Man Charged With Desecrating the American Flag

[Chomsky]

This is sarcasm, right?

probably

:lamo

Oops ... I may owe you one then ...

 

[Northern Light]

Facebook isn't the problem. It's someone dumb enough to document their actions, post them online under their real name, and not expect someone to react, especially in 2016 America where the law can be bent to put you in jail if the establishment wants to.

What interests me about this case is that had he not posted the photo, nothing would've been done. The charges of disorderly conduct are obviously exaggerated in order to arrest him, since speech laws technically can't do it. The claims that many people called in concerned about safety are either non-sense, or those people themselves were exaggerating because they didn't like the flag being burned. I guess if the fire had been a little bit bigger, they could've called him a terrorist and went that route.

The article gives the guy's personal statement. While I don't care for his form of protest, he has real grievances, and he was doing it on private property.

Just another case of freedom being trampled under false pretenses.

 

[beefheart]

I saw a large sweaty guy walking around in baggy shorts that were in the same design as the American flag...how is that not a crime?

Hey, we live in a country that has liberty and freedom, and the fact that someone can burn a flag without being sent to the pokey should prove that.

Sometimes liberty and freedom are not easy to look at, but not having it is worse.

 

[beefheart]

:lamo

I'm extremely proud to say I have neither a Facebook nor Twitter account! I'm reasonably tech savvy & tech involved, but see no reason to put my personal stuff out in the world. One it's out - it's out! What looks fun & good at 19 when in college, might not look so good at 32 when you're a working professional or business owner with a wife & kids!

I'm happy to let the world go flying by on this one ...

I love Facebook, it is a great news accumulator, I subscribe to many newspapers and magazines and groups on FB, I get a lot of good information from sources all over the world.

And...lots of cat pictures....:roll:

 

[mak2]

This has always been my attitude too. I know burning the flag is a protected first amendment right. But the ass whippin he gets afterwords should be a protected form of speech too.

I am a hypocrite and I know it............. when it comes to flag denigration.

The first amendment should be treasured and protected by all means necessary.

The miscreants who publicly denigrate the flag deserve a good azz whooping. (hence my hypocrisy)

The "Stars and Bars" is being removed from public places because it stirs emotional reactions of racism, anger, and humiliation. I get it!

To many millions of people, the Red White and Blue represents the ones that came before us. It also represents the ones that have fallen and died.

The military hands the flag to the widow during the closing of a military funeral for a reason.

Hence my hypocrisy.

 

[Chomsky]

I love Facebook, it is a great news accumulator, I subscribe to many newspapers and magazines and groups on FB, I get a lot of good information from sources all over the world.

And...lots of cat pictures....:roll:

Then that might explain it - my pet tastes run strongly canine ... :mrgreen:

 

[beefheart]

Then that might explain it - my pet tastes run strongly canine ... :mrgreen:

Same here, I have a rare breed, and I can connect with others that have my breed....

 

[Chomsky]

Same here, I have a rare breed, and I can connect with others that have my breed....

You know what though: I had a Siamese when I first moved out at 17, and I must admit as cats go this one was pretty interactive and communicative! It seemed to like to hang around with me in the apartment! Plus it was stunningly beautiful, and seemed to naturally resort to posing in a somewhat dignified looking way. I got her for free from a friend.

Even though I'm no particular fan of cats (nor having any animosities either), I would consider another Siamese if I felt assured it wouldn't set-off my allergies. I was thinking about it recently, too.

 

[gdgyva]

I am a hypocrite and I know it............. when it comes to flag denigration.

The first amendment should be treasured and protected by all means necessary.

The miscreants who publicly denigrate the flag deserve a good azz whooping. (hence my hypocrisy)

The "Stars and Bars" is being removed from public places because it stirs emotional reactions of racism, anger, and humiliation. I get it!

To many millions of people, the Red White and Blue represents the ones that came before us. It also represents the ones that have fallen and died.

The military hands the flag to the widow during the closing of a military funeral for a reason.

Hence my hypocrisy.

you are not alone USN

my dad was military, as was his dad

I served for a time, and then went into the civilian sector

I can put up with a lot of things in the name of freedom, but something about the flag gets to me

It is more than a symbol to me....more than a piece of cloth

I could care less if you get up on a soapbox, and tell the world why you think the USA sucks in your opinion

But something about desecrating the flag gets to me.....A LOT

maybe it shouldnt....and that is a fault of mine

i bet there are a lot more of us out there too

 

[SocialD]

So this happened in Illinois on the 4th of July.



Forbes Welcome

I raise this issue to bring up two points:

1. This is a perfect example showing people why posting on Facebook (or any other social media) in not always in one's best interests.

