Flag Burning.

[Woodcut Lvr]

for the record you do realize you are defending a hateful organization?

 

 

 

please explain to me why their meetings need to be held in public because it is blatently apparent they try to cause disruption by having meetings in such a manner

 

 

 

I am. I'm also defending their rights as a citizen of the United States.

 

 

 

Why shouldn't their meetings be held in public. It's an amendment that says they can. So, they're using their rights to do so. And maybe they're trying to get more people into their organization, as all organizations strive to do.

 

 

 

But no, they're not trying to cause disruption, it's those around them who make it out to be disruptive.

 

 

 

Edit-- I fail to see how having a meeting in public is trying to get violence started. If you mean having a person whom is hated by this group attacking the members? That's not their fault.

 

 

 

So, if it's disruptive, it should stop. That's what you're saying? I find many things disruptive, but I don't think they should be stopped.

[Kenshinjapan]

for the record you do realize you are defending a hateful organization?

 

 

 

please explain to me why their meetings need to be held in public because it is blatently apparent they try to cause disruption by having meetings in such a manner

 

 

 

edit-- also by having meetings in public they are hoping to incite violence therefore placing them in violation of the law

 

 

 

I'll bring the flag burning into this again. Why can't people burn a flag in private, rather than at crowded places.

[mmmcannibalism]

having the meetings in public is attempting to insite violence because they intend to cause violence. No its not legal for the people to attack them but its also not legal for them to hold their meeting in public when they want it to cause violent action\

 

 

 

you accuse me of saying I want to stop anything disruptive, thats interesting considering I am clearly stating that flag burning by itself should be legal when it is disruptive.

 

 

 

kenshin--people burn flags in public because they want to show passion for their cause whatever it may be. Certainly many cases of flag burning should be just as illegal as the klan meetings, I think anyone burning the flag of their country is an idiot but they have the right to do it. I will not stand for a group intending to spread hate and racism.

 

 

 

edit--im going to bed see you in the morning everyone

[Woodcut Lvr]

having the meetings in public is attempting to insite violence because they intend to cause violence. No its not legal for the people to attack them but its also not legal for them to hold their meeting in public when they want it to cause violent action\

 

 

 

you accuse me of saying I want to stop anything disruptive, thats interesting considering I am clearly stating that flag burning by itself should be legal when it is disruptive.

 

 

 

kenshin--people burn flags in public because they want to show passion for their cause whatever it may be. Certainly many cases of flag burning should be just as illegal as the klan meetings, I think anyone burning the flag of their country is an idiot but they have the right to do it. I will not stand for a group intending to spread hate and racism.

 

 

 

edit--im going to bed see you in the morning everyone

 

 

 

You want the flag burnings to be legal because they are disruptive, when that is hatred to some people (War Vets). Yet you don't want the KKK to hold meetings, when that is hardly disruptive and never causes violence.

[Range_This11]

 

You want the flag burnings to be legal because they are disruptive, when that is hatred to some people (War Vets). Yet you don't want the KKK to hold meetings, when that is hardly disruptive and never causes violence.

 

Public demonstrations of any kind are legal as long as they don't harm another person. I find it to be one of the most beautiful rights we have.

[Woodcut Lvr]

 

You want the flag burnings to be legal because they are disruptive, when that is hatred to some people (War Vets). Yet you don't want the KKK to hold meetings, when that is hardly disruptive and never causes violence.

 

Public demonstrations of any kind are legal as long as they don't harm another person. I find it to be one of the most beautiful rights we have.

 

 

 

I know, that's what I'm trying to get from this guy. I haven't heard of a case of the KKK hurting somebody for a long time.

[Range_This11]

 

I know, that's what I'm trying to get from this guy. I haven't heard of a case of the KKK hurting somebody for a long time.

 

Actually the last known lynching was in Duluth, MN only a few hours from me.

[Woodcut Lvr]

 

I know, that's what I'm trying to get from this guy. I haven't heard of a case of the KKK hurting somebody for a long time.

