and Stripes and, not exactly those same stars and stripes of the Confederacy or of the Union. The flag has grown over the years, take a look at it.

The thing is, if you look at our flag you may remember why it is patterned like it is. The 13 stripes representing the original colonies (both in the north and south) and, the 50 stars in the blue field representing the current 50 states as together under a single union (and it was fashioned this way long before the Civil War). We are not, or at least should not be one another's enemies along lines of North/South. We have enough to worry about with those who want to corrupt our morals, drug our children, infiltrate our borders, convert us, and kill us. It likely is coming again you know, another 9/11 or another Oklahoma City. So why not unite and be ready. Weed out the filth. These types hope for our division, they use it against us.

You, of course, can say whatever you want outside of fighting words and such is your constitutional right. So I will say mine too: How dare you defile America with such trivial nonsense when we have real enemies to face. You folks who want to keep up the hostilities of the Civil War, your attitude is, in my opinion, extremely despicable.

Unite under one flag - unite as loyal Americans, do something for your country instead of trying to divide her all over again.

Sincerely,
Glenn B

El Rojo
April 20, 2005, 11:10 PM
All these people who are so upset that the United States won the Civil War and WWII should feel free to go where ever it is they think is better.So when we won, dissent and freedom lost with it? We can no longer be a society that recognizes freedom and liberty and that people don't have to agree with you? The answer can't be to try and reform the system to your liking, but must be to move because we are a intolerable society who resists any kind of opinions other than our own?

That is a moniker that I don't particularly care for. "If you don't like the United States, then leave." That is not how the United States was founded. It is a representative government, so if I don't like how things are run, I don't have to leave, I can try and change it. And that pretty much sums up the whole process. Many sides (or two if you want) all thinking they are correct and all attempting to change the system to what they think is best. That is what makes America great. That is what distinguished us from the dictatorships and socialist states that have failed. We have a choice. We can choose to move too if we want, which the people in these totalitarian states never had a choice to do. But I don't have to move. I can fight for my cause and I can try and affect change.

So if I am a Nazi, a Republican, a Democrat, or a NAMBLA fan, I don't have to leave! I can try and reform the system and try and make this country reflect my values. It is apparant some of you disagree with our representative, republic that stresses majority rule with minority rights. You think it should be your way or the highway. Who really should be leaving this country? Not me, I will do what I think is right and I will vote, talk, and write my opinions to try and influence others. You can try and shut me up by demonizing me and crying that I am offending you, but thankfully it won't work. What you really should be doing is talking and influencing your friends and making sure that the rest of the country chooses not to agree with me and that you have a larger influence with our representatives than I do. But that would mean we have free choice and liberty and you don't want that.

Those that choose security over freedom deserve neither.

NevadaPistolero
April 20, 2005, 11:17 PM
Help me momma...the nazis and the confederates are coming to get me......dont try to start telling other people what they can collect or what they have to hate or love. Mind your damn bussiness and stay out of other peoples bussiness before it comes back and bites you right in the ass. Its called freedom....many men died so we could all have it not just a few cry babies. if that kind of collectable bothers you that much I sure wouldnt go to any more gun shows.....and who gives a ???? what the antis think...one of their standard bearers was a KKK leader...get the point.

Titus
April 20, 2005, 11:32 PM
Yeah, let's not upset the Nazi sympathizers. People who do that are what's really wrong with this country. :rolleyes: Hey, maybe they can start selling bin Laden and Al Zarqawi t-shirts too. Then they can be all offended that people are getting offended, cause they got their First Amendment rights, that the people who are exercising their First Amendment rights, telling them what they think of them are stepping on...

The Axis didn't get what it had coming by the United States being all sensitive. How about rooting for our side for a change?

one45auto
April 20, 2005, 11:39 PM
I am shocked and disgusted by the Nazi and Confederate stuff...

Nothing evil or dishonorable about the Confederacy. Let's leave the revisionism to liberals and High School textbook writers, shall we?

Feanaro
April 20, 2005, 11:53 PM
Authentic and reproduction Nazi items don't bother me in the least. Collecting such items doesn't show any love for Nazis, I certainly don't support Nazi, or Neo-Nazi, philosophy. But they are an interesting, if ultimately evil, group of people that achieved greatness for a time. Not great as in morally good but "remarkable or outstanding in magnitude, degree, or extent. Of outstanding significance or importance." Nazi symbols are part of the history of our species, dark as it may be. But the worse evil would be to forgot, to bury it away as if it never happened. Modern Nazi literature can be defended to some extent. I have some of Marx works lying around here somewhere. Not because I agree with his ideas but because I don't. "Know Thy Enemy." Nazi knives(again excepting the real thing and replicas) and the like is another story. Such items do not inform or expand knowledge nor do they have any historical value. There are reasons, I'm sure, for non-Nazis to own them but in general they show an affinity for Nazi philosophy rather than history. I would prefer that shows not rent space to such people.

As for the Confederate battle flag... being a Southerner I have mixed feelings. On the one hand the flag is tainted by popular perception and historical reality. But what about Old Glory? Slavery in Northern States was not addressed by the Emancipation Proclamation, only the 13th Amendment stopped that(mostly. Slavery as punishment for a crime was still legal). And slavery was an institution under that flag before the Confederacy was even a twinkle in Jefferson Davis' eye. Plus genocide(pesky In'juns were sitting on our land) and large amounts of racism(The Irish, Scottish, Polish etc). That flag saw better times but so might the Battle Flag had it been given time. Still, it was used by by large numbers of racist groups, as well as other morons. But so was Old Glory.

"Enough wafflin'!" I hear you cry, "pick a side." Oh, very well. Would I drive down the road with a large Swastika or Confederate flag(any incarnation) slapped on my car? No. Besides the popular perception(for better or worse), it implies(thought not affirms) support for the ideas behind those groups, not simply the history. Some of the ideas behind Nazism and the Confederacy are disgusting. Having such icons on historical pieces is another matter.

GRB
April 20, 2005, 11:55 PM
So if I am a Nazi, a Republican, a Democrat, or a NAMBLA fan, I don't have to leave! I can try and reform the system and try and make this country reflect my values. It is apparant some of you disagree with our representative, republic that stresses majority rule with minority rights. If you want to be a fan of any of these feel free, but the constitution does not give you freedom to commit acts of violence against other races as - so I guess you are a no more than a fan of the nazis! Are you also a fan of NAMBLA, or do you really get into sexually abusing male children? There is neither any constitutional right to sexually molest children.
I hope neither is truly the case - I don't believe it really is the case and am quite hopeful you use these only as examples.


I am an American Citizen. I am moral to some fairly high degree. I live my life in those ways as opposed to whinning about how someone from NAMBLA should have his say. I se eyour point, but truly think it was poorly made. I actually protect his right to say it but, not to do it, because there is no such right. He can have his say but not his way, not legally. You are probably an American citizen too. My bet is you vote, you support morality in some form, and you do not believe entire races or religious groups should be annihalted to promote a new world order, nor do you likely believe that young boys are ripe for the sexual picking by older men. So why use such lame stuff in your argument. America is made great by they who do good things, not evil even thoug it is also made great by allowing the evil to speak their minds. Then again, remember this: Of course you can say what you like as an American citizen but, so can the guy who tells you to leave if you do not like it here.

