Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

First they came for our cloths with flags printed on them...

Discussion in 'Legal' started by MasterPiece Arms.com, Jun 23, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MasterPiece Arms.com

    MasterPiece Arms.com member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    101
    Location:
    s9.invisionfree.com/MasterPiece_Arms_MAC
    BBC NEWS


    US House passes flag-burning ban [pure phony patriotism at work]


    The US House of Representatives has approved a constitutional amendment allowing lawmakers to ban flag burning.

    The Republican-led House voted 286-130 on the divisive measure, which now goes before the Senate.

    Similar moves in the past have failed to gather the majority required for constitutional amendments in both houses of the US Congress.

    The draft amendment aims to override a 1989 Supreme Court ruling protecting flag desecration as free speech.

    The issue has been a rallying cause for conservatives ever since.

    It gathered political momentum in the wake of the 11 September 2001 attacks on the US.

    "Ask the men and women who stood on top of the World Trade Center," said Republican Randy Cunningham, a Californian congressman. [He did NOT just say that did he?]

    "Ask them and they will tell you - pass this amendment" [Oh...my...God. I do not believe a U.S. congressman is actually using the dead from 9/11 to campaign for legislation, and actually saying they would agree with him if they WEREN'T dead!]

    Senate hurdle

    Wednesday's vote was the fifth time the Republican-dominated House has approved the amendment.

    But so far it has failed to get the required 67 votes needed in the Senate.

    However Democrats are divided on the issue, and recent changes in the Senate mean the measure could be approved.

    "There are too many scenarios where we would lose," Terri Ann Schroeder of the American Civil Liberties Union - which opposes the amendment - told the New York Times.

    The move does not directly prohibit desecration of the flag - but allows individual state legislatures and the US Congress to enact such a ban.

    If the Senate in turn approves the amendment by a two-thirds majority, it still has to be ratified by 38 states.

    The constitution has been amended 27 times, including the first 10 amendments known as the Bill of Rights.
    Story from BBC NEWS:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/4122814.stm

    Published: 2005/06/23 11:02:27 GMT

    © BBC MMV
     
  2. one-shot-one

    one-shot-one Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    1,029
    Location:
    texas
    Well....

    if you want to argue about politicians i'll pass.
    but i agree people should have the free speech to burn the flag as long as those who gave themselves to serve under it retain the right to inflict serious bodily injury on those people as part of their free speech!
    :neener:
    by the way i'm not a vet but my dad was that flag covered his coffin when we burried him, and those that served do not deserve to see this type of protest, find something else to make your point.
     
  3. Rockrivr1

    Rockrivr1 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,244
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    "but i agree people should have the free speech to burn the flag as long as those who gave themselves to serve under it retain the right to inflict serious bodily injury on those people as part of their free speech"

    +1

    Free speech is exactly that, free speech. But, I cannot vouch for that person's safety if they try it when I'm around. :fire:
     
  4. Fletchette

    Fletchette Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,398
    Location:
    WY
    MPA,

    I agree with you. This is phony patriotism. It is right-wing PC.

    My position is, if the flag is the property of the protester, that protester can indeed destroy his properrty. If it isn't, arrest him for vandalism.

    If this Amendemnt actually passes you will see more flag-burning in one week than you have in a lifetime. :(
     
  5. Sindawe

    Sindawe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,480
    Location:
    Outside The People's Republic of Boulder, CO
    Nor can I vouch for yours should you innate the use of force against me or mine while we exercise the right of free speech.

    Debate, argue, bicker, yell, scream, foamy mouthed ranting. Fine.

    Lay hands apon another because you disagree with them. You'll be in for a world of hurt.
     
  6. IZinterrogator

    IZinterrogator Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    275
    Location:
    Huachuca City/Fort Huachuca, AZ
    Maybe he was talking about the firefighters that raised the flag over the wreckage of the WTC. That would make more sense to me.
     
  7. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,056
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    You realize that you violate the law if you attack someone because of speech, right?

    I don't know if you carry a gun or not. Hopefully not, or else you may end up serving time for murder.
     
  8. Derby FALs

    Derby FALs Member In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2004
    Messages:
    978
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Federal law at that...
     
  9. MatthewVanitas

    MatthewVanitas Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    3,463
    Location:
    Burlington, Vermont and Montreal, Québec
    Scenario:

    "Your honor, there I was, expressing my political opinions by burning an American flag, which I purhased at Wal-Mart, while standing on my own front yard. Suddenly, this maniac jumps out of his car, trespasses on my property, and proceeds toward me with a tire iron threatening grievous bodily injury or death. At that point, I had no choice but to draw my .45 Kimber and place two 230FMJ rounds in his chest. Any reasonable person in my situation would recognize the danger of imminent bodily harm."

    So, who would the hero be by THR standards?
     
  10. Sindawe

    Sindawe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,480
    Location:
    Outside The People's Republic of Boulder, CO
    In my book, the flag burner. Those who protect their rights, even with lethal force, are the heroes.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2005
  11. BigG

    BigG Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    7,081
    Location:
    Dixieland
    Often the same yokels who stretch free speech to its furthest extent seek to limit the RKBA to its smallest extent. Why is that?
     
