Confederates? Nazis? No Gun Show For You!: IMI Systems Quote of the Day

Westchester County Executive George Latimer announces an executive order banning gun shows at the Westchester County Center (courtesy lohud.com)

“Photos taken by a legislative aide at the center during the last firearm show showed some Confederate memorabilia and books on the Nazis were sold at the show. That led to discussion about regulating what vendors at County Center trade shows could sell. ‘There’s absolutely no use for that in any place in our society,’ [Westchester County Executive George] Latimer said. ‘And certainly we can’t control the society at large but we can certainly control those things that are under county government.'” – George Latimer bans Westchester County Center gun shows with executive order [via lohud.com]

Win IMI Ammo

comments

  1. avatar Reggie Browning says:

    Does anyone want to tell him that Nazis banned books too?

    1. avatar Ollie says:

      National Socialists (Nazis) = American Socialists (Liberals/Progressives)

      Socialism works great until you run out of other people’s money or charismatic mental defectives take control and push their own psychotic agendas onto the citizenry.

      1. avatar Jim says:

        No, Nazis were right wing. Stop with this nonsense.

        1. avatar Jeh says:

          Nazis were left wing nationalists, closer to communists than they themselves realized.

        2. avatar Ing says:

          Only in Europe, where anything that isn’t to the left of Lenin is considered “right-wing.”

        3. avatar California Richard says:

          The NAZIs (initially) were lumpped with the right wingers because the industrialists saw them as anti-Bolshevik German Nationalists, and the (right wing) industrialists thought they could be controlled. Didn’t work out so well. Where the Bolsheviks used the unions (anti-industrialist) to press for international socialism the NAZIs appealed to nationalist ideals to press for domestic socialism….. The Russians didn’t like that very much. The Russians didn’t like it when the Chinese Socialists did the same thing, or the North Korean Socialists, or North Vietnamese Socialists, or the Cambodian Socialists, or the Italian Socialists, or Yugoslavia, or Cuba, etc, etc, etc…. hell,.. Even the 1956 Hungarian Student Revolt (that was smashed by the Soviets) was nothing more than a Hungarian Socialist revolt. They just wanted the Russians to stop meddling in the affairs of the Hungarian Communist government. Not exactly Right wing vs Left wing.

        4. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          I read the comment and was ready to rebut it. Then I realized it was Jim the troll.

        5. avatar Kelly Sport says:

          Hitler himself said the only difference between a NAZI and a Communist is that one is a nationalist and one is an internationalist.

      2. avatar Diego Abreu says:

        How out of touch with reality do you have to be to make this comparison? My goodness.

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          If you actually look at what fascism is, you will realize that the closest successful parallel in American politics is Barrack Obama.

      3. avatar Roymond says:

        Actually some socialism does work great, and the stuff that does turns out to resemble the tribal virtues of caring for everyone plus those things that make commerce easier for everyone. The real issue with socialism is the trend of calling things “rights” which are really obligations, a phenomenon that results in anything that might benefit someone being called a “right” — when what it really is is an excuse for plunder.

    2. avatar Madcapp says:

      Reggie, you get the comment of the year so far.

    3. avatar Charles Gregor says:

      More to the point, Weimar Germany had stringent laws against “hate speech”. The Nazis were constantly getting hauled into court and there were many banned issues of Nazi newspapers. Fat lot of good it did.

    4. avatar Hurr Durr says:

      This guy can read books? I’ll just leave this here:

      http://i63.tinypic.com/hulfzq.png

    5. avatar Diego Abreu says:

      So does our Democratic government, all the time, whats your point?

      1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        What books? Is it because their authors are from a certain ethnic group? Or is it because they are child pornography?

  2. avatar Hank says:

    They don’t even want books about nazis to be sold anymore? Hmm… almost as if they want to erase history… time to head off to the local book burning!

    1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      Naw….the Democrats just want to grandstand and the spineless Republicans just want to avoid being called racists or Nazis. All politics, no principles.

      The proof? “Mein Kampf” is readily available on the shelves of this same county’s public libraries. It’s also required reading in some classes at the local community college.

      Neither the Dems nor the Repubs are calling for pulling and banning the book in those locations. To do so would make them appear to be the very Nazis they present themselves as being against.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “The proof? “Mein Kampf” is readily available on the shelves of this same county’s public libraries. It’s also required reading in some classes at the local community college.”

