Politics - Semper Fi!

[Ysabel Kid]

From "The Federalist 'Patriot Post'" last week:

Last week, U.S. Marine Corps reservist Ray Adam Modisette was leaving Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma when he noticed a protest by the infamous Westboro Baptist "Church" folks, who believe that God is punishing America via military casualties for homosexuality. One of the protesters was in the process of stuffing a U.S. flag down her pants. Police officers at the scene arrested Modisette after he ignored their instructions to move away from the protesters, and instead attempted to rescue the flag. "We believe the act was emotional and not really deliberate," Midwest City Police Chief Brandon Clabes said. "It caused us to take action, but we hated to have to do it." The Assistant City Attorney has decided not press charges at the request of police. Modisette posted $850 bail from money he earned while serving in Iraq, though with no charges filed, he will be given a refund. "I think it would have been money well spent," Modisette later said. "I guess a lot of people on Ol' Glory's side felt the same way." As for the Westboro yahoos, he added, "The way I was raised was the reason I couldn't drive by and watch that go on. There's liberty, and then there's ridiculous." Semper Fi!

[JReed]

OOHRAH!!!!!!!

[Ysabel Kid]

I wish he would have crammed the "protester's" head up her own rear...

[FWiedner]

I understand his impulsive behavior, but I still think he needs to write the 1st Amendment on the blackboard 1000 times.

[JReed]

I wish he would have crammed the "protester's" head up her own rear...

I have other suggestions none as pleasant as yours though.

[ohwin94_61]

I cant post how I feel

Semper Fi

[Jeeps]

I understand his impulsive behavior, but I still think he needs to write the 1st Amendment on the blackboard 1000 times.

I can understand freedom of speech and all. But if she doesn't like our flag
she should pick one she does and emigrate. It's all the vogue from what I hear.

And while were at it, "speech" is "speech", burning or shoving a flag down your
pants is "action".

I suppose I've lived a blessed life to never have seen (in person) someone
desecrate a symbol which is so dear to my heart.

If you ask me it should have the same restrictions as public pornography.

You can burn a flag, you can dunk religious symbols in urine, and you can
cover the picture of a religious Icon in dung. These are protected.

Drawing a picture of a gun in school. Not protected.

Anyone see a trend here?

Were in BIG trouble.

Especially when we get convinced it is the right thing to do.

Shame on us for letting it happen.

[Blaine]

Too bad no one these days has the TestTickles to enforce the US Code on Flags.......

[FWiedner]

I understand his impulsive behavior, but I still think he needs to write the 1st Amendment on the blackboard 1000 times.

I can understand freedom of speech and all. But if she doesn't like our flag
she should pick one she does and emigrate. It's all the vogue from what I hear.

And while were at it, "speech" is "speech", burning or shoving a flag down your
pants is "action".

I suppose I've lived a blessed life to never have seen (in person) someone
desecrate a symbol which is so dear to my heart.

If you ask me it should have the same restrictions as public pornography.

You can burn a flag, you can dunk religious symbols in urine, and you can
cover the picture of a religious Icon in dung. These are protected.

Drawing a picture of a gun in school. Not protected.

Anyone see a trend here?

Were in BIG trouble.

Especially when we get convinced it is the right thing to do.

Shame on us for letting it happen.

It's a shame that people consider the symbols of freedom more important than the freedoms themselves.

I think it's a curious phenomenon that persons who consider themselves patriots of this nation want to see freedom so tightly regulated, and condemn those who exercise their liberties in a way other than what is "socially acceptable" to be exiled from citizenship or even physically harmed.

Is it possible to love America, and hate Americans?

[Jarhead]

I understand his impulsive behavior, but I still think he needs to write the 1st Amendment on the blackboard 1000 times.

I can understand freedom of speech and all. But if she doesn't like our flag
she should pick one she does and emigrate. It's all the vogue from what I hear.

