Reno Vet Cuts Down Mexican Flag Flown Above American Flag

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

11. When flags of two or more nations are displayed, they are to be flown from separate staffs of the same height. The flags should be of approximately equal size. International usage forbids the display of the flag of one nation above that of another nation in time of peace. The order of precedence for flags generally is National flags (US first, then others in alphabetical order in English), State (host state first, then others in the order of admission) and territories (Washington DC, Puerto Rico, etc.), Military (in order of establishment: Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard), then other.

http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html

Interesting...

The flags at the buildings rented by the company for which I work are set up with the US flag highest, the Canadian flag below the US flag, and the state flag below the Canadian flag (all on separate poles).

I questioned it and was told that I was wrong and they didn't need to have the Canadian flag at the same height.

ZV

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: montypythizzle

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: buck

Originally posted by: alien42
who cares?

Im sure a Vet would.

and a vet is more american than i am?
whatever (and i dont want to hear that i am disrespecting a vet because i am not)

They have also fought for their country, not sit around on the internets. You would protect your house if you bought it or worked for it. Eh, I guess you would defend your rents basement though.

Objection!

TallBill nefs just as much as we do

 

[alien42]

Originally posted by: buck

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: montypythizzle

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: buck

Originally posted by: alien42
who cares?

Im sure a Vet would.

and a vet is more american than i am?
whatever (and i dont want to hear that i am disrespecting a vet because i am not)

They have also fought for their country, not sit around on the internets. You would protect your house if you bought it or worked for it. Eh, I guess you would defend your rents basement though.

i own my own house, thanks though

Owning your own house cookie and fighting overseas for our country is night and day sir. If you can't see the difference in that, you are an idiot.

i did not relate the two, just responding to montys statement. calling me an idiot makes you a big man doesnt it? what ever happened to personal attacks not being allowed anyways?

 

[jman19]

Talk about a non-issue... jeez.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: SonnyDaze
Good for Jim Brossard. :thumbsup:

Originally posted by: dainthomas
I wonder if the Reno sheriff's department was called to the scene.

That would be a good episode. :laugh:

You do realize that show is filmed in SoCal, right?

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: mwmorph

Originally posted by: alien42
who cares, its just a flag.

I am part of a whole, that Democratic Republic government system makes sure that I have an investment and involvement in this country and god damn me if I won't stand up for what it stands for, mainly the (legal) people in the United States, aka. Me, my family, my friends, my classmates, coworkers and fellow Americans. It's the American flag and America if I'm not mistaken is my country. If I don't have pride in my country and assume the flag that represents me deserves some dignity, then I don't deserve any respect either in association.

I bet you never show pride in you country or do anything for your country besides become offended by violations of the flag code.

Thanks for the personal attack from someone who's never responded to any of my posts before or been on here long enough to even know me. Great way to start off here, making enemies and spreading bs.

Lets see, I canvassed for Barack Obama and I'm in the middle of my ROTC application for the Marines, Air Force and Army and oh yeah, I took the time and effort (13 years) to become a naturalized US citizen.

But I guess thats not involvement in one's country. Let me ask, what have you done for America that lets you get on this high and mighty horse to shoot me down?

 

[Kadarin]

That guy should be thrown in jail for violating the delicate sensibilities of our Hispanic voting population!

/sarcasm

 

[WingZero94]

Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer
At least someone has the balls to stand up for not only what they believe in, but for whats right. You choose to come and live in this country then you had better respect it and its laws.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: mugs
The store owner was an idiot for flying the Mexican flag above the American flag. He had to realize how much hatred that would bring his way.

But on the other hand, the flag code is violated ALL THE TIME, even by supposedly patriotic people who fly their flags in front of their houses in the rain or at night unilluminated. Businesses violate the flag code ALL THE TIME by using flags in advertisements.

This isn't about the flag code.

how is it NOT about the flag code? There are certain portions of the flag code, that when violated, do not present much of an issue, even for veterans. Such as not lighting up the flag at night, flying the flag when it is beginning to tear due to wind damage, etc etc. These are things, that while frowned upon by many, are not worth putting up much fuss. My own parents have a flag that is one of those that hands off an outward extending pole from the porch, and it's not illuminated. They try and bring it in before storms, but don't always get the chance. Regardless, I don't fret because it's not something I would want to stress over.
HOWEVER, flying The Colors BENEATH another flag, NO MATTER WHAT FLAG IT IS, even if it's a State's flag, is highly offensive to many individuals.