 

Actually the last known lynching was in Duluth, MN only a few hours from me.

 

 

 

And how long ago was this event though? I doubt it was yesterday... :ohnoes:

[Lenticular_J]

 

You want the flag burnings to be legal because they are disruptive, when that is hatred to some people (War Vets). Yet you don't want the KKK to hold meetings, when that is hardly disruptive and never causes violence.

 

Public demonstrations of any kind are legal as long as they don't harm another person. I find it to be one of the most beautiful rights we have.

 

 

 

I know, that's what I'm trying to get from this guy. I haven't heard of a case of the KKK hurting somebody for a long time.

 

Think the most recent was in the 70's, at least that someone was suspected in a criminal case. But yes, that's definitely a double standard. If someone outspoken is being slurred, fire up the cop cars boys! But if people show up at a soldier's funeral to chant how they're going to Hell and spit at the mourners, they might need protection!

 

 

 

Hate that mentality.

 

 

 

And Woodcut, I think that was a long time ago.

[Range_This11]

 

And how long ago was this event though? I doubt it was yesterday... :ohnoes:

 

God...I want to say the 1930s maybe? It was a long time ago, though.

[magekillr]

The US is not a democracy, it is a Republic

 

 

 

Sorry, Republic and democracy are not mutually exclusive terms. Try looking up the definitions sometime, the USA is both.

 

 

 

Are you people seriously reducing what the KKK advocates to physical harm?

[Woodcut Lvr]

 

And how long ago was this event though? I doubt it was yesterday... :ohnoes:

 

God...I want to say the 1930s maybe? It was a long time ago, though.

 

 

 

And there we go, my point is proven. KKK isn't violent anymore, nor do they have meetings to provoke fights. They have just as much a right to go out and have meetings as much as those anti-war protesters.

 

 

 

--Edit: Republic and Democracy are very close but different.

 

 

 

Democracy: Government by the people, exercised through elected representatives.

 

Republic: A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens.

[Shiny]

I'm not against it, but I think it is a stupid act to do.

 

 

 

There was a guy in New Zealand (a Maori guy) who shot the NZ flag with a shotgun. I found that really offensive, because he then went and stood on it. :|

[Ouchy]

I'm not against it, but I think it is a stupid act to do.

 

 

 

There was a guy in New Zealand (a Maori guy) who shot the NZ flag with a shotgun. I found that really offensive, because he then went and stood on it. :|

 

 

 

Yuck, I remember that guy... It was quite disgraceful if you ask me

[Deiophobus]

People keep posting that they could think of more productive protests, etc. Personally I think burning/destroying a flag obviously works well as a protest, because it gets so much more attention than if you do something else, like picketing, or petitioning or whatever. Even if the attention is negative, your protest will be very widely known, and you'll get the attention you're looking for.

[Ginger_Warrior]

 

If I went to the busiest place in Britain and burned the British flag, I would most likely be tackled, beaten to a pulp, and arrested

 

And what law of ours (which you apparently are so knowledgeable in) would you be arrested under then?

 

 

 

I doubt there is any law in Britain holding me accountable for flag burning. My statement is that I am causing a scene, started a riot, and fight. It's all instigation. Plus, police would detain me to stop me from causing more of a scene and you know they would. I would be arrested.

 

 

 

I am using an example. I don't know all or any of Britain's law, but I do know human beings. I do know it would cause people to attack me and police would get involved. I would get fined or charged.

 

Correction: You know Americans.

 

 

 

People have burned the Union Jack before, particularly in protest about Ireland, and nothing's been done about it. They'd probably ring the newspapers and they'd film you and ask you to explain why you're burning it. There's been several protest organised by Muslims over the Iraq War where the odd Union Jack or two was burned. No one got overly-sentimental.

 

 

 

If someone violently assaulted someone for speaking out against British Nationalism, they'd be slammed for doing the exact opposite of what this country stands for.

 

 

 

The police can't just detain you for no reason.

 

 

 

The Union Jack really doesn't symbolise a lot in this country, except the Acts of Union between Scotland and Northern Ireland - our heritage is in our political system, it's in the numerous memorials set up to commemorate those who died in the Wars, it's in our history, and it's in the common values we share with each other. It doesn't evoke the same emotional reaction as the Star-spangled Banner does.

 

 

 

Hell, some government buildings in Scotland refuse to display the Union Jack and aside from a few grumbles, nothing's done about it. They still display their nation's flag - the white cross on a blue background.

 

 

 

Simply put, your blanket generalisation that all humans = same patriotism as Americans is untrue.

 

 

 

As for the KKK - people died in the biggest war this world has ever seen so people could live in religious and racial tolerance. We turned a blind eye to the Nazis when they claimed they were 'just peaceful', and look where it ended up. You cannot be ignorant of the threat these sorts of groups have, and reducing the threat they have to just physical assault is naive.

[DaN]

It might be legal but if I ever saw anyone do it they would be in the hospital. People have died for that flag.

Did they give their lives for a symbol traditionally displayed on a piece of apparently flammable cloth, or for a collection of moral, ethical and political values...?

 

 

 

I know I'd be pretty upset if some jackass assaulted someone else because of their treatment of an empty symbol rather than showing due respect for, say, the legal code I died to protect.

 

 

 

Actually people have died for the actual flag itself.

 

 

 

People have also died for free-speech there are people in China who can be thrown in jail for their blogs, in America they would just be sued and in Australia nothing would happen.

 

 

 

I take major offense. That flag represents the country me and my brothers and sisters in uniform have sworn to protect and put our life on the line to protect day in and day out for hundreds of years. Its disgusting someone would be willing to burn a flag for fun. Any flag for that matter no matter the country.

 

 

 

What exactly are you fighting for?

[Woodcut Lvr]

As for the KKK - people died in the biggest war this world has ever seen so people could live in religious and racial tolerance. We turned a blind eye to the Nazis when they claimed they were 'just peaceful', and look where it ended up. You cannot be ignorant of the threat these sorts of groups have, and reducing the threat they have to just physical assault is naive.

 

 

 

WWII was for the WORLD'S religious tolerance? I still see intolerance going on today. I still see discrimination going on today. So either WWII was completely inaffective, or that wasn't the point of the war. I think it's the latter.

 

 

 

The KKK isn't violent anymore. Everytime they protest, it's in papers, news teams are there, and all they do is stand there and talk amongst themselves. Occasionally yelling. This is not harrassment nor assault. Nowhere near violent.

 

 

 

I just feel it's wrong that we are being so hateful to any group of people. It's just stupid that what the past has shown us, should hold true to the future. (i.e. We don't on Germany anymore)

[Ginger_Warrior]

WWII was for the WORLD'S religious tolerance? I still see intolerance going on today. I still see discrimination going on today. So either WWII was completely inaffective, or that wasn't the point of the war. I think it's the latter.

 

That's like saying that because crime exists, the police are totally ineffective, which is quite clearly a flawed opinion.

 

 

 

I just feel it's wrong that we are being so hateful to any group of people. It's just stupid that what the past has shown us, should hold true to the future. (i.e. We don't on Germany anymore)

 

You feel it's wrong we should hate the KKK, even though they're hating groups for no other reason than factors which are out of their control in the first place?

 

 

 

If this is the size of the reaction the KKK get in their weakened state, imagine the scale of unrest there would be if their views were actually protected by law, and they freely attacked people verbally!

[Bufoman]

 

 

 

Democracy: Government by the people, exercised through elected representatives.

 

Republic: A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens.

 

 

 

You got the two switched, Republic is the first one, Democracy is the second.

[mmmcannibalism]

Think the most recent was in the 70's, at least that someone was suspected in a criminal case. But yes, that's definitely a double standard. If someone outspoken is being slurred, fire up the cop cars boys! But if people show up at a soldier's funeral to chant how they're going to Hell and spit at the mourners, they might need protection!