And while were at it, "speech" is "speech", burning or shoving a flag down your
pants is "action".

I suppose I've lived a blessed life to never have seen (in person) someone
desecrate a symbol which is so dear to my heart.

If you ask me it should have the same restrictions as public pornography.

You can burn a flag, you can dunk religious symbols in urine, and you can
cover the picture of a religious Icon in dung. These are protected.

Drawing a picture of a gun in school. Not protected.

Anyone see a trend here?

Were in BIG trouble.

Especially when we get convinced it is the right thing to do.

Shame on us for letting it happen.

Semper Fi Brothers.....

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they have made a difference, Marines don't have that proplem" Ronald Regan.

[Jeeps]

I understand his impulsive behavior, but I still think he needs to write the 1st Amendment on the blackboard 1000 times.

I can understand freedom of speech and all. But if she doesn't like our flag
she should pick one she does and emigrate. It's all the vogue from what I hear.

And while were at it, "speech" is "speech", burning or shoving a flag down your
pants is "action".

I suppose I've lived a blessed life to never have seen (in person) someone
desecrate a symbol which is so dear to my heart.

If you ask me it should have the same restrictions as public pornography.

You can burn a flag, you can dunk religious symbols in urine, and you can
cover the picture of a religious Icon in dung. These are protected.

Drawing a picture of a gun in school. Not protected.

Anyone see a trend here?

Were in BIG trouble.

Especially when we get convinced it is the right thing to do.

Shame on us for letting it happen.

It's a shame that people consider the symbols of freedom more important than the freedoms themselves.

I think it's a curious phenomenon that persons who consider themselves patriots of this nation want to see freedom so tightly regulated, and condemn those who exercise their liberties in a way other than what is "socially acceptable" to be exiled from citizenship or even physically harmed.

Is it possible to love America, and hate Americans?

How do you know what I consider FW? Sorry sunshine your not that smart.
I know you think you are but......

I personal think it's a shame that people want freedom, then they dump all
over the symbol of the institution that provides that freedom.

I don't consider destruction or peeing on others feelings freedom. Sounds
like you do though. Or at least you get some sort of weird satisfaction at
putting down others while they're being pained by what they see as a degradation
of the society they live in.

I don't suppose you support the Marines freedom to rescue the flag from a
bad case of the clap doya FW? I thought not. I can infer too.

You can twist my words anyway you want, question my patriotism if you
must but an AMERICAN DOES NOT BURN THE FLAG.

I love America deeply, I get and understand your last little quip, so I will
repeat myself, I LOVE AMERICA DEEPLY. I consider that a wiseguy remark
and you should be ashamed of yourself FW. No excuse for that one.

AMERICAN FREEDOM.... Is it too much to know and understand when that
freedom is being used to emotionally hurt others it is no longer a freedom
but a smear on Americas good name?

She was baiting that Marine, and I have a firm belief that if you are looking
for a certain reaction by baiting someone who has feelings, then you should
have to live with the results of the actions you were baiting for.

[Jarhead]

I understand his impulsive behavior, but I still think he needs to write the 1st Amendment on the blackboard 1000 times.

I can understand freedom of speech and all. But if she doesn't like our flag
she should pick one she does and emigrate. It's all the vogue from what I hear.

And while were at it, "speech" is "speech", burning or shoving a flag down your
pants is "action".

I suppose I've lived a blessed life to never have seen (in person) someone
desecrate a symbol which is so dear to my heart.

If you ask me it should have the same restrictions as public pornography.

You can burn a flag, you can dunk religious symbols in urine, and you can
cover the picture of a religious Icon in dung. These are protected.

Drawing a picture of a gun in school. Not protected.

Anyone see a trend here?

Were in BIG trouble.

Especially when we get convinced it is the right thing to do.

Shame on us for letting it happen.

It's a shame that people consider the symbols of freedom more important than the freedoms themselves.