On the other hand if you put certain stuff into practice, I do think you (meaning you generically) should be jailed if you practice the Nazism of Hitler or live the life of a perverted child molester. Then after some time in jail you should leave but, in a box. No you don't have to leave America for having opposing viewpoints but, just as you write about nazis and NAMBLA and how someone should not write telling you to leave America, the other guy too can whine about wanting you to leave. Isn't it wonderful.

Of course all that wonderfulness leads to heated discussion and such things get said: In the words of Jesse Ventura, "We won." All these people who are so upset that the United States won the Civil War and WWII should feel free to go where ever it is they think is better. I find the above quote also to be pretty ludicrous in its own right. I do not agree with anyone who says you should leave for having differing opinions. That is not the America I have known, nor is it the one written up in our constitution, nor is it the one in which our children should be raised. These are not the days of the Salem Witch Hunts, the Nazi Book burnrings, or of the Spanish or Italian Inquisitions.

As I see it, the whole thing is absolutely preposterous (from both opposing viewpoints) when we have real enemies to think about - Americans who would unconstitutionally strip others of their rights, Nazis who practice hate crimes and, NAMBLA members who practice sex crimes included along with terrorists as I see it.

Oh well, I said my piece, not much more to add because if you guys cannot see who is the real enemy, well - I am afraid I have to go to prepare to fight even harder because while you guys are whacking each other I'll be fighting the real enemies of the USA and I don't believe that to be each other here at The High Road.

Sincerely,
GlennB

El Rojo
April 21, 2005, 12:01 AM
How about rooting for our side for a change?That is the problem, what is our side? Is it what you say or what I say? Who says what our side is? Sure in World War II we had a side. The United States of America vs. Germany. That was pretty clear cut, just like any of the wars we had. We aren't talking about a war though. We are talking about the inherent freedom and liberty present in this country which means people can say and do what they want as long as they consider other people's rights. That is rights, not feelings.

So whose side is who on when we talk about Nazis in America or freedom loving Southerners? Just because a country that we fought in the past subscribed to some of the ideals held by our own citizens, does that make our own citizens our enemies? If they aid the other side physically then yes, they are our enemies. If they follow our laws and try and influence other people through freedom of speech and expression, that is not being an enemy, that is expressing your opinion. I don't like liberals and I don't like their ideas of appeasement and fourth chances. However, that is their right to think that and it is my job to counter that with my own opinions. That doesn't make them my enemy who I should silence and destroy. I just have to be more influential with my fellow countrymen.

When are you people going to figure this out?

Glenn,

We are on the same side. You summed up pretty much what I said to a T. I meant to use the most dispicable and horrible excuses for human existance and state they have a right to express their opinions. You are 100% correct, I can think it is ok to be NAMBLA, but current law states I cannot be NAMBLA. So my job is not to rape boys, but to try and lower the consentual age to have sex and influence you to accept that that might be a legitimate act that two consenting humans could participate in. Your job is to oppose me 100% of the way. Now, of course I am not a NAMBLA fan and I will stand right next to you and say that is not something God wants me to do and it isn't something I want to see be legalized. Indeed we should stand up for what is right in this country and fight the acts and mindsets that we see as immoral and destructive. However, you don't fight them with brute force or coersion. You fight them with education and reasoning. These concepts are not a foreign enemy that you can destroy. How can you destroy sin or anything else we find abhorrent? You can't. There will always be evil on this earth and we cannot change that. You can only influence those around you to do the right thing and recognize that we were created with free choice.

And that is the key, free choice. Let people make up their own minds. You can't force that upon anyone. There are certain things that we have established as being unacceptable like child sex, murder, rape, and a host of others. Those acts absolutely violate the rights of others. However, if I were to advocate having a society free of jews or blacks, that is my right. To ADVOCATE, not destroy or murder, but to only seek to find a place where I could associate with my own kind, I can do that. And to counter, we can fight that ignorance and seek to have a freedom loving country that recognizes all humans' inherent rights and to reaffirm that with our actions.

Yes Glenn, we are saying the exact same thing. The illegal acts that violate the rights of others are unacceptable. The trying to chagne society to reflect your own values is not. And most certainly opposing those you disagree with is your right and most here would agree, your duty.

Titus
April 21, 2005, 12:20 AM
So whose side is who on when we talk about Nazis

I'd ask UCLA for my money back.

El Rojo
April 21, 2005, 12:29 AM
Yes Titus, forget the argument. If you can't reason with me, attack my personal character and make jokes. I think my money was well spent at UCLA as it is apparent I can make a coherent argument and make sound reasoning which by looking at your last post, you are unable to compete with. In fact, looking at your previous posts, they mainly are one liners which I refuted in whole. Frustrated? Maybe you should spend some money at an institution of higher learning. Not to soak up their liberal ideas, but to at least learn to be articulate and make an argument based on logic and reasoning rather than the infamous one liner. Of course, I shouldn't assume you're not college educated, but I can assume by your posts if you were, it wasn't at a level like UCLA. If it were, you might quote my entire sentence instead of cutting off the part that doesn't suit you. It’s called academic honesty and integrity. Ok, personal attacks are done, go back to looking at my argument and not my signatures, unless you have nothing to refute me with.

Titus
April 21, 2005, 12:36 AM
I find the above quote also to be pretty ludicrous in its own right. I do not agree with anyone who says you should leave for having differing opinions.

I'd tell a person the same thing about their job. So if you're sorry the United States won, maybe this ain't the place for you. (That's "you" in a general sense.)

Titus
April 21, 2005, 12:41 AM
Hee-haw! I think my undergrad school was ranked #2 and grad school #7 in the last WSJ polls. Logic? Long-winded = articulate? And you can put the whole sentence in that quote too. So?

El Rojo
April 21, 2005, 12:44 AM
So if you're sorry the United States won, maybe this ain't the place for you.There is a distinct difference in saying the United States should lose a war and subscribing to general principles and ideals. As I have explained, a modern day Nazi doesn't mean they necessarily think Hitler should have won the war. Hell, I don't even know what a modern day Nazi thinks. How many modern day Nazis were even alive then? It doesn't matter and that is the point.

Go back and read my posts. I guess I type too much and you are skipping right past everything I write. I have already addressed exactly what I mean. Go back and re-read as I am a broken record that just ran out of play.

junyo
April 21, 2005, 12:45 AM
No, you need to accept responsibility for your own actions. If you can't handle seeing a Nazi or going to a gun show where a Nazi might be, that is your problem. If you chose to do something about these Nazis, then you accept the responsibilities of your actions. If you boycott the gun show, that is the action your chose to do in order to stand up for your beliefs. You are not a victim, you choose to stand up for what you believe in. You choose to spend more money elsewhere in order to send a message to the show promoter that you are not a Nazi fan. I respect that, but I don't respect you trying to play this off on the Nazis or acting like a victim. You dictate your actions and you only.
You initially asserted that other peoples speech had no affect on others. When I pointed out that other's speech could have material effect on others you proposed "So move or don't go to the gun show." I take extreme exception to being accused of playing the "victim card" for merely extrapolating the consequences of your line of reasoning. Then you compound it by accusing me of arrogance and attempting to force people to change after I specifically stated "I'm not talking about banning Nazis, and wouldn't be in favor of it." I've not written one word about forcing, banning, or in any other way restricting anyone's access or freedom, and I defy you to produce an instance of such arrogance. And having insulted me, you then deign to condescend as well; how about while I "get some thick skin and deal with it" you work on developing those reading comprehension skills?