        The difference is, the ‘professors’ are presenting it as a ‘How To’ instruction, not as the ‘Warning’ it should be…

      2. avatar Diego Abreu says:

        I think it should depend on the book. Mein Kampf has more academic value than “The Holocaust Never Happened” Or some nonsense like that.

        1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

          1st Amendment applies to all speech, not just the ones you agree with you anti-liberty, control freak.

  3. avatar Felix says:

    Sounds like content-based discrimination, unconstitutional under current Supreme Court precedent.

    1. avatar jsled says:

      Not if you read the article! Farago is intentionally misleading you with this post.

      1. avatar Porkchop says:

        The writer of the newspaper article or the county spokesperson simply does not understand the scope of the First Amendment. It does not matter whether they pass a county ordinance or draft a new contract provision; content-based discrimination by a state actor is still prohibited.

      2. avatar Felix says:

        If the reason to ban gun shows is because some unliked content was on display, that is content-based discrimination and unconstitutional. It doesn’t matter that they didn’t ban just the unliked content.

      3. avatar DaveL says:

        I read the article. Robert’s take is essentially accurate, and you are either trying to mislead or else ignorant of the facts yourself. The article lists two reasons for banning gun shows on county properties, to wit:

        1. To show official disapproval of “gun culture”.
        2. To suppress the dissemination of “Confederate memorabilia” or “books on the Nazis.”

        Neither is an acceptable reason under the 1st Amendment. Both are content-based limits on speech, in what had been established as a type of public forum.

        You might think that it somehow gets a pass because they’re banning all gun shows on county property because they include messages of which they disapprove, as opposed to directly banning the disapproved messages themselves. This is a nine year-old’s idea of a clever legal trick. It doesn’t work. It has never worked. Courts see right through such semantic games, and they tend not to appreciate them.

        1. avatar Porkchop says:

          I think you are wrong, because gun shows are not primarily communicative — they are commercial activity. Sure, a well-run gun show sends a positive message, but the vendors don’t come to propagate a message, they come to sell stuff. There may or may not be an equal protection claim in there under the Fourteenth Amendment, but I don’t see this as a First Amendment issue.

        2. avatar DaveL says:

          The “not primarily communicative” angle might have worked, probably would have worked, had they not broadcast to all and sundry that their purpose was to suppress a particular culture and viewpoint. When you specifically target the expression, you cannot then turn around and deny the conduct is expressive, or that that expression is at issue.

        3. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Dave’s 09:42 statement is right on the money. His later statement isn’t because commercial speech is also protected. The courts in California wouldn’t let a county ban gun shows from county property (kinda, sorta). This is real basic stuff.

        4. avatar Porkchop says:

          Nordyke v. King was kind of a nondecision, since in the end the county took the position that it was not banning gun shows, so the court did not have to decide whether banning gun shows would be unconstitutional. In addition, Nordyke was a 9th Circuit case. New York is in the 2d Circuit, so Nordyke is not binding law there anyway. Nor was Nordyke a First Amendment case — it was a straightforward case of applying the Second Amendment to the State of California through incorporation via the Fourteenth Amendment. The real challenge was to the ban on the carrying of firearms on the fairgrounds, which had the effect of banning gun shows. The ultimate resolution was that since the county allowed gun shows to go forward as long as the guns at the show were unloaded and attached to cables, there was no constitutional violation. But of what part of the constitution? It’s rather confusing, I think. You can’t openly carry a loaded firearm in public anywhere in California. In order to carry at all, you must carry concealed, which you can’t do without a concealed carry permit. Concealed carriers could not carry on the fairgrounds under the ordinance, and apparently only vendors could possess firearms on the fairgrounds. At the end of the case, all of those restrictions remained. So, as a Second Amendment case, Nordyke is crap. It appears that the First Amendment was not implicated at all in Nordyke, nor was there an argument based on the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In the final analysis, Nordyke is not really about the differential treatment of gun shows as a commercial enterprise, nor is it about speech.

        5. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          I don’t disagree with anything you say. The larger point is that even counties in 9th Circus California pump the brakes on this issue. These Westchester County guys are on the far end of the branch on two amendments.