I think it's a curious phenomenon that persons who consider themselves patriots of this nation want to see freedom so tightly regulated, and condemn those who exercise their liberties in a way other than what is "socially acceptable" to be exiled from citizenship or even physically harmed.

Is it possible to love America, and hate Americans?

How do you know what I consider FW? Sorry sunshine your not that smart.
I know you think you are but......

I personal think it's a shame that people want freedom, then they dump all
over the symbol of the institution that provides that freedom.

I don't consider destruction or peeing on others feelings freedom. Sounds
like you do though. Or at least you get some sort of weird satisfaction at
putting down others while they're being pained by what they see as a degradation
of the society they live in.

I don't suppose you support the Marines freedom to rescue the flag from a
bad case of the clap doya FW? I thought not. I can infer too.

You can twist my words anyway you want, question my patriotism if you
must but an AMERICAN DOES NOT BURN THE FLAG.

I love America deeply, I get and understand your last little quip, so I will
repeat myself, I LOVE AMERICA DEEPLY. I consider that a wiseguy remark
and you should be ashamed of yourself FW. No excuse for that one.

AMERICAN FREEDOM.... Is it too much to know and understand when that
freedom is being used to emotionally hurt others it is no longer a freedom
but a smear on Americas good name?

She was baiting that Marine, and I have a firm belief that if you are looking
for a certain reaction by baiting someone who has feelings, then you should
have to live with the results of the actions you were baiting for.

FW likes to shoot off his mouth....he "Talks the Talk", but that's about it...There's always that 10% Bro....

[Rebel1972]

As bad as I hate to say it .If she went to wally world and bought the flag, it belongs to her ,she can do whatever she wants to with it .I do not like it any better than any one else here and I would not do it myself ,but it's her right to be stupid .Thats what Old Glory stands for .

[Ysabel Kid]

I'm all for freedom of speech, but as with all other freedoms comes responsibility - especially for one's own actions and/or speech. That always seems to be the part that is missing.

Mistreating the US flag is not "speech" so much as it is insult.

Look at it this way. If I walked up to a marine and insulted him, his family and the Corp, I'd fully expect to get my butt kicked - and deserve it. Freedom of speech does not give me the right to get into anyone's face and expect no response. Mistreating the flag - the symbol of the country and Constitution they have sworn an oath to defend - with their lives if necessary - is an insult just the same as an direct verbal assault. You want to throw insults? Expect the lumps that come from doing so and stop whining when they do.

Your rights do not permit you to violate the rights of others. This is where the law intersects. I am not a fan of flag-protection laws. I am a fan of butt-whoopin's being dispensed when needed - a much more effective control in this circumstance!

[Hobie]

There used to be a concept of "fighting words", i.e. speech intended to incite violence such that if one was the target of violence as a result of one using the fighting words that mitigated the offense of the attacker. Some folks flat kicked butt and suffered no consequence because the target of their wrath used "fighting words", same as initiating the attack. E.g. "your wife sleeps with men for cash".

Does this still exist?

[rjohns94]

I have to agree with FWeidner on this one.

Having served a full carreer and returned to Civy life, the hardest things I deal with is the right to free speech. the years spent away from my son while serving and the hardships endured and the wars fought, were for those freedoms which we so enjoy, and often take for granted. The symbols are not the freedoms. Nor is going head to head with these people the way to go. Christ would teach that to overcome this, we need to be Counter Culture. Not yell the loudest, nor be the strongest, but to approach every situation out of Grace. These people are obviously way off the path of Christ, and need Grace demonstrated to allow a transformation to take place in their lives. They showed up at our church in York Pa. We invited them in for drinks and food because it was bitter cold out. They were going to protest our church for two weeks, they left after one day. We may not like what they have to say and we may wish to take up arms against those citizens who would pay so little tribute to the symbol of this great nation. But that is not the way we should act. It also causes us to tread on the very freedoms that we hold dear.

blessings

[Jarhead]

[Blaine]

There used to be a concept of "fighting words", i.e. speech intended to incite violence such that if one was the target of violence as a result of one using the fighting words that mitigated the offense of the attacker. Some folks flat kicked butt and suffered no consequence because the target of their wrath used "fighting words", same as initiating the attack. E.g. "your wife sleeps with men for cash".

