Here's The United States Code The NFL Players Are Violating---36 U.S.C. § 301

[Conservative65]

There are no sanctions under 18 USC for violating it.

In essence, they tell you what you should do, but don't proscribe any penalties for failure to follow 36 U.S.C. 301

Does that mean it's not really a law?

There's the law of gravity, the law of averages, even the law of supply and demand. There aren't any penalties for violating them.

How many of them are considered a crime?

I didn't get an answer as to whether the crazy driver you describes several posts back ran you in a ditch or a concrete barrier?

 

[NYcarbineer]

That has nothing to do with my point.

Sure it does. It addressed burning the flag.

Next.

Oh, here we go. If it were an actual federal crime to, for example, improperly display the flag, how could it then still be legal to BURN one?

eh?

So violating 36 U.S.C. 301 isn't a crime? No wonder you idiots think someone coming here illegally isn't a crime.

Show me the criminal penalties then.

Does that mean it's not a crime?

It's not a crime. The code is 'advisory'.

 

[ABikerSailor]

If there are no consequences for not observing the flag, then how can it be illegal?

 

[Conservative65]

Sure it does. It addressed burning the flag.

Next.

Oh, here we go. If it were an actual federal crime to, for example, improperly display the flag, how could it then still be legal to BURN one?

eh?

So violating 36 U.S.C. 301 isn't a crime? No wonder you idiots think someone coming here illegally isn't a crime.

Show me the criminal penalties then.

Does that mean it's not a crime?

It's not a crime. The code is 'advisory'.

The code is LAW. Laws aren't advisory.

Like I said, burning a flag might be legal just not in your best interest.

 

[radical right]

Nobody can be charged for violating it, there are no penalties proscribed for it's violation. No fines, no jail time, no nothing.

Sure they can. Charges involve saying what you did to break the law.

Due process means a person get an arraignment

Criminal Law Stages of a Criminal Case :: Justia

Court Process - Infraction, Misdemeanor, and Felony - NoCuffs.com

At the arraignment hearing you will be asked to wait until your name is called. You will be with a number of other defendants awaiting their arraignments or other pretrial hearings. Once you are called in front of the judge, he or she will inform you of a few things:

• Charges: The judge will inform you of the charges being brought against you, and the potential punishments.

Guilty: A plea of “guilty” signifies that the defendant admits to committing the crime and accepts the charges and punishments against him.

36 U.S.C. 301 has no punishments. Whether you plea guilty or not guilty, they have to let you walk out the door.

 

[AVISSSER]

(1) when the flag is displayed—

(A) individuals in uniform should give the military salute at the first note of the anthem and maintain that position until the last note;

(B) members of the Armed Forces and veterans who are present but not in uniform may render the military salute in the manner provided for individuals in uniform; and

(C) all other persons present should face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over the heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart; and

(2) when the flag is not displayed, all present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed


Customs and Courtesies. Nothing enforceable here.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Oh, here we go. If it were an actual federal crime to, for example, improperly display the flag, how could it then still be legal to BURN one?

eh?

So violating 36 U.S.C. 301 isn't a crime? No wonder you idiots think someone coming here illegally isn't a crime.

Show me the criminal penalties then.

Does that mean it's not a crime?

It's not a crime. The code is 'advisory'.

The code is LAW. Laws aren't advisory.

Like I said, burning a flag might be legal just not in your best interest.

How can burning a flag be legal if it obviously violates what you are claiming is the LAW?

 

[Conservative65]

Nobody can be charged for violating it, there are no penalties proscribed for it's violation. No fines, no jail time, no nothing.

Sure they can. Charges involve saying what you did to break the law.

Due process means a person get an arraignment

Criminal Law Stages of a Criminal Case :: Justia

Court Process - Infraction, Misdemeanor, and Felony - NoCuffs.com

At the arraignment hearing you will be asked to wait until your name is called. You will be with a number of other defendants awaiting their arraignments or other pretrial hearings. Once you are called in front of the judge, he or she will inform you of a few things:

• Charges: The judge will inform you of the charges being brought against you, and the potential punishments.

36 U.S.C. 301 has no punishments. Whether you plea guilty or not guilty, they have to let you walk out the door.

Charges: What you did. Period. When then police charge someone with a crime, they don't list the potential punishment. They tell you that if you don't want what you say used against you, keep your trap shut. The courts decide what the punishment is.

 

[Conservative65]

So violating 36 U.S.C. 301 isn't a crime? No wonder you idiots think someone coming here illegally isn't a crime.

Show me the criminal penalties then.

Does that mean it's not a crime?

It's not a crime. The code is 'advisory'.

The code is LAW. Laws aren't advisory.

Like I said, burning a flag might be legal just not in your best interest.

How can burning a flag be legal if it obviously violates what you are claiming is the LAW?

That has, sadly, gone through the courts.

Again, burn a flag is you choose. It's not a good choice on your part.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Oh, here we go. If it were an actual federal crime to, for example, improperly display the flag, how could it then still be legal to BURN one?

eh?

So violating 36 U.S.C. 301 isn't a crime? No wonder you idiots think someone coming here illegally isn't a crime.

Show me the criminal penalties then.

Does that mean it's not a crime?

It's not a crime. The code is 'advisory'.

The code is LAW. Laws aren't advisory.