You more or less made my point. It's not about the fact that he was "illegally" flying the flag. People really don't care so much about that - "patriotic" people do it all the time. It was more about the message he was sending by flying the Mexican flag over the American flag. I don't like that message, and I think the guy should go back to Mexico if he feels that way, but the first amendment protects his right to do it just like it protects a protester's right to burn the flag. This veteran may respect the flag, but he doesn't respect what it stands for.

how? no, I am not missing your point. it's quite obvious. But look at it this way.
Sure, that store owner has the right to do as he pleases (if he's not illegal, but I'll be nice and assume he is a citizen or at least has the proper rights to be here), but you have to be careful with the rights of the 1st Amendment. It's used too often as a 'do whatever you want pass', and I find that part in of itself disrespectful. However, this is not about that. Or actually, it is.
Think of it like this. He has the right to fly the flag in whatever way he chooses, but since it is such a glaring violation of the flag code (one that deserves action, imho), then that vet has the right to take it down and restore justice to The Colors.

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: buck

Originally posted by: alien42
who cares?

Im sure a Vet would.

and a vet is more american than i am?

Yes.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: WingZero94

Originally posted by: RadiclDreamer
At least someone has the balls to stand up for not only what they believe in, but for whats right. You choose to come and live in this country then you had better respect it and its laws.

Got to love how people brush over the fact that it's a non-enforceable law because it violates the 1st Amendment. Are you really arguing that the store owner broke a law? If you're going to argue in favor of the veteran, at least make it a worthwhile argument instead of one formulated through trite rhetoric.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: mugs
The store owner was an idiot for flying the Mexican flag above the American flag. He had to realize how much hatred that would bring his way.

But on the other hand, the flag code is violated ALL THE TIME, even by supposedly patriotic people who fly their flags in front of their houses in the rain or at night unilluminated. Businesses violate the flag code ALL THE TIME by using flags in advertisements.

This isn't about the flag code.

how is it NOT about the flag code? There are certain portions of the flag code, that when violated, do not present much of an issue, even for veterans. Such as not lighting up the flag at night, flying the flag when it is beginning to tear due to wind damage, etc etc. These are things, that while frowned upon by many, are not worth putting up much fuss. My own parents have a flag that is one of those that hands off an outward extending pole from the porch, and it's not illuminated. They try and bring it in before storms, but don't always get the chance. Regardless, I don't fret because it's not something I would want to stress over.
HOWEVER, flying The Colors BENEATH another flag, NO MATTER WHAT FLAG IT IS, even if it's a State's flag, is highly offensive to many individuals.

You more or less made my point. It's not about the fact that he was "illegally" flying the flag. People really don't care so much about that - "patriotic" people do it all the time. It was more about the message he was sending by flying the Mexican flag over the American flag. I don't like that message, and I think the guy should go back to Mexico if he feels that way, but the first amendment protects his right to do it just like it protects a protester's right to burn the flag. This veteran may respect the flag, but he doesn't respect what it stands for.

how? no, I am not missing your point. it's quite obvious. But look at it this way.
Sure, that store owner has the right to do as he pleases (if he's not illegal, but I'll be nice and assume he is a citizen or at least has the proper rights to be here), but you have to be careful with the rights of the 1st Amendment. It's used too often as a 'do whatever you want pass', and I find that part in of itself disrespectful. However, this is not about that. Or actually, it is.
Think of it like this. He has the right to fly the flag in whatever way he chooses, but since it is such a glaring violation of the flag code (one that deserves action, imho), then that vet has the right to take it down and restore justice to The Colors.

How kind of you in not being a bigot.

He has the right to fly the flag however he wants because he's not breaking the law. The veteran exercised vigilante justice not even for a broken law but for his inability to control his emotions. I don't understand why it's so hard for people to understand that the store owner didn't break a law. He broke a guideline that's used by the government for flying flags, not a law.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: buck

Originally posted by: alien42
who cares?

Im sure a Vet would.

and a vet is more american than i am?

Yes.

Do you live in the Starship Trooper world?

Fighting guarantees citizenship!

 

[Mill]

Title needs to be edited. The USSC has struck down laws pertaining to flag desecration and display in two different cases. One in 1989 and the other in 1990 I believe.

The current Flag Code is simply an advisory and is not law as it is Unconstitutional because it violates the First Amendment.