If you complain, you're "overly sensitive", "playing the victim", a "bleeding heart", "suppressing/oppressing someone". Don't complain and you're at least tacitly validating whatever it is, because if anyone else does then the excuse is "no one else complained" or you're the only one with an issue". It's a conveniant logical trap that pretty much assures that anything that doesn't upset the majority is a non-issue. At least to that majority...

To the point of the thread I'll restate my first comment, slowly, and avoiding big words:
Q: How does this effect the way the antis think of us as gun owners?
A:If you glory in the symbols of failed regimes that stood for nothing other than murder and racism, why would you then wonder why people think you're a racist? All of the toughening up in the world doesn't change that.

El Rojo
April 21, 2005, 01:13 AM
When I pointed out that other's speech could have material effect on others you proposed"So move or don't go to the gun show."Where did you make a sound argument that other's speech could have material effect? All you said was, "And now, these people have been allowed to dictate my actions, and very possibly cost me money." These people did not dictate your actions, you did. If you seek other people's approval so much that you don't want to suffer the embarasment of being in the same neighborhood as a unkept yard or being seen in a building with Nazis, then it might be worth it to you to avoid those areas. Now I recognize that home values might decrease because of a bad looking neighborhood, but in all honesty is that because of one house or is it because of a host of other linked factors? As far as the gun show goes, you choose what is important to you and what is not. If a Nazi is at a gun show and you walk in and don't want to be associated in any form or way with Nazis, then you are willing to pay more to go elsewhere and seek your merchandise. The Nazi did not cause you to leave, you did. Your values and principles mean more to you than saving a few bucks at the gun show. So you choose to avoid the Nazis, the Nazis did not run you out of the gun show. Again, I respect anyone willing to make that decision. It is the right thing to do. You didn't phrase it that way. You said, "these people have been allowed to dictate my actions, and very possibly cost me money." Again, you dictate your actions and you sacrificed your money for your principles and morals. A very acceptable and worthy sacrifice.

You further made the statement that the Nazis aren't there because they want to hand out flyers, they are there because business is good. I disagreed in part with that and brought up the fact that they very well could be recruiting as a primary means of being at the gun show, not to make money. You didn't address my point. I recognize your point that in some cases that this Nazi stuff must be selling to someone. It must sometimes be profitable. My question is, "What are we going to do about it?" Nazis like guns and they like Nazi merchandise. We really have only three options. One, ban Nazis from beign around guns. Two, gun show promoters don't allow Nazi tables in their shows. Three, we don't give our money to promoters who have Nazi tables at their shows. We can't change Nazis and their like for guns. The antis can associate us all they want. We need to work hard to make sure they are the only ones making that association and make sure the undecided middle understands we don't condone those principles. So stop going to the shows, run your own Nazi free show, or maybe talk to you friends and tell them you go to shows with Nazis around, but you shun them and merely tolerate their presense as they have rights too, as much as we detest their ideals.

If you glory in the symbols of failed regimes that stood for nothing other than murder and racism, why would you then wonder why people think you're a racist?You use subjective reasoning here by stating, "that stood for nothing other than murder and racism". Is that all they stood for? As has been pointed out, that is not the only thing. If you say you hate blacks or jews, then that makes you a racist. Having a symbol or flag does not. You associate that flag or symbol with racism, that is your thing. Heck, most of the racists probably associate the flags and symbols with racism. I won't disagree with you there. However, it doesn't have to mean that to everyone. They are just objects devoid of meaning until we give them meaning in the desired context. We have to do that though, the objects don't have that ability until we allow them too.

cuchulainn
April 21, 2005, 01:16 AM
I think El Rojo is being unfairly painted here. He's defending the Nazi's right to think and say reprehensible ideas. He doesn't believe those ideas himself. Folks either are misunderstanding him or are engaging in ad hominem. ("Support the Nazi's right to free speech and I'll call you a Nazi yourself to shut you up.")

OTOH, gun shows are private enterprises, not government sponsored affairs, and therefore the sponsors have no duty whatsoever to respect the Nazi's free speech rights. Their rights are irrelevant to whether the sponsors can and should boot them out.

They can (legally) and should (morally) boot them out. Period.

A private enterprise is neither legally nor morally bound to allow reprehensible ideas to appear under its banner.

El Rojo
April 21, 2005, 01:40 AM
OTOH, gun shows are private enterprises, not government sponsored affairs, and therefore the sponsors have no duty whatsoever to respect the Nazi's free speech rights.The only problem with that is where are many gun shows? On fairgrounds and public property. That is how the LA County Board of Supervisors screwed us out of the Great Western Gun Show. So that brings up an interesting question, how far can gun show promoters go on public property as far as weeding out the trash?

junyo
April 21, 2005, 02:44 AM
Where did you make a sound argument that other's speech could have material effect? If you seek other people's approval so much that you don't want to suffer the embarasment of being in the same neighborhood as a unkept yard or being seen in a building with Nazis, then it might be worth it to you to avoid those areas. Now I recognize that home values might decrease because of a bad looking neighborhood, but in all honesty is that because of one house or is it because of a host of other linked factors? As far as the gun show goes, you choose what is important to you and what is not. If a Nazi is at a gun show and you walk in and don't want to be associated in any form or way with Nazis, then you are willing to pay more to go elsewhere and seek your merchandise. The Nazi did not cause you to leave, you did. Your values and principles mean more to you than saving a few bucks at the gun show. So you choose to avoid the Nazis, the Nazis did not run you out of the gun show. Again, I respect anyone willing to make that decision. It is the right thing to do. You didn't phrase it that way. You said, "these people have been allowed to dictate my actions, and very possibly cost me money." Again, you dictate your actions and you sacrificed your money for your principles and morals. A very acceptable and worthy sacrifice.The house example made my point quite soundly, and you're dancing arond the point. Value is for the most part determined by other people's perception. I don't get what I want for my house, I get what someone else is willing to pay. To say that "home values might decrease because of a bad looking neighborhood" and blame it on other factors is a dodge: there may well be other factors in the total price, but a house in a well maintained neighborhood will usually sell for more than the identical house, in the same city/school district/whatever except for it's next to a dump. And that difference, controlled for whatever other variables, is what your neighbors cost you in value.

Further, even if they didn't affect your value immediately, they affected the real value that you could get from the house buy changing your perception of it's value. Once you were concerned that the house's value was going down you became more likely to sell, and more likely to except an offer near what you thought the house was now worth. But affecting the parameters that you had to worth with they affected your value.

You're arguing a brand of determinism that holds the decision maker responsible for every decision but fails to account for the fact that decisions aren't made it a vacuum. Society isn't a sterile environment. If people are expected to make the best decision possible at any given moment, then it must be factored in that the variable set that they are presented with at any given second is in some cases beyond their control. If I am making the best decision as to where to buy a gun, and I determine that that would be the gunshow except for the Nazi paraphenalia, then yes, I made that decision. But the variable set that I was presented with to make that decision was based on the decisions of others; past buyers, the sellers and the organzier, decisions which were beyond my control. Eliminate those decisons, the variable set changes, and the optimum decision shifts. By placing sole responsibility on one decisionmaker, you conveniantly ignore the other choices that lead to the situation in the first place.
You further made the statement that the Nazis aren't there because they want to hand out flyers, they are there because business is good. I disagreed in part with that and brought up the fact that they very well could be recruiting as a primary means of being at the gun show, not to make money. You didn't address my point. I recognize your point that in some cases that this Nazi stuff must be selling to someone. It must sometimes be profitable. My question is, "What are we going to do about it?"I didn't address it because I don't have an answer, and never claimed to. I see it as a problem, but other than not partronizing them, and hoping that the guy next to you at the range didn't either there's nothing to do.
You use subjective reasoning here by stating, "that stood for nothing other than murder and racism". Is that all they stood for? As has been pointed out, that is not the only thing. If you say you hate blacks or jews, then that makes you a racist.Nothing subjective about it. I've not seen one valid point. I'm not gonna rehash the thread, so you tell me, what else, what postive principles, did those regimes stand for?