      4. avatar Hank says:

        Not really. The government can’t really ban written content, at all. Even if it’s totally fake, made up and obscene. You could publish a magazine or book about all the robotic alien Nazi Jewish sluts that rule congress through forced sex all you want, (with pictures) and it couldn’t be banned. Example: All tabloids, pornography, and the New York Times.

        1. avatar Big Bill says:

          After reading the actual article, I came to this conclusion: when the government inserts a clause into a commercial contract (as even the article admits is what’s happening), then the government becomes an actor in that contract.
          Banning books based on content based on that clause in that contract then becomes unconstitutional because of its conflict with the first amendment.

        2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

          The government bans content all the time. Try opening up a strip club or adult book store across the street from a school and see what happens.

          You all are conflating individual speech with commercial speech. The courts do indeed see a difference there. The Supreme Court ruled in 2010’s Citizens United case basically that corporations have a right to speech; political speech, anyway.

          The government can place restrictions on speech relative to the time, place, and manner of speech, in order to maintain governmental functions. There are legal tests to pass for this to be legal, though. For example, if the selling of these materials is really just a pretense for a Nazi or Klan rally on government property without a picket/parade permit, then the sellers could have a problem.
          If they really are just selling books, then a ban probably is unconstitutional.

          Overall, though, free speech rights of non-person entities is an area of law that remains unsettled.

      5. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        What, in the original article, leads you to that conclusion? Where, exactly, is the attempt to mislead?

      6. avatar Icabod says:

        Copy & Paste from the article:
        “Lawmakers asked Astorino, a Republican, to add language into contracts for all shows at the County Center that would block the sale of objectionable clothing, flags or books. That would mean vendors at other shows like the Reptile Expo would face the same limits on selling on Confederate-flag merchandise.”
        Does this mean the Reptile Expo can sell nazi material? The only item mentioned is “confederate-flag mecendise.”
        It was pointed out that “objectionable” is neither defined or very specific. As example, is a history of Germany “objectionable.?”
        The “same limits on selling confederate-flag mechendise” shows how vague the censorship is. The ban is on “objectionable” items, not specifics such as a “confederate flag.” That, in itself, is vague and hard to define.
        The whole attempt is based on “I don’t like it so I want it banned” emotion that fails the test of the Consitution and common sense.
        That leads directly into Mr. Farago’s comments. Thetes no “misleading.”

        1. avatar Illinois_Minion says:

          “… block the sale of objectionable clothing…”
          I object to democratic logo’s on clothing, books, and merchandise!

          Lets see how far that goes.

  4. avatar Waffensammler98 says:

    Oh look, a New York Democrat attacking the 1st Amendment. In other news, water is wet.

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      According to the article, it is Republicans that are now trying to do this and with contractual efforts rather than laws (bans).

      1. avatar DaveL says:

        From a First Amendment standpoint, it matters little whether they do it with a law, a regulation, a written or unwritten policy. The courts take a “Green Eggs and Ham” approach. They may not, shall not, with a rule, they shall not with some other tool. They may not shall not with a writ, not even just a little bit.

        1. avatar Defens says:

          But may they, if the glove does fit?

  5. avatar jsled says:

    They banned gun shows entirely. They legislature banned them last year, but it was veto’ed by the former governor. The last gun show was only the first one in years.

    This is intentionally misleading. Continued great work, Farago.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Speaking of intentionally misleading people, Gov. Paterson did not veto a g un show ban.

      http://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/westchester/2017/01/20/veto-gun-show-ban/96845292/

    2. avatar Jim S. says:

      Former Governor?? Certainly not Cuomo, or Patterson, or Spitzer.

      Reading the 2nd article might have helped.

      “Westchester County Executive George Latimer signed an executive order Tuesday that bans gun shows on all county-owned properties. The move is one of Latimer’s first acts as executive, coming on his second day in office.”

    3. avatar FedUp says:

      Funny how only one person is accusing Farago of dishonesty here, and surprise…surprise, that person is projection his/her own dishonesty onto Robert.

  6. avatar ToddR says:

    Someone needs to contact Eugene Volokh.

  7. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    I think I’m going to start my own political party. I’m calling it the ‘Confederate Nazi Party of America’. There’s no real ideological platform other than pissing people off and freaking them out. Our anthem will be Twisted Sister’s ‘We’re Not Gonna Take It’. Probably put up a reality TV show host for president in 2020.

