Supreme Court to Rule on Cross Burning

[BDawg]

Did a search on cross and one on burn and didn't see this.

CNN.com

It will be interesting to see how Republicans will weigh in on this topic. On one hand, it's similar to flag burning which they think should be illegal, but on the other, it's a strong motivational tool they use against their enemies. j/k!!!


IMHO, the government should ban this except where it creates a true fire hazzard. Perhaps you should get approval to do it like burning leaves.

 

[her209]

I'm only burning a letter. Its not like I'm burning all the letters of the alphabet.

 

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: her209
I'm only burning a letter. Its not like I'm burning all the letters of the alphabet.

Yeah, why does no one burn large "Z"s?

 

[Scarpozzi]

Freedom of speech. The courts need to leave this one up to Smokey the Bear.

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: Scarpozzi
Freedom of speech. The courts need to leave this one up to Smokey the Bear.

Burning Crosses is not freedom of speech. Its a show of racial intimidation.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: classy

Originally posted by: Scarpozzi
Freedom of speech. The courts need to leave this one up to Smokey the Bear.

Burning Crosses is not freedom of speech. Its a show of racial intimidation.

bruning the flag can be taken the same way.

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: classy

Originally posted by: Scarpozzi
Freedom of speech. The courts need to leave this one up to Smokey the Bear.

Burning Crosses is not freedom of speech. Its a show of racial intimidation.

I was thinking this was more of a religious issue. What's the story behind burning crosses, why pick a cross and not something else?

KK

 

[woodie1]

Originally posted by: TheEvil1

Originally posted by: classy

Originally posted by: Scarpozzi
Freedom of speech. The courts need to leave this one up to Smokey the Bear.

Burning Crosses is not freedom of speech. Its a show of racial intimidation.

bruning the flag can be taken the same way.

BLING, BLING we have a winner.

 

[Bulk Beef]

Burning Crosses is not freedom of speech. Its a show of racial intimidation.

If you do it on somebody's front yard, yes, I agree, but if they want to do this kind of sh!t at their rallies, I think that's protected.

 

[deftron]

It's not Freedom of Speech (you can't go right up to someone and call them a racial slur or profane name or say your going to kill them...
The violate the First Amendment's "fighting words" doctrine)

Also, crosses should not be allowed to be burned on other peoples property no matter what.. that's tresspasing at the least.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

I would hope the Supreme Court rules that it is legally guaranteed by the constitution.
If not, what's next? Flag burning??

 

[JellyBaby]

Burning Crosses is not freedom of speech.

No, it's freedom of speech.

 

[deftron]

Burning crosses on your own yard with message aimed at general crowd = Yes, freedom of speech


Burning crosses on someone elses front yard with message aimed directy at them = Not freedom of speech .. "fighting words"

 

[Brutuskend]

Barry Black organized a Ku Klux Klan

What an ironic name......

I would think with a last name like that, his family background may not be as Arian as he might like to believe! :Q

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: BDawg

It will be interesting to see how Republicans will weigh in on this topic.

most cross burning was done by people who voted fiercly democrat

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: BDawg

It will be interesting to see how Republicans will weigh in on this topic.

most cross burning was done by people who voted fiercly democrat

WAS. That was when Democrats were conservative.

 

[MadRat]

Originally posted by: JellyBaby

Burning Crosses is not freedom of speech.

No, it's freedom of speech.

No, its not freedom of speech but rather freedom of expression.

 

[Bluefront]

I'm wondering....should I notch the two boards so they fit together nicely, or just nail the two together? Also...after the burning what should I do with the remains? Bury them reverently?

 

[FeathersMcGraw]

Originally posted by: Scarpozzi
Freedom of speech. The courts need to leave this one up to Smokey the Bear.

Federal Code Section 875(c) declares the following:

(c) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or mprisoned not more than five years, or both.

The provision of interstate commerce applies since this is a federal law, but this doesn't preclude the possibility (and probably likelihood) of similar laws applying at state or local levels. There's obviously a legal question whether a burning cross constitutes a threat to injure, but to completely pawn off the question as an issue of free speech is disingenuous, as there is legal precedent impinging on the total freedom of speech where it applies to threatening communications.

 

[scorp00]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend

Barry Black organized a Ku Klux Klan

What an ironic name......

I would think with a last name like that, his family background may not be as Arian as he might like to believe! :Q

Probably short for blacksmith, which could of been what his family used to do for a living.

 

[Nitemare]

There is no way it should be ruled unconstitutional for a person to place a burning cross in someones front yard...




but then again it should be ruled constitutional to shoot all those above persons in the head until they are dead dead dead...for criminal trespass and malicious behavior....


All's fair in love and war, I bet if the clannies were getting shot every time they tried to place a burning cross in an African-Americans front yard, there would be alot more crosses in churches and less to stand witness for hatred and bigotry.

 

[FeathersMcGraw]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
There is no way it should be ruled unconstitutional for a person to place a burning cross in someones front yard...

but then again it should be ruled constitutional to shoot all those above persons in the head until they are dead dead dead...for criminal trespass and malicious behavior....

So in defense of what you consider to be the constitutionally-protected practice of burning crosses, you're going to allow people to commit capital censure in clear violation of the rights of the cross-burners to due process of law with a jury trial?

 

[Amused]

Well, most of you know me here, so let me be short, and to the point...

As much as I detest cross burners AND flag burners, if EITHER is made illegal, I will promptly have a cross or flag bonfire on my property. I will also invite all the media who care to record the event.

Because even though I detest flag and cross burners (for different reasons) I detest totalitarianism even more.

We are only as free as the most objectionable opinion we allow to be expressed.

 

[gopunk]

should be legal

if it is used as a form of intimidation, there are laws against that. use them instead of making up new ones that shouldn't exist.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: FeathersMcGraw

Originally posted by: Nitemare
There is no way it should be ruled unconstitutional for a person to place a burning cross in someones front yard...

but then again it should be ruled constitutional to shoot all those above persons in the head until they are dead dead dead...for criminal trespass and malicious behavior....

So in defense of what you consider to be the constitutionally-protected practice of burning crosses, you're going to allow people to commit capital censure in clear violation of the rights of the cross-burners to due process of law with a jury trial?

Do I think criminal trespass deserves use of lethal force?....yes. I'm very pro-capital punishment and would like to see it used more often for offenses other than 1st degree murder charges. Hell, I'd like to bring back public executions and hangings