Saying you hate blacks or Jews means that you said you hate black or Jews. Hating blacks or Jews simply because they are black or Jewish makes you a racist. Racists rarely announce that they are racists. And therein lies the dilema. It is a odd thing for some people to understand the constant, visceral knowledge that a certain portion of the population hates you, and have always hated you, and will always hate you. From the moment you were concieved, until the day you die. Hate you not because of something you did or did not do, but simply for being. To live with that knowledge creates a desire for awareness, to constantly try to determine whether the person with whom you are currently dealing is part of that percentage. There are flagrant signs - like say, being a Nazi - and subtle 'tells', like an otherwise normal guy buying swastika back the playing cards. Is he a racist or a collector? People often communicate despite themselves.

To say that a flag has no meaning is nonsense. A flag is a symbol, and symbols, well, symbolize things. That's like saying that written words have no meaning, they're just collections of shapes and lines. The shapes that make up written words have no inherent, objective meaning; neither does fabric and thread. But humans communicate via mutually shared ideas and concepts, and we take certain collections of shapes and lines to represent a concept, as we take certain collections of fabric and thread to represent concepts. The point of displaying them is to communicate that concept to others, just like scrawling grafitti, or having a signature line below your posts. To say that the viewer is obligated to give the symbol meaning is equivalent to saying that I can interpet your post as a jumble of random letters devoid of meaning or a poem about a cat. You wrote those strings of symbols with specific concepts in mind that you wanted to convey to me. A flag is different only in it's degree of explicitness.

Blackburn
April 21, 2005, 04:16 AM
The Civil War is over, or so it would appear to me. So why people want to keep it up is absolutely fragglin ridiculous when we have real enemies to worry about. Whether or not it was a legitimate war, a legal or illegal war, fought to free the slaves or not - it really is over. One side lost badly, the other side won well. So what IT IS OVER!

Grow up - give it up - go on with life and look for your real enemies. They are not other law abiding and loyal US Citizens

Do you really expect people who, over a hundred years later, still list their location as "Occupated southern states" to listen? :uhoh:

I'm glad I don't wear battle-flag decorated underwear like some people do. I prefer not to gird my loins with the colors of failure. :D

cracked butt
April 21, 2005, 04:27 AM
From what I've seen, its not too hard to tell the collectors from the racists.

If you see a table full of mostly junk, medals allied and nazi, uniforms, pins, knives, bayonets, etc, its a pretty good bet that the seller is interested in historical artifacts. If you see a pair of skinheads wearing replica SS uniforms sitting behind a table draped in Nazi flags along with some literature along with cassette tapes or CDs with Nazi inspired music, along with a few artifacts, you can pretty much deduce that they are whackjobs. Same goes for the guy selling survival/guerilla warfare/anarchist cookbook/turner diaries books at a table. The one type of seller that I haven't figured out yet is the one with a bunch of K98s/Walther P38s/Lugers for sale and has a sign saying "real nazi markings." I'm not sure if he's being a capitalist or a nazi sympathizer.

I have no interest in Nazi memorabilia, but to each their own I guess. I wish promoters would take the time to weed out the fringe elements to give everyone a better experience at the gunshow.
At any rate, my dad used to take me to gunshows when I was a kid and it seemed tamer back then, but I certainly wouldn't take my kid or even my wife to a gunshow today- too many characters who have gone beyond amusing and deep into the realm of unsavory.

cuchulainn
April 21, 2005, 06:50 AM
The only problem with that is where are many gun shows? On fairgrounds and public property. The organizers have a lot more power over the vendors they allow to display items verus the customers they allow to patronize the gun show. The situation is more akin to the Knights of Columbus' fight with gay-pride marchers in the St. Pat's day parade. The courts ruled that the KofC indeed can bar marchers they disagree with even though the parade happens on the ultimate public place, the street.

Matthew748
April 21, 2005, 06:54 AM
I go to a lot of gun shows in northern Illinois and Indiana and do not remember ever seeing a glut of flashy, newly made Nazi paraphernalia at them. Once in a while I will see someone selling old relics, but that is about it.

One thing I do see on occasion is a booth or two selling KKK stuff. I have no interest in that and they never seem to do much business.

I have to chuckle a little when I see some of the types of people who sport Nazi clothing and jewelry nowadays. I know a fair amount about Nazi Germany (too many objective history books and too much history channel) and cannot help but feel that they are terribly misinformed. Most likely, many of them would find themselves being persecuted by the old Nazi party rather than hailed as friends and equals.

richyoung
April 21, 2005, 10:23 AM
"is/was this right specifically reserved to the states, or was its legality based on the 10th? "

Primarily the 10th, although many states either made ratification of the Constitution conditional upon a reserved right of secession, or had state constitutions reserving that right.

richyoung
April 21, 2005, 10:30 AM
"Regardless of what they considered themsleves, any officer that had served in the US Army had taken an oath "to bear true faith and allegiance to the United States of America" "

And officers are allowed to RESIGN - as I'm sure the Southern officers did - they had no more obligation to the "United States" after that resignation - not to mention the fact that by waging an illegal war, the U.S. was violating its OWN part of the compact. Remeber the Nuremburg trials? "I was only following orders" is NOT an excuse, and an illegal order, i.e. one in violation of the supreme law of the land, the Constitution, has no validity and should not be followed. (At least, that is what they are teaching officers today.)

richyoung
April 21, 2005, 10:43 AM
"To the point of the thread I'll restate my first comment, slowly, and avoiding big words:
Q: How does this effect the way the antis think of us as gun owners? "


Answer: for those having trouble with the obvious...IT HAS NO EFFECT! Antis DON'T go to gun shows, and they hate us ANYWAY! We kill Bambi, and are prepared to kill the thug about to "redistribute" our assets.

sendtoscott
April 21, 2005, 10:52 AM
Antis DON'T go to gun shows, and they hate us ANYWAY! We kill Bambi, and are prepared to kill the thug about to "redistribute" our assets.

Yes, but anti's use what goes on at gun shows (including tables w/ swastikas) to justify their position to people in the middle.

richyoung
April 21, 2005, 10:54 AM
"OTOH, gun shows are private enterprises, not government sponsored affairs, and therefore the sponsors have no duty whatsoever to respect the Nazi's free speech rights."

In my part of the country, almost all gun shows take place in public facilities - fairgrounds, armories, convention centers, etc. As a public facility, they may well require the gun show operator NOT to discriminate as a condition of using the facility. Don't know for sure, maybe someone in the biz will let us know if the leaes typically have some boilerplate lingo about the issue...

richyoung
April 21, 2005, 10:58 AM
"Yes, but anti's use what goes on at gun shows (including tables w/ swastikas) to justify their position to people in the middle."