Does this still exist?

I checked and could not find that concept anywhere....too bad, because a good azzwhuppin' is the only thing a moron will understand sometimes.

BTW, just because you bought the Flag, does not mean you may treat it any old way....like I stated above, there is a portion of the US Code that deals with the Flag....too bad it's not enforced, at least at an informational level.... It's not a First Amendment issue.....can't yell fire in a theater, can't disrepect the US Flag.........

[El Mac]

They aren't the only ones.

[Jarhead]

They aren't the only ones.

[Iron_Marshal]

The Virginia Code Section States: § 18.2-488. Mutilating, defacing, etc.
No person shall publicly burn with contempt, mutilate, deface, defile, trample upon, or wear with intent to defile any such flag, standard, color, ensign or shield.
(Code 1950, § 18.1-425; 1960, c. 358; 1968, c. 349; 1975, cc. 14, 15, 493.)


Let me catch some cool-aid drinking, flag desecrating, left-wing liberal and see if I don't charge them. I fully expect that the liberal judges would throw out the case, but not before I throw the idiot in jail.

[Jeeps]

Let me try this another way.

Men fought and died under 'Ol Glory for Americans to enjoy freedom.

The freedom of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It would shock me
to learn the last breath from a soldiers body contained the words "make sure
it's ok to burn the flag".

As usual people (human nature) have twisted something beautiful, this countries
freedoms, into something sick and twisted to allow them to do things that
freedom was not meant for. I know that is a long argument in and of itself.

Like Hobie said, "fighting words". If I walked through any black neighborhood
spouting the "N" word and any other racial epithet I could think of, I know
darn well what would happen to me probably sooner than later.

AND I WOULDN'T BLAME ANY BLACKMAN ONE BIT. I ASKED FOR IT.

"I may not like what you say, but I'll give my life to defend your right to say it."

HOGWASH You've had your manhood taken off you right under your nose.

"Your doing hurtful mean spirited things on purpose, here's a knuckle sandwich!"

While we are trying to protect "actions" as "speech" maybe a knuckle sandwich
could be protected under the first amendment.

I for one would rather have a bloody lip than a broken heart.

But when you have no heart, I guess a bloody lip must hurt a bit.

[JReed]

There used to be a concept of "fighting words", i.e. speech intended to incite violence such that if one was the target of violence as a result of one using the fighting words that mitigated the offense of the attacker. Some folks flat kicked butt and suffered no consequence because the target of their wrath used "fighting words", same as initiating the attack. E.g. "your wife sleeps with men for cash".

Does this still exist?

It does in my book. It goes hand in hand with the laws of physics for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

As far as freedom of speech she exercised hers and he exercised his. Freedom of speech protects you from government imposed censorship no where does it say that no one can hold you to task when do you or say something offensive. To look at this differently if you go to Compton and start bad talking blacks I fully expect to see your obituary in the sunday paper and I would say you deserved it.

Thats my story and I'm sticking to it.

Jeeps types faster then me

[Jeeps]

If the actual "burning" of the flag is considered "free speech" then by all rights
shouldn't "rescuing" said flag from flame also be considered "free speech"???????

Does that sound right? Or is only mean intentions covered by law?

Lookee me, I'm a Polish lawyer

[Jarhead]

[Jeeps]

Jeeps types faster then me

We are kind of tripping over one another here, but I don't mind

I'll gladly share this foxhole with ya Jeremy

I should stay away from these types of threads but I just can't help myself.
I will always blurt out my love of the flag and support any man who tries to
keep her from burning no matter how silly I sound.