    1. avatar TrappedInCommiefornia says:

      All the internet trolls would join immediately. Then you can just use all their campaign contributions (provided by their parents credit cards) for your personal expenditures. It’s brilliant!

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Well if personal enrichment was my goal I’d call it ‘The Clinton Foundation’.

      2. avatar BLoving says:

        Unfortunately, Gov, the extent of your influence in government probably is not worth a large “donation”… they might offer you a cup of coffee in exchange for your one vote…
        🤠

    2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      That’s been done before. It was called the Reform Party. That unprincipled vehicle for vanity candidacies turned trainwreck careened from Pat “der Fuhrer” Buchanan to Ralph “I hate corporations, but personally own $3 million in Fortune 500 stock” Nader in just one election cycle.

      Nowadays they don’t even run their own presidential candidates. They just “me too” other parties’ candidates and slap them on the ballot in the one or two states where they can still sneak in. Sad.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        They were doomed from the start because they had a crappy name.

  8. avatar Gunwrites says:

    Modern journalism skills on display. Just what states have a Westchester County? One? Several? More political grandstanding and poor writing skills. FAIL!

    1. avatar DaveL says:

      It’s Westchester, NY. You have to understand that the inhabitants of New York City have a more global view of things, and by “global” I mean “within commuting distance of Manhattan.”

  9. avatar 300BlackoutFan says:

    So a business (eg, a bakery), run by a private citizen, must provide any and all services related to their business (eg, decorate a cake with items they morally object to – even if it were, say a Nazi symbol or Confederate Flag).

    But a government can decide what types of events can and cannot rent their space (ie, can deny any and all services related to that particular business). Got it.

    So those Constitutional Amendments – those must apply to the Citizenry, and not the Government, right?

  10. avatar dragos111 says:

    An interest in Nazi’s may make one a historian, not a sympathizer. Learning about the past is an important part of not repeating it.

    1. avatar IdahoBoy says:

      Learning the wrong things about the past guarantee that the past will be repeated.

    2. avatar David B says:

      I beg to disagree. When has history ever repeated itself? Will the defenestration of Prague ever occur again or will the Spanish Armada rise to sink again or will the Huns ever again cross the Alps if we burn all the books and erase the knowledge from our collective consciousness? History is not a glowing celestial fountain from which, whence we drink, we avoid repetition. History doesn’t repeat itself. Actions, which become history, are the result of people—some more flawed than others and their natural inclinations.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        ‘When has history ever repeated itself?’

        That question was frequently uttered 99 years ago in Versailles.

      2. avatar Lurch says:

        A study of history might have taught that in WW2 the Germans used the Ardennes as an entry route into the West, or that a disarmed populace are easy pickings for a dictator to control.

        1. avatar YARB0892 says:

          Don’t forget lessons about attacking Russia during winter or with it fast approaching, starting multi-faceted wars, and prolonged campaigns against a people in their native lands- Afghanistan, Zulus, India, Britain, etc.

        2. avatar David B says:

          You’ve picked up a good point, but, in the process, laid down the premise that history doesn’t repeat itself. Are we all time travelers in our own alternate dimensions? You and I may both buy the same toothpaste on separate Mondays. Does history repeat when I put my Colgate in my cart after you? They are separate events even if you tweeted about it profusely and I somehow read your posts. And, if I read your posts, would that convince me to buy Tom’s instead so I didn’t repeat history or your actions? We both want cleaner and whiter teeth and our actions are based on our personal motivations and human nature–not by what or did not read about some past event involving George Washington and his wooden teeth. This is not an indictment on you, but rather the premise that history repeats itself. It does not.

      3. avatar former water walker says:

        Europe INVADED by Moose-lims…FIFY😄😋😎

      4. avatar Hank says:

        What an incredibly ignorant post. The Spanish Armada never returned to threaten Britain, however, Britain was threatened with large scale invasion from Napoleon, then Hitler, and probably will be again this century. When people say history repeats itself, they’re pointing out humanity repeats many actions that it has already acted out. The flags, names, dates, and technology changes, but the game is the same. There are more numerous and better examples, but you’re too stupid to understand them.