..and anybody so simple-minded as to be swayed by such a tactic is no great prize for our cause in the first place. Leave the idiots to the antis - they will do them more harm than they could ever help us.

sendtoscott
April 21, 2005, 11:02 AM
..and anybody so simple-minded as to be swayed by such a tactic is no great prize for our cause in the first place. Leave the idiots to the antis

The attitude that "anyone who sees tables of Nazi stuff at gunshows and then has a low opinion of gun owners is too stupid to care about" will just get us a brand new AWB.

richyoung
April 21, 2005, 11:22 AM
"The attitude that "anyone who sees tables of Nazi stuff at gunshows and then has a low opinion of gun owners is too stupid to care about" will just get us a brand new AWB."

No - the attitude that "we have to worry about what some idiot will think when he hears second- or third-hand about Nazi stuff at gun shows" is an excellent excuse to sit on our haunches and NOT push for national CCW, repeal of the GCAs of 1968 and 1934, re-opening the class III lists, national repemption of civil suits for misused weapons, etc. Those that are FOR us, are for us. Those that are AGAINST us, are against us. You have more poser at your disposal to help our cause than ALL of the media. Buy a brick of .22LR and take a neighbor, or his kid, or BOTH - shooting. Teach them the safety rules. Repeat.

TimRB
April 21, 2005, 11:22 AM
Not that it really adds to the discussion, but I had an interesting experience recently that involved Nazi stuff...

I work for a large multinational high-tech company, and I was in Mexico for a week working at our manufacturing site there. At about 4PM, shift change time, lots of line workers were coming and going. One guy came in, a young, dark-skinned Mexican man with long hair tied into a ponytail, wearing a T-shirt with a Nazi flag on it. It was unmistakable: red rectangle, white spot in center, swastika in white spot. There was no lettering that I could see.

I was absolutely speechless. Wearing something like that here in the US (and especially in PRK) would immediately get you sent home, if not fired outright. Like many here, I strongly believe that people have a right to air their views no matter how distasteful I may find them, so I didn't confront him or even speak to him.

I speculated later that the guy was not really a Nazi, but rather found the swastika interesting in some other way. Some American Indian cultures, for example, use that symbol in their art. I think he really and truely was too clueless to realize what a strong (and mostly negative) symbol he was wearing. I guess I'll never know...

Tim

NevadaPistolero
April 21, 2005, 01:44 PM
Well I can tell you from experience the vast majority of mexican people have no problem with German items or Germans over WW2. Ive spoken to many that share that thought. Theres 2 types of people you will find at a gun show..the collector/seller of historical WW2 memorabilia, the others are wanna be nazis.......these people are so disorganized and dazed and confused i dont think there even worth worrying about one way or the other. I have collected and bought and sold at gun shows for many years, I was into all WW2 items...Nazi,US,Russian ,japanese,Italian...you name it. But I really liked the WW2 German stuff from the early war years...the quality of their medals and cloth items was superior. Like I said earlier...live and let live...its not hurting you so leave it alone.....if those items offend you either dont go to the gun shows or move to Germany where its outlawed. People always want to get involved in other peoples bussiness....thats a liberal leftist view. Dont mess with me and I wont mess with you. theres alot wrong with this country...but selling WW2 items is not one of them....talk about thin skin...christ. And agian like I said earlier ..."who cares what the antis think"....do you think your gonna change their minds by outlawing nazi memorabilia LOL.......Robert Bird.....big shot democrat.....leader of the Ku Klux Klan........man dont you get it........maybe instead of cowering down and kiss the antis (deleted) why dont you go on the offensive and shut them down...no its easier to quake in your boots and kiss (deleted) LOL.

language violation deleted by moderator.

sendtoscott
April 21, 2005, 01:50 PM
I don't intend to turn having tables of Nazi junk at shows into a test of Manly Will against "the enemy". Besides, the hard core antis probably don't object to Nazis at gun shows, since they're the best friends gun banners have.

cuchulainn
April 21, 2005, 02:58 PM
NevadaPistolero: who cares what the antis think It's not about what the antis think. It's about what the fence sitters think. The fence sitters are our potential allies, but can be pulled one way or the other.

It's not about thin skin or boot quaking or kissing body parts. It's about recognizing a political reality -- the more that gun shows become associated with Nazi crap, the easier it will be for the antis to paint us as racists and thereby pull the fence sitters into their camp.

And it's not about outlawing Nazi crap. It's about disassociating gun shows from Nazi crap. Do you understand the difference?

And by the way, it is possible to disassociate the gun shows from the Nazi crap and still go on the offensive against the antis. It's not an either-or proposition.

And by the way again, we pro-gun folk have been winning the offensive for about four or five years. It's been a bad half decade for the antis. Their high water mark was in 2000 at the MMM event in D.C. Since then they've suffered mostly defeats and lost support. Or haven't you been paying attention?

GEM
April 21, 2005, 03:36 PM
I think statements like who cares what the antis think just beg the issue.

It is practically bad for the RKBA to be associated with Nazis. However, none of us should be happy or live and let live with Nazis at the gun show.

I would remember you that Nazis are our enemies. They would have conquered the US and killed millions. How many of our fathers and uncles died to fight them? So stick live and let live where the sun doesn't shine. You should as outraged at Nazis as all the blowhards who denounce Jane Fonda.

Nazis are sworn enemies of freedom and the United States. The only reason you say live and let live is because of a lack of understanding or sympathy for their ideology.

If you want to collect Nazi war stuff - good for you. I wouldn't. I wouldn't try to collect a samurai sword that killed Americans on the Bataan death march either.

I might keep a war trophy as an indicator of how we beat that scum. If someone produces new Nazi stuff, how are they less despicable than the Jane Fonda or kiddie porn producers. Let and live - is bullcrap.

I won't patronize a gun show that has a significant presence of this type of material.

sendtoscott
April 21, 2005, 03:39 PM
Besides, didn't the Nazis support 'gun control'? The JPFO emails I get are pretty insistent that's the case.

s&w 24
April 21, 2005, 05:14 PM
I was at a show with my wife and our friend who is an ingraver when we came to a re-enactor table complete with a kid (16 to 19) dressed in an SS dress uniform and get this MAKE UP so he could look more arian !! Our friend went up to him and adressed him in german, he turned so pale you could see it thru his blusher !! Next show he was there but in civilian clothes.

A buddy of mine replied thet you can't play army without the loosers.

NevadaPistolero
April 21, 2005, 08:37 PM
s&w 24 it just goes to show wannbes are just that..wannabes.(this is aimed at no one in particular) I would seriously think there other problems that need addressing in this country. In case you didnt know the first collectors and sellers of nazi memorabilia were the GIs who brought it back from the war. If they had no problem with it why the hell should anybody else. Get real....whining about nazi items at gunshows isnt gonna change a damn thing. Stop trying to infilict your values on me and everyone else....sounds like you would do it at gun point if you could get away with it...to me your more of a danger then a bunch of loser wannbes. Go read damn constitution and bill of rights again.......or maybe for the first time.

cuchulainn
April 21, 2005, 08:55 PM
Stop trying to infilict your values on me and everyone else The "inflicting of values" is going in both directions. But you don't hear us complaining about you "inflicting" your values on us, now do you? ;)Go read damn constitution and bill of rights again. What does the Constitution and Bill of Rights have to do with anything? We're talking about private enterprises choosing who they allow under their banner. The B-of-R doesn't regulate that.