2. Notice that the charges include both desecration, which under Texas v. Johnson 491 U.S. 397 (1989) cannot be made illegal by itself; and disorderly conduct which might fall under the Texas V. Johnson clarification allowing charges for the narrow government interest of preventing "flag burnings that were likely to result in a serious disturbance of the peace." https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/491/397/case.html

I don't agree with this arrest if it was based solely on reactions to a Facebook post. However, there might be some small basis if calls came in from neighbors who saw him doing this in his neighborhood. But even then it was on his own private property, done apparently for the purpose of posting on his Facebook page to express his opinion, and not to incite violence. That clearly falls under First Amendment protections explained in Texas v. Johnson, since the target audience was that small fraction of the total U.S. population who are his "followers."

Yes it is the 4th of July. Yes, many Americans feel that the symbolism of the Flag should allow legal protection against desecration. Yes, people will get upset as a result.

Still, IMO it is his personal property once purchased and he can wear it, or burn it, or fly it, and it's none of our business.

My pride rests in the Nation, not in it's symbols.

When I was a soldier I would gladly defend our garrison flag from all comers. Because in that instance it clearly represented the symbol of our nation in that spot, at that time, and by extension my right to be there to serve my nation's interests. It was my job to protect it.

A common citizen's handling of their own property is not the same thing, and I support their First Amendment right to use it to express themselves howsoever they will.

Texas vs Johnson was interesting. Scalia sided on this one with what was mostly liberal justices Marshall, Blackmun and Brennan in that it was free expression. There are a number of times he did this but we don't really hear about those.

 

[Iron Cross]

So this happened in Illinois on the 4th of July.



Forbes Welcome

I raise this issue to bring up two points:

1. This is a perfect example showing people why posting on Facebook (or any other social media) in not always in one's best interests.

2. Notice that the charges include both desecration, which under Texas v. Johnson 491 U.S. 397 (1989) cannot be made illegal by itself; and disorderly conduct which might fall under the Texas V. Johnson clarification allowing charges for the narrow government interest of preventing "flag burnings that were likely to result in a serious disturbance of the peace." https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/491/397/case.html

I don't agree with this arrest if it was based solely on reactions to a Facebook post. However, there might be some small basis if calls came in from neighbors who saw him doing this in his neighborhood. But even then it was on his own private property, done apparently for the purpose of posting on his Facebook page to express his opinion, and not to incite violence. That clearly falls under First Amendment protections explained in Texas v. Johnson, since the target audience was that small fraction of the total U.S. population who are his "followers."

Yes it is the 4th of July. Yes, many Americans feel that the symbolism of the Flag should allow legal protection against desecration. Yes, people will get upset as a result.

Still, IMO it is his personal property once purchased and he can wear it, or burn it, or fly it, and it's none of our business.

My pride rests in the Nation, not in it's symbols.

When I was a soldier I would gladly defend our garrison flag from all comers. Because in that instance it clearly represented the symbol of our nation in that spot, at that time, and by extension my right to be there to serve my nation's interests. It was my job to protect it.

A common citizen's handling of their own property is not the same thing, and I support their First Amendment right to use it to express themselves howsoever they will.

Ultimately, permission to desecrate the symbols of a nation breaks the social contract with the nation, and oftentimes leads down a slippery slope to revolution

 

[DA60]

I'm completely against his arrest & charges!

He has every first amendment right to do what he did, no matter how offensive others may feel. If you're offended, tough tootsies; this is exactly the type of unpopular speech the 1st is intended to protect!

What a bunch of pansies we've become! :doh

I agree completely.

People...it's just a flag...lighten-the-hell up.

I don't care about what it represents to you...it's just a flag.


I can't help but wonder how many people want the flag treated like a precious child, then go home and treat their own children in less-then-precious manners.

More then a few, I am SURE.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Ultimately, permission to desecrate the symbols of a nation breaks the social contract with the nation, and oftentimes leads down a slippery slope to revolution

It's not a question of permission, but rather one of rights. Free men don't need permission to burn a flag, and no social contract is broken.

 

[RetiredUSN]

I agree completely.

People...it's just a flag...lighten-the-hell up.

I don't care about what it represents to you...it's just a flag.


I can't help but wonder how many people want the flag treated like a precious child, then go home and treat their own children in less-then-precious manners.

More then a few, I am SURE.

So was the confederate flag...right? I suppose all those pansie azzed black people should just lighten the hell up also....huh?

 

[Tanngrisnir]

So was the confederate flag...right? I suppose all those pansie azzed black people should just lighten the hell up also....huh?

LOL! You think it's only black people who dislike the flag of traitors and don't want it flying on/over gov't property?

 

[RetiredUSN]

LOL! You think it's only black people who dislike the flag of traitors and don't want it flying on/over gov't property?

It doesn't matter who liked or disliked it.

The confederate flags came down for a reason, didn't they? (symbolism)

Now all of a sudden, ( some people) think that flags are just a piece of cloth that people all those pansies shouldn't get worked up over.

Some of the same people recited hatred, racism, and other descriptives on a couple confederate flag threads.

 

[Patrickt]

I'm on the side that thinks no one should desecrate the flag but there should be no law preventing it. People not doing something disgusting but harmless because they'll be seriously punished for it by the government is not compatible with a free country.