ACLU of Nevada released a statement:

The ACLU of Nevada is concerned about recent media reports that it is "illegal" to fly foreign flags over the U.S. flag.

While there is indeed a federal law regulating the display of the U.S. flag, that law is merely advisory and simply codifies standard government practice in displaying the American flag.

Several federal courts have examined this law and held that the flag rules are not mandatory and cannot be enforced. Indeed, if the federal flag rules were mandatory, they would clearly violate the First Amendment, which protects every American's right to speak and express themselves, including their choice of flag to display.

In 1989, the Supreme Court held that we even have the right to burn our own flag, which had been outlawed by 48 states. Our robust and meaningful democracy is built upon our First Amendment, which protects our right to express ourselves even when - indeed, particularly when - that expression is distasteful or unpopular.

We at the ACLU wholeheartedly support the First Amendment rights of all, and this includes the right of the press to publish stories as they see fit. Of course, this right necessarily means that sometimes the media may get it wrong.

However, we urge the media to take the opportunity to correct misinformation, especially about our rights and the criminal law.

The media is a powerful tool in informing the public, and this is an opportunity to tell the world that the First Amendment is alive and well, and protects everyone's right to fly whatever flag they wish on their property.

 

[GTaudiophile]

He derserves a medal.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: mugs
The store owner was an idiot for flying the Mexican flag above the American flag. He had to realize how much hatred that would bring his way.

But on the other hand, the flag code is violated ALL THE TIME, even by supposedly patriotic people who fly their flags in front of their houses in the rain or at night unilluminated. Businesses violate the flag code ALL THE TIME by using flags in advertisements.

This isn't about the flag code.

how is it NOT about the flag code? There are certain portions of the flag code, that when violated, do not present much of an issue, even for veterans. Such as not lighting up the flag at night, flying the flag when it is beginning to tear due to wind damage, etc etc. These are things, that while frowned upon by many, are not worth putting up much fuss. My own parents have a flag that is one of those that hands off an outward extending pole from the porch, and it's not illuminated. They try and bring it in before storms, but don't always get the chance. Regardless, I don't fret because it's not something I would want to stress over.
HOWEVER, flying The Colors BENEATH another flag, NO MATTER WHAT FLAG IT IS, even if it's a State's flag, is highly offensive to many individuals.

You more or less made my point. It's not about the fact that he was "illegally" flying the flag. People really don't care so much about that - "patriotic" people do it all the time. It was more about the message he was sending by flying the Mexican flag over the American flag. I don't like that message, and I think the guy should go back to Mexico if he feels that way, but the first amendment protects his right to do it just like it protects a protester's right to burn the flag. This veteran may respect the flag, but he doesn't respect what it stands for.

how? no, I am not missing your point. it's quite obvious. But look at it this way.
Sure, that store owner has the right to do as he pleases (if he's not illegal, but I'll be nice and assume he is a citizen or at least has the proper rights to be here), but you have to be careful with the rights of the 1st Amendment. It's used too often as a 'do whatever you want pass', and I find that part in of itself disrespectful. However, this is not about that. Or actually, it is.
Think of it like this. He has the right to fly the flag in whatever way he chooses, but since it is such a glaring violation of the flag code (one that deserves action, imho), then that vet has the right to take it down and restore justice to The Colors.

How kind of you in not being a bigot.

He has the right to fly the flag however he wants because he's not breaking the law. The veteran exercised vigilante justice not even for a broken law but for his inability to control his emotions. I don't understand why it's so hard for people to understand that the store owner didn't break a law. He broke a guideline that's used by the government for flying flags, not a law.

I've never said it's law. Quit trying to put words into my mouth. And who cares if it's vigilante justice? Sure, no law was broken, however, the store owner's actions' were severely disrespectful to the country he chooses to live in. If you are going to be a citizen, have respect for the history of The Colors and what they represent.
What I absolutely hate about protesters who burn the flag or generally disrespect it, are they are fvcking morons in that they don't see the irony of any statement they are trying to make with the flag. Guess what? You couldn't do that to The Colors if not for the history of them and those who have sacrificed themselves throughout history to uphold the beliefs of them. So, by disrespecting The Colors, you are being disrespectful to the history of this country.
I support the vet and his 'vigilante justice', because he has equal right to restore respect.
Don't live here if you are going to disrespect the history and purpose of The Colors. And no, that's not a stab directed only to Mexican immigrants, but to all citizens who choose to desecrate and disrespect the flag.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: mugs
You more or less made my point. It's not about the fact that he was "illegally" flying the flag. People really don't care so much about that - "patriotic" people do it all the time. It was more about the message he was sending by flying the Mexican flag over the American flag. I don't like that message, and I think the guy should go back to Mexico if he feels that way, but the first amendment protects his right to do it just like it protects a protester's right to burn the flag. This veteran may respect the flag, but he doesn't respect what it stands for.