Hkmp5sd
April 21, 2005, 09:09 PM
I find it odd that a group of people that generally treat the Bill of Rights on the same scale as the 10 Commandments are more than happy to infringe of other people's rights when it deals with something they personally dislike. People that want the Constitution to be followed to the letter are suggesting everything from pressuring gun show organizers to prohibit sales of Confederate and Nazi military memorabilia to an outright ban on them. Not allowing some American citizens to market their legal items does count as a violation in my opinion. Do we not complain when major TV networks won't allow the NRA to run an ad on their station? Same thing. Would we not jump up and down if a gun show organizer refused to allow the "Pink Pistols" to set up a table at a gun show? You bet we would.

If you don't want to possess this memorabilia, then don't. If it creates more mental anguish than you can handle just seeing this stuff, don't go where they sell it. It is your hangup, so feel free to place limits on yourself to avoid being exposed to it. Also feel free not to attempt to place limits on others because of your hangup.

NevadaPistolero
April 21, 2005, 09:12 PM
LOL...ok Freedom from persecution by cry babies...it has everything to do with the constitution. My values are, mind your damn bussiness instead whining about (deleted) little things. Nazi items are legal to sell, to own, to buy.....get over it :neener:






edited to delete forum rules violation

cuchulainn
April 21, 2005, 09:24 PM
I find it odd that a group of people that generally treat the Bill of Rights on the same scale as the 10 Commandments are more than happy to infringe of other people's rights when it deals with something they personally dislike. What does the Bill of Rights have to do with what we're talking about?Not allowing some American citizens to market their legal items does count as a violation in my opinion. A gun show organizer who bars certain vendors is NOT violating their rights. A gun show is a private enterprise, and the organizers can allow or bar whomever they want.

Furthermore, as citizens in capitalist republic, we're within our rights to bring market and social pressure on that private enterprise to stop a busines practice we believe is harmful. The Bill of Rights does not require me -- a private citizen -- to stand silently as someone spews racist filth. Indeed, that notion flips the 1st Amt on its head and turns it into a tool to shame me into silencing my voice rather than protecting my voice.

Look, I'd stand beside you and defend the Nazi scum's rights if the government tried to shut them up. But we're talking about a private enterprise not allowing them under its banner. Frankly, I'm perplexed that the distinction seems to be eluding some people.

cuchulainn
April 21, 2005, 09:31 PM
it has everything to do with the constitution. Really? Care to explain how the Constitution requires a private enterprise to allow all comers under its banner?Nazi items are legal to sell, to own, to buy. Yes they are. But there's a distinction between the seller of war memorabilia (with which I have no problem) and the seller of racist propaganda (which I dislike).My values are, mind your damn bussiness And yet, here you are telling us how to think. Hey, I've got no problem with that. That's your right. I'm telling you how to think. You're telling me how to think. That's the nature of bulletin boards. But I find it amusing that you're breaking the values you suggest we follow ;)

Hkmp5sd
April 21, 2005, 09:32 PM
But we're talking about a private enterprise not allowing them under its banner. Frankly, I'm perplexed that the distinction seems to be eluding some people.

So you are telling me that you think it is perfectly alright for a gun show promoter to deny "Pink Pistols" (pro-gun homosexual group) and "JPFO" (pro-gun Jewish group) from setting up tables?

cuchulainn
April 21, 2005, 09:41 PM
So you are telling me that you think it is perfectly alright for a gun show promoter to deny "Pink Pistols" (pro-gun homosexual group) and "JPFO" (pro-gun Jewish group) from setting up tables? Alright? No. Within his rights? Yes.

I think the PPs and JPFO ought to be there, but they have no right to be there if the owner/operator doesn't want them.

Would you insist that a Christian group allow a vendor of Satanic material at its event? Would you insist that a Jewish group allow a vendor of Holocaust denial books at its event? Would you insist that a gay group allow a vendor of anti-gay vitriol at its event?

Hkmp5sd
April 21, 2005, 10:06 PM
I don't believe you open the doors to the public and then exclude certain groups because of prejudice. That amounts to discrimination.

sendtoscott
April 21, 2005, 11:48 PM
Lets take a poll then, who on this thread

A. Doesn't mind associating with Nazi gun controlling mass murderers :confused:

or

B. Does mind being associated with Nazi gun controlling mass murderers :barf:

Shmackey
April 22, 2005, 12:42 AM
Nazis are one of the reasons, directly and indirectly, why I have guns in the first place. You want to sell a shirt, fine. You want to act out your fantasies, I get to act out mine.

Byron Quick
April 22, 2005, 02:04 AM
Tell you what, folks. Some of you can watch your language or we can shut this down.
Your choice.

I've no problem with the genuine artifacts being sold or collected.

I would even say that your right to free speech gives you the right to sell propagandistic Nazi drivel hot off the press. It just doesn't give you the right to do so at a gun show controlled by me.

But in the end, it doesn't matter. Let the would be Nazis in America run with plenty of rope. We killed them once and we can do it again. If you're a wannabe Nazi, please don't come around me whining about how your rights have been violated. Doing so not only is a contradiction of your political philosophy; but such behavior causes cognitive dissonance.

jefnvk
April 22, 2005, 02:10 AM
So you are telling me that you think it is perfectly alright for a gun show promoter to deny "Pink Pistols" (pro-gun homosexual group) and "JPFO" (pro-gun Jewish group) from setting up tables?

Yeah, if the promoters don't want them there, it is fine that they don't let them set up. Same as Nazi booths. Honestly, looking at gunshows I think that money will let anyone in. There was an Avon-like table (perfumes, lotions, etc) at one of the more recent gunshows I attended.

I'm curious how some of you would react to one table at the last gunshow. It was a private dealer, a WWII vet. Seems he had a German Mauser and G-43 (wish I had the cash :banghead: ). he also had a bunch of German WWII stuff that he ahd brought back, a flag, knives/daggers, I believe a uniform top. Guess what? All of it Nazi marked.

Sitting down the aisle from him, was a small shop that specialized in Japanese military goods. Sure enough, plenty of stuff from WWII. They were not particularly nice. Little town in China called Nanking comes to mind.

Every so often, you'd see Russian stuff. The Russians sure weren't nice people by any means. I wouldn't be suprised if Stalin was close to Hitler in terms of number of people ordered killed. Where is the outcry over this Russian stuff?

Would there be outrage if someone were selling stuff from the Khmere Rouge? Millions killed in Cambodia, literate city folks and foreigners?

And where is the outcry against American militaria stuff from the 1800's? Trail of Tears ring a bell? Or even Japanese internment camps in WWII?

People have a bad reaction to Nazi stuff becaus it has been beaten into their heads since Kindergarten that they were bad people. Rightfully so, too. What people need to do is to grow up and realize that Germans wern't the only people killing off mass civilian populations. Collecting WWII German relics DOES NOT make one a Nazi any more than a rifle makes you a killer.

To simply say Nazi stuff is bad because they killed lots of people is a little shortsighted, unless you say stuff from anyone that has ever comitted a mass atrocity should not be collected.

To anyone pointing out that the Nazi symbol is being used by extremeist organizations, I see the American flag there too. Maybe that should be banned. Heck, how many of you will scream till you are blue in the face that someone else misusing a gun in no way should prohibit you from owning one? Yet you would say that because someone took the Nazi flag and is now using it for a cause you don't like, that no one should be able to own that stuff?

Leave the choice up to the promoters. If you don't like their choices, don't go, and let them know why you aren't going.

cuchulainn
April 22, 2005, 04:57 AM
Hkmp5sd: I don't believe you open the doors to the public and then exclude certain groups because of prejudice. That amounts to discrimination.Yes, technically, it is discrimination, but it's not immoral discrimination or illegal discrimination. Not all discrimination is bad.