  12. Ransom

    Ransom Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2003
    Messages:
    438
    I dont agree with what you say but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it.

    That is what America is about.

    edit:

    What amazes me its funny the other way around as well. An awful lot of right wingers will argue that the second amendment shouldnt be limited but will argue up and down how the first amendment should.

    Maybe, as in a lot of things, the truth lies in the middle. Both amendments shouldnt be limited.
     
  13. MrTuffPaws

    MrTuffPaws Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,511
    Location:
    Az
    +10
     
  14. Rockrivr1

    Rockrivr1 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,244
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    I've had both friends and family who have died in war/conflict/peace keeping effort and many more that have served, including myself, for me to just stand around while some "yokel" decides to burn a flag in protest to what they have paid the ultimate price to defend. No way no how!

    While it may not turn to violence I can ultimately say that the person holding the flag will not be holding it for long. If that gets me in trouble for theft or some such other offense then SO BE IT!!! That piece of cloth is sacred ground in my mind and I'll defend it as such.
     
  15. Ransom

    Ransom Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2003
    Messages:
    438
    But its freedom that those people died to protect. To attack someone for simply expressing themselves would be far more disrespectful to thier memory.
     
  16. cropcirclewalker

    cropcirclewalker member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,380
    Location:
    In the Woods close to Arkansas
    And thus, the concept of federalism draws it's last breath. :(

    edited to add; Mr. Ransom is a quicker typster than me. I wonder if good ol' Tom Jefferson or George Washington considered themselves as subject and beholding to the Stars and Stripes.
     
  17. Third_Rail

    Third_Rail Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,981
    Yep, and I wouldn't have a problem with it. The 1st Amendment means just as much to me as the 2nd does. This proposed law is BS.
     
  18. Flyboy

    Flyboy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,888
    Location:
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Perhaps your problem, then, is that you worship objects, instead of concepts.
     
  19. MasterPiece Arms.com

    MasterPiece Arms.com member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    101
    Location:
    s9.invisionfree.com/MasterPiece_Arms_MAC
    Emotional attachment to a cloth does NOT trump property rights!

    Rockriver1, this is pure reckless emotionalism that you probably decry the gun banners for using:
    I want to personally thank the TRUE patriots who have stood up in this thread for private property rights, which is what the founders protected BEFORE ANY STINKIN' FLAG WAS SEWN: Fletchette, Sindawe, Lone_Gunman, Derby FALs, MatthewVanitas, Ransom, cropcirclewalker, Third_Rail, and Flyboy.

    Clearly Rockriver1 has an emotional attachment to an idealized fantasy projected onto a cloth. Obviously it means more to him than the ACTUAL liberties. I'd bet a weeks pay that he doesn't like it when the ANTI GUNNERS use that type of emotion to destroy the 2nd amendment. I invite him to STAY in Massachusettes where highly charged emotion trumps any and all property rights.

    Mr Rockriver1, I sense that this is PURE machismo, bravado, and big mouthed bluff, but if you actually mean that veiled threat: bring it on pal. You name the public place and I'll bring my flag, the gas, the lighter, and the water bucket (to satisfy the fire marshall, which we've done when staging U.N. flag burning rallys).

    When did someone else's property become YOUR sacred ground to defend? Again, see previous paragraph.
     
  20. mtnbkr

    mtnbkr Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,108
    Location:
    Manassas, Va
    +1

    Chris
     
  21. P95Carry

    P95Carry Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    16,341
    Location:
    South PA, and a bit West of center!
    Careful with the thread direction folks - this is a highly emotive issue, from whichever direction you are coming.

    But try and keep it cool eh! :)
     
  22. VARifleman

    VARifleman Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,533
    Location:
    Northern VA
    Sounds like Idolatry to me...I thought this was settled 5000 yrs ago? :scrutiny:
     
  23. one-shot-one

    one-shot-one Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    1,029
    Location:
    texas
    missed the point

    if you want to go out buy a flag and hide in you back yard and burn it go ahead, if you go out buy a flag and stand out in frount (on their property or on public street) and burn the flag you deserve and butt wooping.
    it ain't the privite property rights i got a problem with its you choice of expression. that flag is only colored cloth but you (they whatever) are not burning it as a piece of cloth. that does not convey much of a message unless your beef is with the textile industry. the act of burning the flag is a statement against more tan a piece of cloth, kinda like yelling bomb at the airport, you can do it but don't expect everyone to be happy about it.
    this like many more threads here will not be resolved to either sids satisfaction, that much i can promise. :banghead:
     
  24. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,297
    Location:
    Looking for a cow that Queen Meadhbh stole
    This proposal is an affront to both the 1st Amendment and the 1st Commandment.
     
  25. VARifleman

    VARifleman Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,533
    Location:
    Northern VA
    Beat you to it, cuchulainn! :neener:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page