how? no, I am not missing your point. it's quite obvious. But look at it this way.
Sure, that store owner has the right to do as he pleases (if he's not illegal, but I'll be nice and assume he is a citizen or at least has the proper rights to be here), but you have to be careful with the rights of the 1st Amendment. It's used too often as a 'do whatever you want pass', and I find that part in of itself disrespectful. However, this is not about that. Or actually, it is.
Think of it like this. He has the right to fly the flag in whatever way he chooses, but since it is such a glaring violation of the flag code (one that deserves action, imho), then that vet has the right to take it down and restore justice to The Colors.

What gives him that right?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: mugs
The store owner was an idiot for flying the Mexican flag above the American flag. He had to realize how much hatred that would bring his way.

But on the other hand, the flag code is violated ALL THE TIME, even by supposedly patriotic people who fly their flags in front of their houses in the rain or at night unilluminated. Businesses violate the flag code ALL THE TIME by using flags in advertisements.

This isn't about the flag code.

how is it NOT about the flag code? There are certain portions of the flag code, that when violated, do not present much of an issue, even for veterans. Such as not lighting up the flag at night, flying the flag when it is beginning to tear due to wind damage, etc etc. These are things, that while frowned upon by many, are not worth putting up much fuss. My own parents have a flag that is one of those that hands off an outward extending pole from the porch, and it's not illuminated. They try and bring it in before storms, but don't always get the chance. Regardless, I don't fret because it's not something I would want to stress over.
HOWEVER, flying The Colors BENEATH another flag, NO MATTER WHAT FLAG IT IS, even if it's a State's flag, is highly offensive to many individuals.

You more or less made my point. It's not about the fact that he was "illegally" flying the flag. People really don't care so much about that - "patriotic" people do it all the time. It was more about the message he was sending by flying the Mexican flag over the American flag. I don't like that message, and I think the guy should go back to Mexico if he feels that way, but the first amendment protects his right to do it just like it protects a protester's right to burn the flag. This veteran may respect the flag, but he doesn't respect what it stands for.

how? no, I am not missing your point. it's quite obvious. But look at it this way.
Sure, that store owner has the right to do as he pleases (if he's not illegal, but I'll be nice and assume he is a citizen or at least has the proper rights to be here), but you have to be careful with the rights of the 1st Amendment. It's used too often as a 'do whatever you want pass', and I find that part in of itself disrespectful. However, this is not about that. Or actually, it is.
Think of it like this. He has the right to fly the flag in whatever way he chooses, but since it is such a glaring violation of the flag code (one that deserves action, imho), then that vet has the right to take it down and restore justice to The Colors.

How kind of you in not being a bigot.

He has the right to fly the flag however he wants because he's not breaking the law. The veteran exercised vigilante justice not even for a broken law but for his inability to control his emotions. I don't understand why it's so hard for people to understand that the store owner didn't break a law. He broke a guideline that's used by the government for flying flags, not a law.

I've never said it's law. Quit trying to put words into my mouth. And who cares if it's vigilante justice? Sure, no law was broken, however, the store owner's actions' were severely disrespectful to the country he chooses to live in. If you are going to be a citizen, have respect for the history of The Colors and what they represent.
What I absolutely hate about protesters who burn the flag or generally disrespect it, are they are fvcking morons in that they don't see the irony of any statement they are trying to make with the flag. Guess what? You couldn't do that to The Colors if not for the history of them and those who have sacrificed themselves throughout history to uphold the beliefs of them. So, by disrespecting The Colors, you are being disrespectful to the history of this country.
I support the vet and his 'vigilante justice', because he has equal right to restore respect.
Don't live here if you are going to disrespect the history and purpose of The Colors. And no, that's not a stab directed only to Mexican immigrants, but to all citizens who choose to desecrate and disrespect the flag.

