Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Guy standing on US flag to protest - 1st amendment right

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    Guy standing on US flag to protest - 1st amendment right

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sJn...ature=youtu.be

    Who cares? His right to express himself -- agree with him or not.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,155
    Violation of 4 USC 8(b). Only the law abiding abide the law. We, OCDO, are not to advocate violation of the law, but to work to change it.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Violation of 4 USC 8(b). Only the law abiding abide the law. We, OCDO, are not to advocate violation of the law, but to work to change it.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Eichman

    4 USC 8(b) is advisory only, has no effect of law.

    1st amendment prevails ... saying you cannot exercise your 1st amendment rights violates the forum rules.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 04-04-2016 at 08:03 PM.

  4. #4
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    The best way to deal with jack wagons like those who desecrate our flag is to simply ignore them. Denying them our audience solves the problem of their efforts to be offensive for no reason other than to offend.

    Major league sports learned this lesson years ago during the era of streaking. Deny the children their 15 seconds of fame and they are far less likely to disrupt your televised game.

    Notably, that would also be the best way to deal with the OP and this type of thread that has nothing at all to do with RKBA but is likely only to be disruptive to the forum.

    My apologies to the forum for not following my own advice in this case.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    The best way to deal with jack wagons like those who desecrate our flag is to simply ignore them. Denying them our audience solves the problem of their efforts to be offensive for no reason other than to offend.

    Major league sports learned this lesson years ago during the era of streaking. Deny the children their 15 seconds of fame and they are far less likely to disrupt your televised game.

    Notably, that would also be the best way to deal with the OP and this type of thread that has nothing at all to do with RKBA but is likely only to be disruptive to the forum.

    My apologies to the forum for not following my own advice in this case.
    Who is this our of which you write?

    The stars-and-stripes is literally a symbol of the federal government--not the nation, not the people who live here.

    To call it "ours" is sloppy thinking. The illogic seems to say that government is equivalent to the society it rules, that both are one and the same. And, that the symbol of the government is then necessarily the symbol of the society that government rules.

    I can differentiate between the two--between the government and the large group of individuals it rules, the society it rules. I reject your unstated premise that the government that rules a society is the same as the society it rules.

    I'm not a big fan of George Carlin--he was a bit too foul-mouthed for my taste. But, he did have a comment I thought really sharp. He said the US flag is a symbol. And, he leaves symbols to the symbol-minded. (Readers, say it out loud to yourself several times.)
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 04-06-2016 at 12:40 AM. Reason: rule #19
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Yours is sloppy thinking. Yours seems to say that government is equivalent to the society it rules, that both are one and the same. And, that the symbol of the government is then necessarily the symbol of the society that government rules.

    I can differentiate between the two. I reject your unstated premise.
    I think it is only the "symbol minded" who would claim the Stars and Stripes can only represent the federal government.

    Many of us who are not blinded by "symbol minded" ideology can understand how a symbol might represent many different things, to different persons, depending on the context. Many of us do view the Stars and Stripes as the most universal symbol of our society, and our nation, of our honorable service members and first responders and their sacrifices on our behalf. It is the symbol which adorns the caskets of our honored dead, which we fly above our homes, which reminds us of our rights under our constitution.

    I reject your overtly stated premise that the government "rules" society. In OUR nation (excluding any pinheads who reject association with the best nation, society, and government that has existed in the secular history of the world), society rules society. We get what we collectively want. Sometimes, some of us end up in the minority on certain decisions. So be it so long as wrongs can be suffered.

    As for Carlin, not only was he foul mouthed, but in the interest of a joke, he rejects the importance of symbols and symbolism. Anyone who OCs for the purpose of normalizing the idea of regular folks being armed, should see immediately the contradiction in attacking symbols.

    If you want to have an intelligent, civil, sincere discussion about an issue, I think we'd both enjoy it. I'm not at all interested in puerile claims about our government being vastly detached from our society, or nit picking about who is included in "our".

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    I think it is only the "symbol minded" who would claim the Stars and Stripes can only represent the federal government.

    Many of us who are not blinded by "symbol minded" ideology can understand how a symbol might represent many different things, to different persons, depending on the context. Many of us do view the Stars and Stripes as the most universal symbol of our society, and our nation, of our honorable service members and first responders and their sacrifices on our behalf. It is the symbol which adorns the caskets of our honored dead, which we fly above our homes, which reminds us of our rights under our constitution.