There's rights and there's freedoms and there is time to stand and say "I will
not allow this to happen here".

Funny part is people see "me" as the problem not the downward spiral of
society to where teasing and poking and being mean is respected.

Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot were very MEAN people. I could be wrong but I'm pretty
sure they didn't break any laws cuz they twisted them to fit their agenda.

MEAN people take advantage of laws last I checked and should be stood up
to and stopped.

[Blaine]

Honest.....we get it.......please understand that you don't have the corner on patriotism, Leatherneck......

[Jarhead]

Honest.....we get it.......please understand that you don't have the corner on patriotism, Leatherneck......

I understand.....and I'm glad you get it.

[JReed]

Jeeps types faster then me

I should stay away from these types of threads but I just can't help myself.

I am right there with ya. I have to keep myself from blurting out the first thing that comes to mind. Makes for a sore tounge but I try hard to be a good boy.

[Jeeps]

Honest.....we get it.......please understand that you don't have the corner on patriotism, Leatherneck......

Please excuse my overzealous friend, he is inflicted with "ChestyPulleritis"

The symptoms of which cause a man to charge across beaches and attack
machine gun nests among other things.

The virus is usually contracted in either San Diego or Parris Island.

I think it's something in the water. Or possibly the "bug juice".

[FWiedner]

How do you know what I consider FW? Sorry sunshine your not that smart.
I know you think you are but......

I personal think it's a shame that people want freedom, then they dump all
over the symbol of the institution that provides that freedom.

I don't consider destruction or peeing on others feelings freedom. Sounds
like you do though. Or at least you get some sort of weird satisfaction at
putting down others while they're being pained by what they see as a degradation
of the society they live in.

I don't suppose you support the Marines freedom to rescue the flag from a
bad case of the clap doya FW? I thought not. I can infer too.

You can twist my words anyway you want, question my patriotism if you
must but an AMERICAN DOES NOT BURN THE FLAG.

I love America deeply, I get and understand your last little quip, so I will
repeat myself, I LOVE AMERICA DEEPLY. I consider that a wiseguy remark
and you should be ashamed of yourself FW. No excuse for that one.

AMERICAN FREEDOM.... Is it too much to know and understand when that
freedom is being used to emotionally hurt others it is no longer a freedom
but a smear on Americas good name?

She was baiting that Marine, and I have a firm belief that if you are looking
for a certain reaction by baiting someone who has feelings, then you should
have to live with the results of the actions you were baiting for.

Burning a flag does not physically harm anyone who witnesses the event, nor does it cost them a dime from their own pocket. Physically assaulting and robbing someone who is burning a piece of their own property as a form of political protest does both.

American service-men don't need to and aren't sworn to protect the flag from other Americans, they do need to and are sworn to protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. One is a piece of cloth, the other is the law that defines our nation and our way of life.

Jumping a flag-burner is akin to fighting to protect your mailbox while you burn down your house. Because of your "deep love" for it.

[Jarhead]

Jeeps types faster then me

I should stay away from these types of threads but I just can't help myself.

I am right there with ya. I have to keep myself from blurting out the first thing that comes to mind. Makes for a sore tounge but I try hard to be a good boy.

Me Three! Semper Fi Brothers....always.

[Jarhead]

Jeeps,

That "Bug Juice" ain't too bad when you put it in with your C-Rats, Ham and Mofo's, but it helps to add a little Tabasco Sauce too...

[Jeeps]

How do you know what I consider FW? Sorry sunshine your not that smart.
I know you think you are but......

I personal think it's a shame that people want freedom, then they dump all
over the symbol of the institution that provides that freedom.

I don't consider destruction or peeing on others feelings freedom. Sounds
like you do though. Or at least you get some sort of weird satisfaction at
putting down others while they're being pained by what they see as a degradation
of the society they live in.