        1. avatar David B says:

          Was defenestration too big a word for you to comment on? lol

          But you proved my point and I thank you for that. Similar actions by different people is not a repeat of history. History is one and done. Burn all the books and people will still act the same. Read all the books and people will stick act the same. Thanks for your comment.

        2. avatar Hank says:

          ^ A clown has spoken.

        3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          There are two things that haven’t changed in thousands of years. The first is human nature. Greed, ambition, pride, jealousy, lust, fear, anger, none of it has changed one bit.

          The second is geography. A few years ago I read a few boo ks from the WWI era and in one that was published in 1915 the author stated as a matter of fact that Japan and America were more or less destined to fight a war in the coming decades (the two countries were allies at the time). After about two seconds of thought I put 2 and 2 together – two ascending naval powers on opposite sides of a body of water – duh. Understand what happened in the past and you c an predict the future.

        4. avatar Coffee Addict says:

          “same soup, different bowl”

      5. avatar Big Bill says:

        Fidel Castro -> Kim Jong Un
        Communist China -> Venezuela
        Just two among a history full of them.

      6. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        That’s just being willfully daft, carping about unique details of historical events, as opposed to distilling from them general principles with proven predictive power.

        1. avatar David B says:

          So predict something. Going back to my point, it’s not about predicting something. It’s about dispelling the false notion that history repeats itself unless we learn from it.

          What some of you are not considering is who is writing history. Do you believe something because it is written? Have you ever heard of revisionist history? Who do you deem as the keeper of the light when it comes to history? Take today’s history–will Brian Ross be more believable in a hundred years’ time speaking to us from digitally faded YouTube clips? Will we try to avoid his version of history?

          Consider the people who say “history repeats itself” and then consider how it benefits them or shapes their worldview by believing it.

      7. avatar John E> says:

        For God sakes you cannot defend your argument by wrapping it in semantics. It becomes sophomoric at best. Just because you use one 5 syllable word doesn’t mean you aren’t the village idiot.

        1. avatar David B says:

          Semantics makes me a village idiot? You do know that semantics relates to what something means and the thinking process behind it?

          Very interesting how you attack the person and not the idea. I’m shocked-shocked!-that you didn’t call me a racist, facist, bigoted, homophobe troglodyte, gun-banning pig; thanks for limiting your epithet to ‘village idiot’. You know how to classy up the place.

          Back to my point–history does not repeat itself anymore more than a gun kills people.

        2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          I think his point was that you were engaged in sophistry. I can’t really say since I only read “I beg to disagree. When has history ever repeated itself?” After that, I was going with the generous assumption that you were an ass.

        3. avatar David B says:

          Now that’s funny! Well played sir!

      8. avatar Porkchop says:

        Mark Twain is alleged to have said, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.” (It has also been attributed to a number of other people.) Whether he actually said it or not, the statement sounds about right to me.

      9. avatar the phantom says:

        pffft!
        the “Nazis” tell us nothing…
        they were around for too short a time for any definitive conclusions to be drawn concerning their methods or intent(s)
        not much more than a decade….most of that being a horrendous World War when normal rules of behaviour simply did not apply…
        add to that: most commonly accepted history of WII is a pack of worthless lies any-way…
        “history” is a lie commonly agreed upon!

      10. avatar dragos111 says:

        You cannot be serious, right? History does not repeat itself? You cannot learn from it? It’s all I can do to not write another line here without using the word “stupid”.

        Yes, you are right that the Spanish Armada will not rise again. But, the events that led up to the rise of the first Spanish Armada could recur in some other country, resulting in the rise of some new fleet that would be used to attack a neighbor.

        Here is a good lesson I have learned lately. Don’t elect a community organizer as President of the US. Fool me once, that’s bad. In this case, fool me twice would be a disaster. Yes, I have learned a lesson from history.

  11. avatar Ogre says:

    The progressive agenda is strong with this one. This county executive was only on his second day in office when he announced the gun show ban in Westchester Co., NY (close in to New York City). Read the news article and you’ll see how far to the left this guy’s head is at. Obviously he has never been to a gun or militaria show in a free state, where Nazi, Soviet and Confederate uniforms, regalia, weapons and other ephemera, as well as books about the Nazis and Confederates, and other right-wing politically incorrect items are regularly offered for sale to collectors and others. But he sent his legislative aid to collect evidence that this stuff actually existed at a gun show (the first one in the county in years) and the show was therefore evil and and politically incorrect, and deserved to be banned (probably for the children). Given New York’s ultra-restrictive gun laws, I’m wondering just what kind of gun show could be presented there (I’m from Virginia).