    I reject your overtly stated premise that the government "rules" society. In OUR nation (excluding any pinheads who reject association with the best nation, society, and government that has existed in the secular history of the world), society rules society. We get what we collectively want. Sometimes, some of us end up in the minority on certain decisions. So be it so long as wrongs can be suffered.

    As for Carlin, not only was he foul mouthed, but in the interest of a joke, he rejects the importance of symbols and symbolism. Anyone who OCs for the purpose of normalizing the idea of regular folks being armed, should see immediately the contradiction in attacking symbols.

    If you want to have an intelligent, civil, sincere discussion about an issue, I think we'd both enjoy it. I'm not at all interested in puerile claims about our government being vastly detached from our society, or nit picking about who is included in "our".

    Charles
    I notice you didn't actually differentiate between the government that rules a society and the society--numerous individuals.

    And, since that government imposes itself on people who do not consent and never consented, "rule" is the correct terminology.

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident...unalienable rights...Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness...to secure these rights, government are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

    I never consented. In fact, government has passed up some thirty-four chances to ask my express, individual consent--tax returns. They know who I am. They know where I live--they mailed the paper work to me in my name with my social security number on the label many, many times. But, nooooo. On the most important social question of all--according to their lights, government--they couldn't be bothered to include a line at the bottom for me to sign my express individual consent. But, they could find room on the tax form to ask whether I wanted a dollar or three of my refund to go the presidential election fund. Yeah, right.

    When government comes to my fellow human beings as an equal sincerely seeking their genuine consent, and those individuals gives their consent, then "govern" will be the correct term. Until then, rule is the correct terminology.
    Last edited by Citizen; 04-04-2016 at 09:04 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I notice you didn't actually differentiate between the government that rules a society and the society--numerous individuals.

    And, since that government imposes itself on people who do not consent and never consented, "rule" is the correct terminology.

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident...unalienable rights...Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness...to secure these rights, government are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

    When government comes to my fellow human beings as an equal sincerely seeking their genuine consent, and those individuals gives their consent, then "govern" will be the correct term. Until then, rule is the correct terminology.
    I notice you are still using the juvenile tactic of misapplying the standard in the DoI in a way that its authors and contemporaries never intended nor imagined. I did give a rat's rectum whether some scum criminal never consents to respect my rights. If he violates them, I will happily have the government impose penalties on him and consider that to be entirely just and appropriate.

    You also continue to engage in the puerile game of trying to differentiate between an imperfect, but democratically selected government and the people who elect that government as if we are being imposed upon by some entirely external force.

    I'm just not interested in seeing every thread turn into a proselyting effort against our government, or in favor of some fanciful notion of Utopian Anarchy where unicorns puke up rainbows and fart out gold. I didn't start any attack on your fantasy. You are the one who felt compelled to respond to my post by trying to make me an offender for a word.

    If you don't see anything in the Stars and Stripes, so be it. Your problem. Not mine.

    Again, if you'd like to engage in a thoughtful, sincere, mutually respectful discussion of some topic, I think it would be great fun. I'd suggest anarchy not be the topic.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    I notice you are still using the juvenile tactic of misapplying the standard in the DoI in a way that its authors and contemporaries never intended nor imagined. I did give a rat's rectum whether some scum criminal never consents to respect my rights. If he violates them, I will happily have the government impose penalties on him and consider that to be entirely just and appropriate.

    You also continue to engage in the puerile game of trying to differentiate between an imperfect, but democratically selected government and the people who elect that government as if we are being imposed upon by some entirely external force.

    I'm just not interested in seeing every thread turn into a proselyting effort against our government, or in favor of some fanciful notion of Utopian Anarchy where unicorns puke up rainbows and fart out gold. I didn't start any attack on your fantasy. You are the one who felt compelled to respond to my post by trying to make me an offender for a word.

    If you don't see anything in the Stars and Stripes, so be it. Your problem. Not mine.

    Again, if you'd like to engage in a thoughtful, sincere, mutually respectful discussion of some topic, I think it would be great fun. I'd suggest anarchy not be the topic.

    Charles
    Unfortunately, your argument is directed against a former US Marine.

    I wore the uniform. I saluted the national ensign (the Flag). I swelled with pride at the National Anthem.

    It was my damn good luck that I never had to shoot another young man duped by his government. It was my damn good luck that I never had to duck shrapnel or flying lead. But, pal, I was there, ready and willing to go. Hell, at a few points, I was eager to go. So, I rate. Meaning, I stood that post, rifle in hand, bayonet on the belt, ready to go. I didn't; but not because of any lack on my part.