I don't suppose you support the Marines freedom to rescue the flag from a
bad case of the clap doya FW? I thought not. I can infer too.

You can twist my words anyway you want, question my patriotism if you
must but an AMERICAN DOES NOT BURN THE FLAG.

I love America deeply, I get and understand your last little quip, so I will
repeat myself, I LOVE AMERICA DEEPLY. I consider that a wiseguy remark
and you should be ashamed of yourself FW. No excuse for that one.

AMERICAN FREEDOM.... Is it too much to know and understand when that
freedom is being used to emotionally hurt others it is no longer a freedom
but a smear on Americas good name?

She was baiting that Marine, and I have a firm belief that if you are looking
for a certain reaction by baiting someone who has feelings, then you should
have to live with the results of the actions you were baiting for.

Burning a flag does not physically harm anyone who witnesses the event, nor does it cost them a dime from their own pocket. Physically assaulting and robbing someone who is burning a piece of their own property as a form of political protest does both.

American service-men don't need to and aren't sworn to protect the flag from other Americans, they do need to and are sworn to protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. One is a piece of cloth, the other is the law that defines our nation and our way of life.

Jumping a flag-burner is akin to fighting to protect your mailbox while you burn down your house. Because of your "deep love" for it.

I'm just arguing that there is right and wrong.

Words are fine, but have been used since the beginning of time to do mean
things.

A person with enough charisma can use words to twist right and wrong and
cause hundreds to kill themselves and their children. (see "Jonestown")

Our Bill of Rights and other laws on the books were written with a certain
heart felt intent. People use the words written to find "loopholes" they can
point to and justify their actions even though they know them to be wrong.

There is a time to "do what is right" and preventing a flag from being burned
or desecrated is the "right thing to do" and should be protected as a "freedom
of speech".

That flag may have been her property, but a sign plastered with "hate speech"
or a pornographic picture is just a piece of paper that is someones personal
property. They get confiscated all the time.

Maybe we should just sue for "emotional distress" when people burn the flag?
Would that be the American thing to do?

[Jason_W]

Probably the best thing to do with the Phelps cult is ignore them completely no matter what inflamatory things they say.

Every time we make a huge stink about such things (include shock art with this statement) we inadvertantly perpetuate it. There is no such thing as bad publicity.

To acknowledge their existence at all only empowers them.

[FWiedner]

I'm just arguing that there is right and wrong.

Words are fine, but have been used since the beginning of time to do mean
things.

A person with enough charisma can use words to twist right and wrong and
cause hundreds to kill themselves and their children. (see "Jonestown")

Our Bill of Rights and other laws on the books were written with a certain
heart felt intent. People use the words written to find "loopholes" they can
point to and justify their actions even though they know them to be wrong.

There is a time to "do what is right" and preventing a flag from being burned
or desecrated is the "right thing to do" and should be protected as a "freedom
of speech".

That flag may have been her property, but a sign plastered with "hate speech"
or a pornographic picture is just a piece of paper that is someones personal
property. They get confiscated all the time.

Maybe we should just sue for "emotional distress" when people burn the flag?
Would that be the American thing to do?

What 1st Amendment haters fail to consider is that once they shut their opponents up or deny them the ability to make politcal protests, they have silenced themselves as well.

What's right and what's wrong?

Attacking and robbing another American citizen legally exercising their right to free speech to protect the flag, or deliberately violating tha law with the express intent of defiling the very principles that the flag that you think that you are protecting represents?

[Jarhead]

[Rebel1972]

Taking that flag was no better than the confiscation of guns after Katrina.Don't get me wrong ,I don't like it one bit and I probably would have confronted her.Think about it this way ,What if she bought a copy of the constitution and was tearing it to pieces ?

[Jeeps]

This is going nowhere let's drop it.

Obviously I see it as baiting for a reaction. Pisspoor.

The nanny state we created no longer believes in sowing and reaping.

[FWiedner]

This is going nowhere let's drop it.