For example, a child advocacy group would be discriminating if it were to forbid NAMBLA from distributing literature at a conference. There's nothing wrong with that. A Christian group would be discriminating if it were to forbid a Satanic group from distributing literature at a revival. There's nothing wrong with that.

And again -- there's a difference between excluding patrons (which we're not urging) and excluding certain vendors.
jefnvk: Collecting WWII German relics DOES NOT make one a Nazi any more than a rifle makes you a killer. OK, it's a long thread and it would be unreasonable of me to expect people to read every line -- but we've made the distiction five or six times between people selling artifacts (no problem) and people selling propaganda (problem).

Look, I own some Nazi artifacts that my dad brought back as spoils of war, including a bed sheet size flag. I understand perfectly well that possession of Nazi items does not make a person a Nazi. I'm not a Nazi.

However, we are objecting to the sale of propagandist filth about how the white gods should take back America from the mud people. That crap is sold at many gun shows – and our silence on the matter is tacit approval.To anyone pointing out that the Nazi symbol is being used by extremeist organizations, I see the American flag there too. Maybe that should be banned. For the fifth or sixth time, no one is talking about banning. (And BTW, I made a similar point earlier in the thread about Old Glory and the genocide perpetrated against the Indians).Leave the choice up to the promoters. If you don't like their choices, don't go, and let them know why you aren't going. Indeed. That's pretty much what we're talking about. No one is talking about coercing the promoters -- unless one considers stern words and market forces to be coercion.

OTOH, I’m not sure that simply not going to the show and saying why is enough. This rises above the level of the shoddy service at the local diner. Like it or not, gun shows symbolize “the gun culture” for many non-gun people. Even if we stop going to the shows, gun shows still represent us.

Again, no one is talking about banning or other government coercion, but there is legitimate action that falls between coercion and isolated complaints by individuals.

imas
April 22, 2005, 10:00 AM
This is in response to the original post.

I have seen alot of war relics and general military paraphernalia at gun shows. I haven't paid attention to what is the most common at guns shows but I'm sure if Nazi stuff sells the best then you are going to find more of it. Can't necessarily blame the vendors.

richyoung
April 22, 2005, 11:00 AM
"Every so often, you'd see Russian stuff. The Russians sure weren't nice people by any means. I wouldn't be suprised if Stalin was close to Hitler in terms of number of people ordered killed."

Uh, it's pretty much a matter of historical record - Stalin killed SCADS more people that Adolph - this without considering things like "prisoner battalions" - whole formations of "convicts (and all you had to do to be a "convict" is be an "enemy of the state" - say the wrong thing...) that went ahead of the combat troops and dug ditches, cut wire, cleard minefields - (WITH THIER FEET - if they refused, they were shot from behind by their own side), etc - technically, those casualties are considered "death by enemy action", but Uncle Joe murdered them just the same as if he had bullets put in their brain, like his officer corps in '37. Not to mention deaths due to government-induced "crop failure" famines, deaths due to exposure and malnutrition in the Gulag, yada yada yada. Hitler is fairly well-known to have been responsible for killing about 25 million people - depending upon how you define "responsible", (and remember, Uncle Joe helped sart the shooting phase of WWII with his "non-agression pact" with Hitler and carving up Poland with hin + invading northern) Europe, Stalins death toll is estimated to be "only" 6 million (a laughable figure usually only found in the works of revisionist appologistas for the Communist cause) to a high side of well over 50 million by most arch-anti-Commies. A median figure of 30 million is easily defensible, probably close to accurate, and still puts him 5 million in the lead in terms of the butcher's bill.

sendtoscott
April 22, 2005, 11:14 AM
"Stalin was worse" is an absolutely valid reason for slamming college kids for wearing Che t-shirts, not for cutting the Nazis some slack at gun shows. Sometimes I think someone selling Sarah Brady or Rosie O'Donell tshirts at a show would catch more flack than someone selling Hitler shirts.

GEM
April 22, 2005, 11:45 AM
It is not a free speech issue. It is a private business. We can tell the dude who runs the gun show that we don't like the wares at the show.

That is the capitalist market place. Duh.

Second, we have clearly distinguished war souvenirs from promoting Nazi ideology.

It is really very simple unless, of course, you like the Nazi ideology. That's what it is boiling down to.

You know lots of gun folks denounce the ACLU. Remember when they defended the Nazi march through Skokie (sp?). That was a free speech issue.

Nazis can go rent a hall and have a Nazi show. You can go to it.

The theoretical issue is whether the government should ban the free speech of sworn enemies of the United States and its citizens. Should the government ban their speech? Should it ban the speech of leftists? Might we shut down the Mosques in the US who preach Wahabbism?

Going down that road, the government would shut down all kinds of folks. I don't think many of us would support that unless you are so self-centered that your view of freedom is to only allow your own opinions.

But all this is different from expressing displeasure in a commercial setting over a product being sold and and an ideology that is antithetical to everything American and decent being pushed.



T

s&w 24
April 22, 2005, 12:03 PM
the other shoe is that if no one buys the stuff the dealers of nazi gear won't show up. There must be market demand of these items or there would not be at the shows. Some gunshows state guns and accesories only, if thats the way they want to run there show o.k. by me.

The real question is who is buying axis memorabilia and why?

NevadaPistolero
April 22, 2005, 12:30 PM
cuchulainn this post started I think about the amount of dealers selling nazi items....not about a table full of idiots selling crap. There is a difference. How in the world am I trying to push my values off on any one else...????????????
I dont believe a live and let live attitude is inflicting anything on anybody.....by trying to tell some one what they can and cant sell IS inflicting your values on others. If Im somewhere and see something I dont like I dont go back.......pretty damn simple. I dont bitch about it and cry and whine that Im offended.

cuchulainn
April 22, 2005, 12:43 PM
cuchulainn this post started I think about the amount of dealers selling nazi items....not about a table full of idiots selling crap. Yes, but the conversation has evolved over seven pages to where we're now talking about the people selling Nazi propaganda. Long ago, we made a distiction between people selling artifacts and people selling racist propaganda.How in the world am I trying to push my values off on any one else.Well, I was teasing you more than anything. You aren't pushing your values on us any more than we are pushing them onto you. But you keep telling us to behave a certain way -- a way that reflects your values. The difference is that we're not getting offended by your doing that, while you keep complaining about it. It's amusing.by trying to tell some one what they can and cant sell IS inflicting your values on others. What are you talking about? We don't have the power to do that. However, we do have the power to convince them. Convincing is not inflictingI dont b**** about it and cry and whine that Im offended. OK, how many times do we have to explain that it's not about us being offended, but about the political reality that the sale of Nazi propaganda at gun shows reflects poorly on the gun community, and is thus a tool that the antis can (and do!) use to pull fence sitters away from our side and to their side?

It's not about our feelings. Our feelings don't matter. It's about winning the political war, and you don't win political wars by letting your enemies point out that you mix with Nazis.

Blackburn
April 22, 2005, 12:53 PM
Where I was raised, people who talk about "mud people" usually end up being rammed into it by a bunch of nazi haters. ;)

cuchulainn
April 22, 2005, 01:01 PM
As well they should be.

jefnvk
April 22, 2005, 02:53 PM
My above post was geared specifically towards people who say any Nazi relic should be pohibited from being owned/sold/watever, and more generally to anyone that says that Nazi stuff should not be owned because they comitted mass atrocities.