  12. avatar Joe R. says:

    Funny thing, I think all the anti-2A / anti-gun MFs (and all evil communist POS (D) MFs [sick pustule of a convoluted redundancy that that is]) will quickly find out that (like the 80% rule in CA) banning guns will lead to a spectacular jump in people making them outright. People will make more lethal ammunition, people will modify weapons, etc., and, shortly thereafter, people will rise up and [at the most benign] depose them [and at the worst – you won’t even be able to fill in the blank]. It’s only happened EVERY FING TIME HUMANS HAVE BEEN THIS BIG OF A TYRANNICAL CONTROLLING D1<K TO EACH OTHER.

    Somebody slap that guy already? if not, his eyes might appreciate a good one.

  13. avatar Anonymous says:

    They are historical relics and that’s about all. Regardless, it was a crap load of virtue signaling, from a guy eager to start “controlling” things.

    Anyways, this comes as zero surprise. White plains is located a stone’s throw north of long island in NY.

    “And certainly we can’t control the society at large but we can certainly control those things that are under county government.’”

    In other words, they are controlling what they can, and would certainly love to control society at large. That means their opinion gets forced down everyone’s throats. But that is expected when people who don’t understand the role of government get their chance to start signing documents.

  14. avatar jwm says:

    I’m guessing that my commie guns and ammo would offend this fucktard.

    At least, I’m hoping they do.

    1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

      Nah, the German Mauser, Luger, or Walther would be more offensive especially ones with lots of Nazi proof marks because “muh Nazis” and “muh swastikas”.

  15. avatar GS650G says:

    I bet the left has a really big list of people they think would be banned from owning guns. The right does too but it is a reaction to actions based rather than philosophical and it’s a lot shorter.
    Next election let the liberals win so they calm down.

  16. avatar Mr.Savage says:

    so you mean to tell me that both testiments of the satanic bible that I own have no place in a collection held by a member of the general public simply for curiosity and collecting purposes? damn, and all this time we have been told this is the land of the free!

  17. avatar MDH says:

    Conflating and associating CSA (uniquely American) memorabilia, with National Socialist German Workers Party (uniquely not American) memorabilia is just bizarre, unless you are a member of the National Socialist American Workers Party (Democrats – or “Crimocrats”, as I have come to regard them). Then apparently, it all makes sense.

    Naturally, the next thing the National Socialist Crimocrats need to do is conflate and associate the above items with the U.S. Constitution, and bill of rights, and by extension you and I – in order to relieve us of our God given, and Constitutionally recognized and guaranteed rights.

    Really they would just prefer to round us up and exterminate us, and given the opportunity, they’ll do just that.

  18. avatar AaronW says:

    Curious, anyone else here actually live in Westchester? (Currently?) I went to the gun show last year – the one allegedly featuring the “Nazi Memorabilia.” Not wanting to waste my admission fee, I took at least two complete circuits of the show floor. I saw that lone table. It was a sad collection of junky German militaria, a few (very few) Nazi propaganda pieces, some books about the Third Reich and its military equipment, and some historical stuff on the European Theater of Operations. At least half of the books on that table were mainstream non fiction tomes that you can find at Barnes and Noble. It was perhaps the least visited table of the whole show. I saw only a few people stop by for a moment, lift up a book or a trinket, and move on. It’s been a struggle to explain to a blizzard of snowflakes that an interest in the ETO and the German military machine in no way equals a desire to join the ranks of the National Socialist Party.
    Astorino was definitely a friend to Westchester gun owners, but curiously, he could have “approved” the Gun Show in the closing hours of his term in office. I called his office, and the people in Constituent Services told me that the operators of the show hadn’t approached them with a contract, so there was nothing to sign.
    That leads me to think that the operator figured that Latimer would countermand or try to countermand any legacy agreement between him and the County. Or perhaps Astorino had the opportunity, but simply didn’t – perhaps to help “smooth the transition” between him and Latimer, and not having been presented with a contract was an excuse.
    So here’s hoping that the event can be run in some private venue – we do have a few hotels with enough conference space to run a decent-sized gun show.