Like I said, burning a flag might be legal just not in your best interest.

Argue with these statements then:

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.

Flag Code, Etiquette and Laws

 

[radical right]

The code is LAW. Laws aren't advisory.

Like I said, burning a flag might be legal just not in your best interest.

The USSC ruled that burning the flag is legal.

If there is a law prohibiting it, that law would be unconstitutional.

The court didn't rule on the law, because nobody has standing to sue over it,

Remember the USSC court was about a violation of Texas law, not 36 U.S.C. 301

Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that invalidated prohibitions on desecrating the American flag

Johnson was charged with violating the Texas law that prohibits vandalizing respected objects (desecration of a venerated object). He was convicted, sentenced to one year in prison, and fined $2,000.

 

[Conservative65]

So violating 36 U.S.C. 301 isn't a crime? No wonder you idiots think someone coming here illegally isn't a crime.

Show me the criminal penalties then.

Does that mean it's not a crime?

It's not a crime. The code is 'advisory'.

The code is LAW. Laws aren't advisory.

Like I said, burning a flag might be legal just not in your best interest.

Argue with these statements then:

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.

Flag Code, Etiquette and Laws

That's what I said. The courts have said burning the flag isn't. They consider someone's right to be a piece of shit and do so on a higher level than respecting the flag of their country.

Tell me the next time and the location where you're going to burn the flag. I want to . . . watch.

 

[Conservative65]

The code is LAW. Laws aren't advisory.

Like I said, burning a flag might be legal just not in your best interest.

The USSC ruled that burning the flag is legal.

If there is a law prohibiting it, that law would be unconstitutional.

The court didn't rule on the law, because nobody has standing to sue over it,

Remember the USSC court was about a violation of Texas law, not 36 U.S.C. 301

Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that invalidated prohibitions on desecrating the American flag

Johnson was charged with violating the Texas law that prohibits vandalizing respected objects (desecration of a venerated object). He was convicted, sentenced to one year in prison, and fined $2,000.

Refusing to stand and burning the flag are two different things. The Supreme Court for some reason held that being a traitor and burning the flag is OK. Still not a good idea.

 

[radical right]

Charges: What you did. Period. When then police charge someone with a crime, they don't list the potential punishment. They tell you that if you don't want what you say used against you, keep your trap shut. The courts decide what the punishment is.

Every defendant gets an arraignment, during which the judge reads the charges against them, and the possible punishments that can be imposed, and asks them to make a plea.

If there are no punishments to be imposed, the judge can't hold the defendant.

 

[LeftofLeft]

You can kneel, sit, lay down; just don't disrupt or infringe on other's rights to honor the National Anthem.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You can kneel, sit, lay down; just don't disrupt or infringe on other's rights to honor the National Anthem.

Kaepernick was told by a Green Beret that taking a knee is better than sitting through the anthem.

A Green Beret who played in the NFL writes Colin Kaepernick a letter

 

[radical right]

Did you know this law existed? - Democratic Underground

Did you know this law existed?
There is even a federal law (36 U.S.C. § 301) mandating that anyone in the presence of an anthem performance must "face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over the heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart.

However, this statutory suggestion does not have any penalty associated with violations. 36 U.S.C. § 301 This behavioral requirement for the national anthem is subject to the same First Amendment controversies that surround the Pledge of Allegiance For example, Jehovah's Witnesses do not stand for or sing the national anthem

The Star-Spangled Banner - Wikipedia

 

[longknife]

Here's the U.S. Code that these unAmerican malcontents are violating. Trump is right, fire them. Hell, even Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Soebarka, the former unconstitutional non-natural born citizen president, violated it when he was a candidate.

36 U.S. Code § 301 - National anthem


a)Designation.—
The composition consisting of the words and music known as the Star-Spangled Banner is the national anthem.

(b)Conduct During Playing.—During a rendition of the national anthem—

(1) when the flag is displayed—

(A) individuals in uniform should give the military salute at the first note of the anthem and maintain that position until the last note;

(B) members of the Armed Forces and veterans who are present but not in uniform may render the military salute in the manner provided for individuals in uniform; and

(C) all other persons present should face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over the heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart; and

(2) when the flag is not displayed, all present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed.

As a proud American veteran it hurts me to say this - the cited law indicates SHOULD. That makes it voluntary for all but military in uniform which is covered under the UCMJ as required.

 

[SavannahMann]

Here's the oath you should be concerned about -

Article II, Section I, of the Constitution --

"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

You didn't worry about it when the n*gger President was in office. Why do you worry about it when the white one is?

The 1st amendment is part of the constitution.

36 U.S.C. 301 is subservient to the constitution.

Has 301 been deemed to be unconstitutional?

No. Because it has no penalty. It would be best described as “gee it would be nice if you did this”.

The Supreme Court did rule you did not have to stand for the pledge of allegiance.

 

[Care4all]

all other persons present should face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over the heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart; and

It's a nice suggestion.

WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER....

it is a suggestion, and not mandatory, it would say MUST instead of SHOULD....besides the fact that we already have cases that have made it to the supreme court where the SC ruled that it is unconstitutional to force civilians to follow these protocols for the Flag and I suppose Anthem, it is the government restricting free speech if a citizen wants to express their thoughts, by burning it... it breaks the First Amendment.