Obviously I see it as baiting for a reaction. Pisspoor.

The nanny state we created no longer believes in sowing and reaping.

I wasn't intending to bait you Jeeps, I was just trying to discuss the issues surrounding a young man's partiotic impulse.

It's not unusual that people either believe in things that they don't fully understand, or that they only support the part of a larger princple that makes them feel good.

I don't think it's right that some hippie a-hole burned a flag, but neither do I think it's right that an American serviceman violated his oath to support and defend the Constitution.

[El Mac]

Semper fly.

[Jarhead]

Semper fly.

[Blaine]

In the USA, a long time ago, such actions were called Civil Disobedience, and people understood that they could be arrested and jailed for this. These warped days, people think Civil Disobedience is covered by the First Amendment, which is hogwash. It's also BS that the authorities allow them to slide, under the threats of the ACLU and public outcry. For crying out loud, Riflemen, Civil Disobedience means not one iota if you are not sacrificing, or, actually achieving personal gain from it.

[El Mac]

Whimper n whine.

[Jarhead]

Whimper n whine.

Is that the best you can do?

[El Mac]

Why jarhead, we cross?

[Jarhead]

Why jarhead, we cross?

[FWiedner]

In the USA, a long time ago, such actions were called Civil Disobedience, and people understood that they could be arrested and jailed for this. These warped days, people think Civil Disobedience is covered by the First Amendment, which is hogwash. It's also BS that the authorities allow them to slide, under the threats of the ACLU and public outcry. For crying out loud, Riflemen, Civil Disobedience means not one iota if you are not sacrificing, or, actually achieving personal gain from it.

Burning a flag just to pee people off can still be held to be illegal according to the laws of the state or municipality where said flag burning may occur, i.e. disturbing the peace, however, burning a flag as an overt expression of political intent is constitutional speech protected by the 1st Amendment.

Your favorite hippie punk may still be arrested and go to jail, but whether or not he gets away with it depends on the context of the flag burning.

See U.S. Supreme Court, TEXAS v. JOHNSON, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)

[Jarhead]

"The Assistant City Attorney has decided not press charges at the request of police. Modisette posted $850 bail from money he earned while serving in Iraq, though with no charges filed, he will be given a refund. "I think it would have been money well spent," Modisette later said."



Very glad to see that this Marine got off the hook, so to speak, regardless of how others may feel....that being said, litigation is not even an issue.
After we came back from Nam we were told/advised not to wear our uniforms in Public to avoid the obvious, and we were given "Direct Orders" not to engage with those who disrespected us for our Service. A very hard thing to do indeed, so I understand, like so many here, why this Marine acted the way he did.
A debate on this issue could go on forever, so I understand Jeeps position as well. Also, can see where FW is coming from regarding case Law...regardless if I agree with him or not. The Marines' CO will probably talk with him and have a smile on his face while doing so ....

[Jeeps]

This is going nowhere let's drop it.

Obviously I see it as baiting for a reaction. Pisspoor.

The nanny state we created no longer believes in sowing and reaping.

NO NO NO, sorry FW I wasn't talking about YOU baiting here.

It was about her actively baiting for a reaction.

Trust me, I agree with all you are saying, but when people use laws to hurt
one another it has gone to far.

If I came to your house with the sole intent of poking and prodding you and
given enough time and an understanding of what could possibly make you
snap, you would eventually step off your porch and throttle me silly.

I would have earned it.

I'm just trying to justify YOUR right to not be "terrorized". (I don't like using
that word but it gets the point across)

Just cuz there is a legal way to treat people like dirt don't make it right.

Yes the actual story at the beginning of this thread did end in the best
possible way for the young Marine.

If he had went over to her and bashed her skull in I would have been the
first to take him out back and teach him how to treat a lady.

If he rushed in and grabbed the flag and ran with it to keep it from being
defiled I would have been the first one to clap him on the back.