No he doesn't. He trespassed onto private property and vandalized someone's property. Where the fuck is that in the Constitution?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: mugs
You more or less made my point. It's not about the fact that he was "illegally" flying the flag. People really don't care so much about that - "patriotic" people do it all the time. It was more about the message he was sending by flying the Mexican flag over the American flag. I don't like that message, and I think the guy should go back to Mexico if he feels that way, but the first amendment protects his right to do it just like it protects a protester's right to burn the flag. This veteran may respect the flag, but he doesn't respect what it stands for.

how? no, I am not missing your point. it's quite obvious. But look at it this way.
Sure, that store owner has the right to do as he pleases (if he's not illegal, but I'll be nice and assume he is a citizen or at least has the proper rights to be here), but you have to be careful with the rights of the 1st Amendment. It's used too often as a 'do whatever you want pass', and I find that part in of itself disrespectful. However, this is not about that. Or actually, it is.
Think of it like this. He has the right to fly the flag in whatever way he chooses, but since it is such a glaring violation of the flag code (one that deserves action, imho), then that vet has the right to take it down and restore justice to The Colors.

What gives him that right?

mugs, save it. This is like any other topic on Immigration or Rights. People have their minds made up. They either believe what they want or they can try to be rational.

Rational thought leads even the most average person to realize that you cannot commit a crime against someone just because you disagree with what they say or do. Especially when what the person did was fully protected under the First Amendment and was in no way illegal or unlawful.

 

[thepd7]

Oh yeah I forgot about the 1st amendment that let's me do/say anything I want.

Well I am off to the elementary school to go scream at kids to fuck themselves, cops can't tell me not to because I have freedom of speech from the first amendment!

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: destrekor
I've never said it's law. Quit trying to put words into my mouth. And who cares if it's vigilante justice? Sure, no law was broken, however, the store owner's actions' were severely disrespectful to the country he chooses to live in. If you are going to be a citizen, have respect for the history of The Colors and what they represent.
What I absolutely hate about protesters who burn the flag or generally disrespect it, are they are fvcking morons in that they don't see the irony of any statement they are trying to make with the flag. Guess what? You couldn't do that to The Colors if not for the history of them and those who have sacrificed themselves throughout history to uphold the beliefs of them. So, by disrespecting The Colors, you are being disrespectful to the history of this country.
I support the vet and his 'vigilante justice', because he has equal right to restore respect.
Don't live here if you are going to disrespect the history and purpose of The Colors. And no, that's not a stab directed only to Mexican immigrants, but to all citizens who choose to desecrate and disrespect the flag.

The point is that because it's not a law, what the veteran did was not appropriate. You're implication that he had the right to do what he did implies that he was upholding some law through vigilante justice. The fact that he's breaking the law to enforce a flag code just makes his actions that much more pathetic. You have every right to support him but it's a naive belief that one has the right to impose their beliefs on another.

The irony in the statement isn't in flag burning. The fact that this country's forefathers fought so tirelessly for the guarantees afforded to us by the ideals that they fought for and displayed in the Constitution is what's important, not The Colors. It would be disrespectful to this country if you choose vigilante justice in enforcing your beliefs on others. It's disrespectful to this country if you can't even acknowledge the first amendment in the Constitution. It's disrespectful to this country that one would think that the greatness of this country lies in its flag and not the ideals that it attempts to uphold. It would, thus, be disrespectful to this country if someone was so afraid of retribution from others that they couldn't even speak their minds, which is exactly what the veteran's actions instills.

The Colors does not equate to the ideals of this country. The ideals equate to the ideals.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: mugs
You more or less made my point. It's not about the fact that he was "illegally" flying the flag. People really don't care so much about that - "patriotic" people do it all the time. It was more about the message he was sending by flying the Mexican flag over the American flag. I don't like that message, and I think the guy should go back to Mexico if he feels that way, but the first amendment protects his right to do it just like it protects a protester's right to burn the flag. This veteran may respect the flag, but he doesn't respect what it stands for.

how? no, I am not missing your point. it's quite obvious. But look at it this way.
Sure, that store owner has the right to do as he pleases (if he's not illegal, but I'll be nice and assume he is a citizen or at least has the proper rights to be here), but you have to be careful with the rights of the 1st Amendment. It's used too often as a 'do whatever you want pass', and I find that part in of itself disrespectful. However, this is not about that. Or actually, it is.
Think of it like this. He has the right to fly the flag in whatever way he chooses, but since it is such a glaring violation of the flag code (one that deserves action, imho), then that vet has the right to take it down and restore justice to The Colors.