Now, if your spouse or your boss or your neighbors wish to punish you in perfectly legal ways, that's fine. "Hey, Chuck, you've been laid off, your wife has locked the bedroom door, and your neighbors aren't inviting you to the summer block party."

 

[gdgyva]

LOL! You think it's only black people who dislike the flag of traitors and don't want it flying on/over gov't property?

but as DA60 aid above....it is just a piece of cloth

why such a stink over this one?

if others can desecrate Old Glory then flying this is just another "first amendment right" right?

 

[Tanngrisnir]

but as DA60 aid above....it is just a piece of cloth

why such a stink over this one?

if others can desecrate Old Glory then flying this is just another "first amendment right" right?

Big difference: no one is saying you don't have right to fly the flag of losers and traitors as you'd wish on your own property; on gov't property, it's a different matter.

Your 1st amendment right to fly the flag of traitors remains unaffected.

 

[gdgyva]

Big difference: no one is saying you don't have right to fly the flag of losers and traitors as you'd wish on your own property; on gov't property, it's a different matter.

Your 1st amendment right to fly the flag of traitors remains unaffected.

i dont fly it...never have

just seems like we take one flag more seriously than another....when they are both just "pieces of cloth" according to many

that is my issue....i dont see our national flag as just a piece of cloth

it is a symbol...an important one....one i fought for, my dad fought for, and his dad fought for

and as i said earlier....someone desecrating it bothers me....A LOT

a lot of us feel that way.....especially families that lost someone fighting for that flag

 

[Cardinal]

My wife and I had a good laugh at Mellot's Facebook post: "So it'd be super-duper if the death threats could stop."

Desecrating a symbol, even one that is important to you, is free speech. I was baffled by the article that he was arrested because I thought this was settled a really long time ago.

 

[Cardinal]

but as DA60 aid above....it is just a piece of cloth

why such a stink over this one?

if others can desecrate Old Glory then flying this is just another "first amendment right" right?

Bryton is allowed to burn the American flag per his 1st amendment rights, and you're allowed to call him a goat ****er per your first amendment rights. What you can't do is threaten his life, though I think most of us are already in agreement on this (I hope). This same issue is in rotation as the story is continually re-animated as a left or right issue.

 

[Bodi]

I'm completely against his arrest & charges!

He has every first amendment right to do what he did, no matter how offensive others may feel. If you're offended, tough tootsies; this is exactly the type of unpopular speech the 1st is intended to protect!

What a bunch of pansies we've become! :doh

I was waving my American flags here at work on the 4th and a couple of people made the, i am burning your flag, lighter hand gesture as if Ivwould get upset and I told them, "all good. Freedom of speech... something you can thank the USA for giving the world."

 

[Chomsky]

I was waving my American flags here at work on the 4th and a couple of people made the, i am burning your flag, lighter hand gesture as if Ivwould get upset and I told them, "all good. Freedom of speech... something you can thank the USA for giving the world."

I gotta' make some exception here though, Bodie:

If someone wants to burn *their* flag, that's freedom of speech.

If someone wants to burn *my* flag, they've got troubles coming!

 

[Fearandloathing]

So this happened in Illinois on the 4th of July.



Forbes Welcome

I raise this issue to bring up two points:

1. This is a perfect example showing people why posting on Facebook (or any other social media) in not always in one's best interests.

2. Notice that the charges include both desecration, which under Texas v. Johnson 491 U.S. 397 (1989) cannot be made illegal by itself; and disorderly conduct which might fall under the Texas V. Johnson clarification allowing charges for the narrow government interest of preventing "flag burnings that were likely to result in a serious disturbance of the peace." https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/491/397/case.html

I don't agree with this arrest if it was based solely on reactions to a Facebook post. However, there might be some small basis if calls came in from neighbors who saw him doing this in his neighborhood. But even then it was on his own private property, done apparently for the purpose of posting on his Facebook page to express his opinion, and not to incite violence. That clearly falls under First Amendment protections explained in Texas v. Johnson, since the target audience was that small fraction of the total U.S. population who are his "followers."

Yes it is the 4th of July. Yes, many Americans feel that the symbolism of the Flag should allow legal protection against desecration. Yes, people will get upset as a result.

Still, IMO it is his personal property once purchased and he can wear it, or burn it, or fly it, and it's none of our business.

My pride rests in the Nation, not in it's symbols.

When I was a soldier I would gladly defend our garrison flag from all comers. Because in that instance it clearly represented the symbol of our nation in that spot, at that time, and by extension my right to be there to serve my nation's interests. It was my job to protect it.

A common citizen's handling of their own property is not the same thing, and I support their First Amendment right to use it to express themselves howsoever they will.

Total police state. It's a piece of cloth, an emblem. It is expected that that symbol will be used in various ways as a means of self expression, which is constitutionally protected here.

This echoes such wonderful places to live like Cuba, North Korea and China.