    Now, if simple humanity isn't good enough for you, by God! that had better be. I rate. I deserve. If for no other reason than I played the fool and allowed myself to be deceived.

    And, my statement--my testimony--is that "the flag" is just a part of the jingoism. It is a symbol. It is used against you, gentle reader. It is used as a symbol--because symbols don't have explanations to accompany them--to get you to connect in your mind 1776 with government today. It is used--because symbols operate without a written explanation--to get you feeling all patriotic about what government is doing today.

    Mark Twain explained that he disagreed with the idea "my country, right or wrong." He held a higher standard. He said (paraphrase) that my country if it is right. If it is wrong, I will work to change its opinion.

    One cannot evaluate the correctness or wrongness of imposed policy by falling prey to symbolism.

    Why would anyone need a symbol? Why would anyone need a symbol to swell them with pride as a substitute for rational thought?


    Footnote: Google War is a Racket by Smedley Butler. The text is now in the public domain. Butler was a USMC General. A daggone General!! And, he finally recognized that his entire career had been spent--well, read it for yourself; I won't spoil the ending for you. And, check his Wikipedia entry. Butler actually proposed an amendment to the US Constitution. It was called the peace amendment. This was by a decorated warrior.
    Last edited by Citizen; 04-04-2016 at 10:16 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Unfortunately, your argument is directed against a former US Marine.
    Your service rates my thanks and gratitude for your service.

    But it no more makes you an expert on what the flag is or isn't a symbol for than it makes you an expert on open heart surgery. You may be an expert on all three. But not because of one or the other. And your emotional appeal to your authority based on military service is nothing more than jingoism itself. The irony is not lost on me.

    The correctness or wrongness of any US government policy is not the question of this thread. Nor does recognizing the Stars and Stripes as a symbol of the nation and culture prevent proper evaluation of said policies, disagreement with those that are in error, or proper support for those that are appropriate. turns out I was smart enough NOT to get duped into taking orders from someone who would happily send me to kill or be killed just to divert public attention from his adulterous dalliances. So who has more credibility to discuss rationally what a given flag does or doesn't represent?

    Meanwhile your repeated, emphatic assertion belies an emotionalism beyond rational thought on the subject. Ditto your 14th reference to General Butler's book and the sneaky way your drill sergeant turned you on to it. Or maybe it is just guilt over being duped and being so willing to take orders from immoral politicians that has clouded your ability to discuss the issue rationally.

    In any event, I say again. If you don't see anything of value in the Stars and Stripes, that is your problem, not mine.

    Now, perhaps you should let this drop before your emotion turns uncivil.

    Charles
    Last edited by utbagpiper; 04-04-2016 at 11:44 PM.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  11. #11
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    Your service rates my thanks and gratitude for your service. ...

    turns out I was smart enough NOT to get duped into taking orders ...
    Wow.

    Compliment then turn right around and insult.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  12. #12
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,880
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post

    Now, perhaps you should let this drop before your emotion turns uncivil.

    Charles
    his emotion becomes uncivil...oh wait...i forgot mate posted this...

    his normal modus operandi...

    ipse

    profoundly apparent
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  13. #13
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Compliment then turn right around and insult.
    Wrong on both fronts. A thanks is not a compliment.

    And I did not insult. I merely turned his arrogant claim of authority on its head to demonstrate why his claim to authority doesn't actually provide any more expertise in divining the meaning of symbols than does my experience.

    Let us remember, it was the anarchist who turned this thread into an exercising in sniping and being unpleasant. I've simply returned his tone back to him.

    Not every thread needs to be turned into an anti-government, pro-anarchist proselyting sessions.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Wow.

    Compliment then turn right around and insult.
    .

    I did not get "duped" .... I joined for the adventure ! See the world ! Good times.

    I wonder how many forum members served just 1 term v. multiple terms of enlistment ...

    And no, not interested in any "thank yous" ... I got paid when I was in..pretty good too IMO.

    Now they are way way way overpaid with too many benies.

  15. #15
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,620
    Even in the Social Lounge, there are limits.

    What was intended to be a discussion has turned into an attack-fest.

    Rather than butcher the thread with edits and deletions, I am locking it.

    You are welcome to open the subject again, but personal attacks or negative references to other forum members will not be tolerated.


    Agree or disagree this is what the courts have said:
    http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/flagburning.htm

    http://thelawdictionary.org/article/...rning-illegal/
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 04-06-2016 at 01:01 AM. Reason: added
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •