Like I said in another thread, I queston certain groups loyalty...

[BENZ-LGB]

Here is information regarding the manner in in which the U.S. flag may be displayed.

Previous to Flag Day, June 14, 1923 there were no federal or state regulations governing display of the United States Flag. It was on this date that the National Flag Code was adopted by the National Flag Conference which was attended by representatives of the Army and Navy which had evolved their own procedures, and some 66 other national groups. This purpose of providing guidance based on the Army and Navy procedures relating to display and associated questions about the U. S. Flag was adopted by all organizations in attendance.

A few minor changes were made a year later during the Flag Day 1924 Conference, It was not until June 22, 1942 that Congress passed a joint resolution which was amended on December 22, 1942 to become Public Law 829; Chapter 806, 77th Congress, 2nd session. Exact rules for use and display of the flag (36 U.S.C. 173-178) as well as associated sections (36 U.S.C. 171) Conduct during Playing of the National Anthem, (36 U.S.C. 172) the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, and Manner of Delivery were included.

This code is the guide for all handling and display of the Stars and Stripes. It does not impose penalties for misuse of the United States Flag. That is left to the states and to the federal government for the District of Columbia. Each state has its own flag law.

Criminal penalties for certain acts of desecration to the flag were contained in Title 18 of the United States Code prior to 1989. The Supreme Court decision in Texas v. Johnson; June 21, 1989, held the statute unconstitutional. This statute was amended when the Flag Protection Act of 1989 (Oct. 28, 1989) imposed a fine and/or up to I year in prison for knowingly mutilating, defacing, physically defiling, maintaining on the floor or trampling upon any flag of the United States. The Flag Protection Act of 1989 was struck down by the Supreme Court decision, United States vs. Eichman, decided on June 11, 1990.

While the Code empowers the President of the United States to alter, modify, repeal or prescribe additional rules regarding the Flag, no federal agency has the authority to issue 'official' rulings legally binding on civilians or civilian groups. Consequently, different interpretations of various provisions of the Code may continue to be made. The Flag Code may be fairly tested: 'No disrespect should be shown to the Flag of the United States of America.' Therefore, actions not specifically included in the Code may be deemed acceptable as long as proper respect is shown.

The Code provisions were enacted prior to the 1st Amendment cases involving the burning of the flag. So i have seriously doubt that 1st. amendment considerations had anything to do with the language of the statute.

Pursuant to the statute, each state has the right to enact its own laws regarding the use and/or misuse of the flag. It would be interesting to see what Nevada law says in this area.

Intellectually, I have no objection to protecting the burning of the flag as free speech. Emotionally, if I saw someone doing it I'd kick his a@@ and then face the music.

I am willing to bet enchiladas to tacos that the owners of the bar knew fuill well what they were doing. They are Hispanics and in the Hispanic culture, being on "top" is a position of power in every sense of the word, from economics, to social, to sex. Putting the Mexican flag on top of the American flag is like saying "The Mexican flag is f**king the American flag; and we are f**king you too." You would have to know and understand the culture to appreciate the insult implied by his actions.

And yes, sadly enough, the citizenship tests are administered i nmany foreign languages. I cannot understand why, if you want to become an American citizen, you don't put hte effort to learn more than just a few passing words of English.

It is wrong and it should not be allowed. You want to be a U.S. citizen? Then at least learn the language.

Originally Posted by BENZ-LGB

I am willing to bet enchiladas to tacos that the owners of the bar knew fuill well what they were doing. They are Hispanics and in the Hispanic culture, being on "top" is a position of power in every sense of the word, from economics, to social, to sex. Putting the Mexican flag on top of the American flag is like saying "The Mexican flag is f**king the American flag; and we are f**king you too." You would have to know and understand the culture to appreciate the insult implied by his actions.

Unbelievable. How did we get to the point to forget common decency?

Oh yes - that's right. We got to that point by allowing a 3rd world country's underclass unfettered and unrestricted access to the US.

[PaulC]

Prior to the flag liberation by Bowie knife, did anyone bother to find out if this was actually intended as an act of disrespect?

Scenario: Vet (sans machete) walks into bar and asks owner (in a reasonable manner) if he is aware of the proper presentation of the U.S. flag under these circumstances.

Owner's Potential Response #1: Realizes gaffe and repositions flags on flagpole. Problem resolved.

OPR #2: "F$%k off, gringo!"

Now under OPR #1, everyone should then be happy.

Under OPR #2, the solution is very simple: Go buy an ancient Ford F-350 for $500 and use it to turn the bar into a carport. At least one party should be happy. And one is better than none.

[Honus]

Originally Posted by BENZ-LGB

...The Code provisions were enacted prior to the 1st Amendment cases involving the burning of the flag. So i have seriously doubt that 1st. amendment considerations had anything to do with the language of the statute...

I have not studied the matter, but I don't think that makes sense. Are you saying that legislators don't take the Constitution into account when drafting legislation? And was it just a coincidence that the drafters of the voluntary protocols for the treatment of flags happened to pick the language that conformed to the First Amendment? A more likely scenario, I would think, is that the legislature started off with language that respected the First Amendment and that the court cases didn't come along until someone tried to make the voluntary standards mandatory.

[BENZ-LGB]

Originally Posted by dculkin

I have not studied the matter, but I don't think that makes sense. Are you saying that legislators don't take the Constitution into account when drafting legislation? And was it just a coincidence that the drafters of the voluntary protocols for the treatment of flags happened to pick the language that conformed to the First Amendment? A more likely scenario, I would think, is that the legislature started off with language that respected the First Amendment and that the court cases didn't come along until someone tried to make the voluntary standards mandatory.

Your comment makes no legal or historical sense.

At the time that the statute was enacted, the genreal consensus was that burning the flag, or otherwise desecrating the flag, was not "speech" protected by the 1st Amendment. So why would the legislator taken into consideration a principle that did not even exist.

As far as they were concerned, desecrating the flag was verbotem.

Why would legislators, working during pre Civil War times, pass a piece of legislation protecting the rights of blacks. Until the Emancipation Declaration passed, blacks had no rights.

It would pretty amazing if the legislators who enacted the flag act could have, and would have, anticipated that some 50 or 60 years down the line desecrating the flag would be protected by the 1st. Amend.

If you can show me some case law, on or around the time the statute was enacted, holding that the desecration of the flag is protected speech then your argument would make some sense. Otherwise it is just more nonsense.

[BENZ-LGB]

Originally Posted by PaulC

Prior to the flag liberation by Bowie knife, did anyone bother to find out if this was actually intended as an act of disrespect?

Scenario: Vet (sans machete) walks into bar and asks owner (in a reasonable manner) if he is aware of the proper presentation of the U.S. flag under these circumstances.

Owner's Potential Response #1: Realizes gaffe and repositions flags on flagpole. Problem resolved.

OPR #2: "F$%k off, gringo!"

Now under OPR #1, everyone should then be happy.

Under OPR #2, the solution is very simple: Go buy an ancient Ford F-350 for $500 and use it to turn the bar into a carport. At least one party should be happy. And one is better than none.

Your suggestion makes sense.

That is why the law generally disfavors "self help" measures.

On the ohter hand, had the Vet taken the approach you suggest I have no doubt that the ACLU would have stepped in to protect the rights of people, citizens or not, to do whatever they please wiht the U.S. flag.

[tankdriver]

According to the statute, the American flag shouldn't be above another flag either.
Also, it should never touch the ground ever. Those of you who have yours stored, I hope it's not touching the ground.
Nor should it be worn. I hope no one has those American flag shirts or caps.

Last one: The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever.It should not be embroidered on such articles as cushions or handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise impressed on paper napkins or boxes or anything that is designed for temporary use and discard. Advertising signs should not be fastened to a staff or halyard from which the flag is flown.

[Jim B.]

Originally Posted by BENZ-LGB

I am willing to bet enchiladas to tacos that the owners of the bar knew fuill well what they were doing. They are Hispanics and in the Hispanic culture, being on "top" is a position of power in every sense of the word, from economics, to social, to sex. Putting the Mexican flag on top of the American flag is like saying "The Mexican flag is f**king the American flag; and we are f**king you too." You would have to know and understand the culture to appreciate the insult implied by his actions.

And yes, sadly enough, the citizenship tests are administered i nmany foreign languages. I cannot understand why, if you want to become an American citizen, you don't put hte effort to learn more than just a few passing words of English.

It is wrong and it should not be allowed. You want to be a U.S. citizen? Then at least learn the language.

Yo soy de acuerdo. Absolutamente.

[MTI]

Image Source




Is this a great country, or what?

[kknudson]

I too believe it is illegal.

Although I agree, they probably didn't know better.

So a solution might have been to explain it to them, giving them the opurtunity to correct it.

If they decline, GO FOR IT.

Although throwing the Mexican flag on the ground was not exactly proper either.

Personally I also feel anyone who is a Mexican-American, Italian-American, German-American .... Should also be told to be correct, or leave.
IF YOU ARE HERE YOU ARE AN AMERICAN FIRST !!!
So if you choose to be an American of Mexican Descent ... I'm on your side !!!!!

[MTI]

Originally Posted by kknudson

I too believe it is illegal.

Belief isn't going to make it so. Criminal property damage is illegal. I belive there's a student in New Mexico currently facing charges for grabbing a Mexican flag during a parade and ripping it, because there wasn't an American flag with it.

[PaulC]

Originally Posted by MTI

Image Source




Is this a great country, or what?

Poor man; size 11 on the right foot and size 34 on the left.

[PaulC]

Originally Posted by tankdriver

According to the statute, the American flag shouldn't be above another flag either.

Sometimes true. From the American Legion website:

(f) When flags of States, cities, or localities, or pennants of societies are flown on the same halyard with the flag of the United States, the latter should always be at the peak. When the flags are flown from adjacent staffs, the flag of the United States should be hoisted first and lowered last. No such flag or pennant may be placed above the flag of the United States or to the United States flag's right.

(g) When flags of two or more nations are displayed, they are to be flown from separate staffs of the same height. The flags should be of approximately equal size. International usage forbids the display of the flag of one nation above that of another nation in time of peace.

[tankdriver]

Originally Posted by PaulC

Sometimes true. From the American Legion website:

(f) When flags of States, cities, or localities, or pennants of societies are flown on the same halyard with the flag of the United States, the latter should always be at the peak. When the flags are flown from adjacent staffs, the flag of the United States should be hoisted first and lowered last. No such flag or pennant may be placed above the flag of the United States or to the United States flag's right.

(g) When flags of two or more nations are displayed, they are to be flown from separate staffs of the same height. The flags should be of approximately equal size. International usage forbids the display of the flag of one nation above that of another nation in time of peace.

g is the actual statute.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode04/usc_sup_01_4_10_1.html

[MTI]

Stephen Colbert this week:

I may disagree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for my right to fight you to the death. This is The Colbert Report!