 

 

 

hmm thats interesting where exactly did i say people chanting at soldiers funerals should be protected? I am saying that all hate speech should not be protected, which would quite clearly include protests at funerals.

 

 

 

To whoever is saying the klan isnt violent anymore you know you are full of it. Sure they dont go out in their ghost outfits in burn crosses that doesnt mean they arent doing anything. For one their agenda by itself is encouraging violence so they are responsible for plenty of random hate crimes.

 

 

 

 

 

in 2006 half of the approximately 10000 hate crimes in America were racially motivated, try to convince me the klan didnt have anything to do with at least one of those

 

 

 

I wonder if all you people defending the klan would say I have the right to set up a protest on the street in front of your house saying you dont deserve the right to live where you are. Actually I would just bring a few dozen friends so we could talk about how much we hate you since thats not harrassmant

[Bufoman]

First off please define "Hate Crime". Did you know the FBI had to investigate a fireman for a possible "Hate Crime" a while back because he hung up a soaking wet teddy bear to dry on a string? "Hate Crime" in this country could mean just about anything, it's become a witch hunt.

 

 

 

EDIT:

 

 

 

I have to ask this: if it's against the law to display a noose to a black person, or call him the N word, even though the latter is protected by the first ammendment, why the hell is burining and spitting upon the American flag legal?

[BlueLancer]

 

I have to ask this: if it's against the law to display a noose to a black person, or call him the N word, even though the latter is protected by the first ammendment, why the hell is burining and spitting upon the American flag legal?

 

 

 

A black person is a human like your brother, sister, father, mother.

 

 

 

A flag is a piece of canvas regardless of emotional value people place on it.

[Lenticular_J]

I take major offense. That flag represents the country me and my brothers and sisters in uniform have sworn to protect and put our life on the line to protect day in and day out for hundreds of years. Its disgusting someone would be willing to burn a flag for fun. Any flag for that matter no matter the country.

 

 

 

What exactly are you fighting for?

 

Okay, okay, okay, I just wanted to say something here. I don't know if that statement was trying to be mean and rude or simply innocent, but judging from previous posts of yours, I'll assume the former attitude was wanted.

 

 

 

Kriegsmier has lain his life down for other humans, and may be in the future. That is worthy of great respect.

[Woodcut Lvr]

Think the most recent was in the 70's, at least that someone was suspected in a criminal case. But yes, that's definitely a double standard. If someone outspoken is being slurred, fire up the cop cars boys! But if people show up at a soldier's funeral to chant how they're going to Hell and spit at the mourners, they might need protection!

 

 

 

hmm thats interesting where exactly did i say people chanting at soldiers funerals should be protected? I am saying that all hate speech should not be protected, which would quite clearly include protests at funerals.

 

 

 

To whoever is saying the klan isnt violent anymore you know you are full of it. Sure they dont go out in their ghost outfits in burn crosses that doesnt mean they arent doing anything. For one their agenda by itself is encouraging violence so they are responsible for plenty of random hate crimes.

 

 

 

 

 

in 2006 half of the approximately 10000 hate crimes in America were racially motivated, try to convince me the klan didnt have anything to do with at least one of those

 

 

 

I wonder if all you people defending the klan would say I have the right to set up a protest on the street in front of your house saying you dont deserve the right to live where you are. Actually I would just bring a few dozen friends so we could talk about how much we hate you since thats not harrassmant

 

 

 

I'm not defending the clan. I'm defending their rights. What you're saying is harrassment. Going in public, like in a park, and having a meeting or a protest, isn't harrassment. Going in front of somebody's home and telling them to leave and how much you hate them, that's harrassment. Just like I said earlier. If you had known how to read, you'd realize this.

 

Example one. A few friends and I get together in the park and we discuss how we dislike Mexicans. And a few mexicans come by and feel hurt from our words.

 

That's not harrassment.

 

 

 

Example two. We go to a house where a family of Mexican decent lives. We put a bag of dog crap on their porch and light it on fire. Next to it we put a letter that says "LEAVE"

 

That's harrassment.