    1. avatar JJ48 says:

      I went to the Air Force Museum at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and they had planes with the roundels of Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany! Quick, ban all museums!

      1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

        Banning the Nazi symbol is okay but banning the Japanese one is racist because they are Asian.

        -Snowflake

  19. avatar ATFAgentBob says:

    Well damn! I better get rid of that copy of Patton I got and stop playing WOT and WOWS. I didn’t realize that those items made me a Nazi. Better toss out all those Civil War movies and books too just to be safe! Oh and all my military collectibles too!
    #ForTheChildren #DoSomething #MeToo

    THE ABOVE PORTION OF THIS POSTED IS PURELY SARCASTIC AND I WILL DO NO SUCH THING I WILL HOWEVER CONTINUE TO EXPAND MY COLLECTIONS OF HISTORICAL BOOKS AND ITEMS FROM MILITARY HISTORY.

  20. avatar CHS says:

    I don’t want to see Nazi stuff at the gun show either, but I’d much rather get rid of the masses of tables selling Harbor-Freight quality tools, fake native american jewelry, pain relief salves and emoji pillows before that one guy totally pretending to be a WWII fan.

    The beef jerky can stay though. I like beef jerky.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      Word. I’ve been to more than one gunshow where the only purchase I made was jerky.

    2. avatar ATFAgentBob says:

      Nazi, Soviet, Confederate, British, and all the others’ militaria do belong at gun shows. Hate to admit it but there is some overlap in customer base between the two. How would you feel about buying a German Mauser with original Nazi bayonet vs not getting that Mauser because of some ban on anything marked with the reich eagle? Books are a totally different thing in my opinion and that all depends on content. If say the book is all about the holocaust never happening or the holocaust actually being a good thing then yeah no buy for me. However, if that book is about German weapons, uniforms, tactics, and that sort of thing then yeah I might buy it for research.

      1. avatar CHS says:

        I don’t actually want to see any censorship at gun shows. My post was meant as a joke.

        That said, I have nothing against legit militaria. I have nothing against legit German militaria.

        But I don’t like neo-Nazis and white supremacists, racists, etc. And I’ve been to more than my fair share of gun shows where there’s always “that table”. It’s usually one lone table, maybe 2 guys manning it, with a weird variety of prepper books and Nazi memorabilia. Those guys are NOT selling memorabilia. They’re racist a-holes pushing Nazi ideology.

        I don’t like seeing that stuff at gun shows.

        But I also don’t want to see them banned or censored. Because I believe in the 1st amendment.

        But I will mock these a-holes every chance I get and make them feel as unwelcome as I possibly can.

      2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        “Books are a totally different thing in my opinion and that all depends on content.” – Content protections are the heart of the 1A. And on the whole Nazi memorabilia thing, I remember growing up, my friend across the street’s dad had a knife marked with a swastika that his dad had taken in WWII. We thought that was the coolest thing. “Pop” took that knife from some Nazi he killed (which totally wasn’t the case because he was a pilot, but we didn’t know better).

        Even at that young age, we had a sense of history.

  21. avatar Nostalgic Libertarian says:

    Remember the good old days when the left at least believed in the FIRST amendment?

      1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

        This

        They only cared about freedom of speech when they didn’t control the narrative.

        Now that the shoe is on the other foot they are all for restricting speech that doesn’t fit their worldview.

        They are the biggest hypocrites.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      Though others beat me to it, no, I don’t. I do remember when that was the claim.

  22. NAZI stuff is available at bookstores, no one calls for that to be banned. and we need to always be reminded about that and the CSA, we need to have these things fresh in our minds as well as communism. this way we may be able to stop that from happening again. the democratic party does not want us to know about those things because we might see what they are doing.

  23. avatar 61north says:

    “And certainly we can’t control the society at large but we can certainly control those things that are under county government.”

    Perhaps he’s not familiar with the local libraries? http://www.westchesterlibraries.org/

    The libraries in Westchester county have over 2,000 books about Nazis. And over 1,000 about Confederates.

    So does he plan to start burning books at the library next?

    1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

      Wouldn’t surprise me if they did.

      They are Democrats afterall and their chairman just came out in support of Antifa so you know what they say about birds of a feather….

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email