I am completely against the new stuff, but I realize that both the seller and the show promoter agree that it is OK for that stuff to be sold. I simply choose to walk by it. If enough of the stuff shows up, and it is cutting into guns and gun stuff, I simply won't go.

rich - I was thinking along those lines. Just couldn't remember specific numbers. Yet, not too many people will complain about Russian communist memoribilia being sold. Why? I think it is simply because everywhere the turn around, there aren't people telling them that the Russian communists were bad people. I see many people walking around with red stars. Most of them can't grasp the concept that communists have killed FAR MORE people than Hitler ever did. Communists, after all, are for the people.

Air,Land&Sea
April 22, 2005, 02:57 PM
I just jumped in at the end of the thread and don't care to read through it, but I've seen plenty of swastikas in Jewish museums. I breathe fire when I see swastikas, but the owner of them are typically not anti-semetic and my feelings aren't directed at them (unless they prove otherwise). Now a "Kerry" bumper sticker is something else. The owner of those always piss me off.

richyoung
April 22, 2005, 03:03 PM
No sweat, jefnvk - Communism has killed over 100 million people, and caused untold misery for at least 20 times that...how ANYBODY can continue to advocate any kind of collectivist/socialist/liberal agenda in the face of the death toll is beyond me...in my most meglomaniacal daydreams, my desire for power is still not strong enough to uncork such a genie - especially when you consider how few of the butchers die peacefully in their bed. No "Old Tyrant's Home" - they usually get back what they dealt out. One can admire the skill and loyalty of men at arms while deploring the actions of the regime they served.

EVIL5LITER
April 22, 2005, 08:17 PM
I'm going to steer clear of the Nazi debate, but I've GOT to answer this one:

The Civil War is over, or so it would appear to me. So why people want to keep it up is absolutely fragglin ridiculous when we have real enemies to worry about. Whether or not it was a legitimate war, a legal or illegal war, fought to free the slaves or not - it really is over. One side lost badly, the other side won well. So what IT IS OVER!

You truly have no knowledge of history whatsoever if you think the South got walloped by the North. It's kind of like saying we won in Vietnam.

Considering the North lost about two soliders for every one the South, I wouldn't exactly call it a walloping.

Given equal conditions (IOW, not having all of your supplies cut off from you due to geographical biases of industry), the South would have beaten the North so bad you'd be singing "Dixie" at football games instead of the National Anthem".

Southerners take pride in the Confederacy because it was a group of civilians taking up arms to defend their homeland from a tyrannous invader who seeked to usurp their rights. The confederates defended their homeland bravely and fought well until they simply ran out of supplies. Without that, they had no way of fighting off the numerically superior forces.

See, we give great credit and hold reverance for those who did that the first time around (Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, etc.), but we make villians of those who did it a second time (Davis, Lee, Jackson, etc.)

What makes me laugh so much about the propaganda being spread in the North about the war was that it was about "freeing the slaves'. I want to know who HONESTLY believes that the US Government truly was interested in freeing slaves, whom they viewed in their own constitution as inferior people, much like livestock.

If they were interested in freeing slaves, they would have done something about their rights oh, say, 100 years earlier than they did. But they weren't. They wanted to get rid of slavery in the south for economic reasons ONLY.

Once again, you could call the Civil War "Revolutionary War II", because all the same reasons and players are there, the outcome is only different.

I will make one comment though about the Hitler/Nazi regime thing: I find it hard to believe the numbers that are paraded about how many Jews were killed during the war. I've heard everying from 1 million all the way to 7 million. The numbers don't make Hitler any less of a madman, but why artificially inflate the numbers to make him any worse than he already was? It's not even physically possible for 7 million jews to be killed, the math just doesn't even add up.

3200 people per DAY, figuring seven million people being killed over a six year period, 7 days a week. I don't care how you pack them, or bury them, you cannot dispose of 3200 bodies per day, period. It's impossible.

I'm sure in some history book ten years from now the numbers will be upwards of 15 million or more. It's a shame that we live in a system where the truth is always going to play second fiddle to the winner's report of what the war was REALLY about, but that's how it's going to be.

Just remember, Thomas Jefferson was a national hero and a slave owner.

Robert E. Lee did not own slaves and felt that every man was created equal, but he was a villanous racist.

GRB
April 22, 2005, 08:34 PM
You truly have no knowledge of history whatsoever if you think the South got walloped by the North.Did I say which side won? You have no idea of the point I was making, or so it seems. You, in order to keep alive the Civil War ranting, take my point out of context AND you assume I meant the North defeated the South badly. That was not my point at all, regardless of which side I believe may have won. (Since that was not the point I will not give my idea on which side was the ultimate winner. I can only imagine though that you base your assumption about my belief as to who won upon the fact that my info shows I am from NY. Hmmm, is that the Civil War raging on yet inside of you? I wonder.)

The whole point I was trying to make, and anyone who was not trying to keep the Civil War alive may have realized this, is that the U.S. Civil War IS REALLY FACTUALLY OVER and, we now have real enemies to fight. Therefore, why keep up an ongoing sort of Civil War with one another when, there are those real enemies to fight! I think you only have proven my point exactly when I said it was "...absolutely fragglin ridiculous..." in reference to keeping that long over war alive.

Best regards,
Glenn B

sendtoscott
April 22, 2005, 08:47 PM
3200 people per DAY, figuring seven million people being killed over a six year period, 7 days a week. I don't care how you pack them, or bury them, you cannot dispose of 3200 bodies per day, period. It's impossible.

I realize this is probably pointless, but by your logic, the First World War couldn't have happened:

http://killeenroos.com/5/WW1Bat.htm

Hkmp5sd
April 22, 2005, 08:54 PM
It's not even physically possible for 7 million jews to be killed, the math just doesn't even add up.

3200 people per DAY, figuring seven million people being killed over a six year period, 7 days a week. I don't care how you pack them, or bury them, you cannot dispose of 3200 bodies per day, period. It's impossible.


You were doing well up until this point. The crematoria at Auschwitz was averaging 10,000 corpses per day by 1942 and reached a one-day record in August, 1945 of 24,000. Even that was not enough and they resorted to digging large pits to make up the difference.

Add to that the fact there were 6 camps that did nothing but execute prisoners, the common belief of 6,000,000 Jews can easily be achieved.

R.H. Lee
April 22, 2005, 08:57 PM
EVIL5LITER: Rather than react to your remarks the way my gut wants, I invite you to look through these photos and reconsider your doubts:

http://history1900s.about.com/library/holocaust/blpictures.htm

Blackburn
April 22, 2005, 09:15 PM
I'm going to steer clear of the Nazi debate

I can guess why. :rolleyes:

Revisionist history wielding, holocaust denying, still-reliving-the-civil-war... sad, man, sad.

P95Carry
April 22, 2005, 09:22 PM
Lot of very thin ice here - may be nearly time to call a halt!

Blackburn
April 22, 2005, 09:40 PM
Honestly Mr. Moderator, I think that's a good idea. Not only has Mr. coohoolian's original point been wilfully missed over and over, but now we have someone spouting this stuff in the thread. You can just imagine the responses he'll get..

P95Carry
April 22, 2005, 09:43 PM
Indeed - I cannot in all honesty see any purpose in leaving this open longer. I'd like to think it could get back on its feet but doubt it. Plus it has done some miles already anyways!

If you enjoyed reading about "Gun shows and Nazi paraphernalia" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!