What gives him that right?

mugs, save it. This is like any other topic on Immigration or Rights. People have their minds made up. They either believe what they want or they can try to be rational.

Rational thought leads even the most average person to realize that you cannot commit a crime against someone just because you disagree with what they say or do. Especially when what the person did was fully protected under the First Amendment and was in no way illegal or unlawful.

oh come on. I fully support the proper freedoms, and understand everything I have said is not technically able to stand in a court. I know they are not rational, so don't confuse me with someone who is mindless and moronic. I have many things trapped in my mind and this is probably one of the things that should have stayed trapped.
I probably shouldn't attempt to rationalize what I have said either, it's not worth the effort nor will it ever appear rational to people who want to interpret the laws the way they currently have.

But let me just say this: the flag code deserves it's own protection, and should not be unconstitutional due to the First Amendment. Why? Because the First Amendment has been abused.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I'm no law student, but I'm pretty sure it says peaceably assemble, and freedom of speech and freedom of press. It takes some stretching through rather interesting interpretations to read freedom of any actions desirable.
How the hell did the courts ever rule in favor of those that have chosen to not abide by the Flag Code and desecrate The Colors? Bullshit if you ask me. Thus how I say the 1st Amendment has been abused, and that blame lies on some sketchy lawyers that have defended certain people and have gotten cases taken to the Supreme Court. How the Supreme Court ever ruled in favor of the 'protesters', who knows. Maybe I need to study law a little more, and I make no claims of being a law student or one who knows all the intricacies of law.
So, instead of bashing me if I have misinterpreted everything here, how about peacefully correcting me?

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: thepd7
Oh yeah I forgot about the 1st amendment that let's me do/say anything I want.

Well I am off to the elementary school to go scream at kids to fuck themselves, cops can't tell me not to because I have freedom of speech from the first amendment!

Yet another amazing display of poorly formed logic. How do you even come to the conclusion that going to a school and yelling obscenities is the equivalent of a person flying a flag incorrectly and not illegally on private property.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: destrekor
I've never said it's law. Quit trying to put words into my mouth. And who cares if it's vigilante justice? Sure, no law was broken, however, the store owner's actions' were severely disrespectful to the country he chooses to live in. If you are going to be a citizen, have respect for the history of The Colors and what they represent.
What I absolutely hate about protesters who burn the flag or generally disrespect it, are they are fvcking morons in that they don't see the irony of any statement they are trying to make with the flag. Guess what? You couldn't do that to The Colors if not for the history of them and those who have sacrificed themselves throughout history to uphold the beliefs of them. So, by disrespecting The Colors, you are being disrespectful to the history of this country.
I support the vet and his 'vigilante justice', because he has equal right to restore respect.
Don't live here if you are going to disrespect the history and purpose of The Colors. And no, that's not a stab directed only to Mexican immigrants, but to all citizens who choose to desecrate and disrespect the flag.

The point is that because it's not a law, what the store owner did was not appropriate. You're implication that he had the right to do what he did implies that he was upholding some law through freedom of speech. The fact that he's disrespecting our country. You have every right to support him but it's a naive belief that one has the right to impose their beliefs on another.

The irony in the statement isn't in flag burning. The fact that this country's forefathers fought so tirelessly for the guarantees afforded to us by the ideals that they fought for and displayed in the Constitution is what's important, not The Colors. It would be disrespectful to this country if you choose not to use vigilante justice in enforcing whats right. It's disrespectful to this country if you can't even acknowledge the first amendment in the Constitution. It's disrespectful to this country that one would think that the greatness of this country not to understand that our flag represents the constituion and our ideals and the sacrafice of all who have died for our rights. It would, thus, be disrespectful to this country if someone was so afraid of retribution from others that they couldn't even speak their minds, without being called a racist and a bigot.

The Colors does infact equate to the ideals of this country. The ideals equate to the flag..

Fixed.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: thepd7
Oh yeah I forgot about the 1st amendment that let's me do/say anything I want.

Well I am off to the elementary school to go scream at kids to fuck themselves, cops can't tell me not to because I have freedom of speech from the first amendment!

Yet another amazing display of poorly formed logic. How do you even come to the conclusion that going to a school and yelling obscenities is the equivalent of a person flying a flag incorrectly and not illegally on private property.

worse things have been protected under the 1st Amendment and specifically the Freedom of Speech. It's taken to damned literally and as I have said, is abused greatly. Read my post above.