Military Men Chase Down Protesters Flying Upside-Down American Flag

[Pogo]

Also how do we know these guys are military? One of them wears a "USMC" shirt-- that's it?

If they turn out to be regular guys then I'm still just as fine with it.

It really isn't relevant. I'm just questioning the source.

 

[Pogo]

If you disrespect the flag you disrespect the nation it stands for and all those who fought bled and/or died defending them. The punks on the scooter deserved a much more serious attitude adjustment than what they got. The idea that symbols are unimportant is idiotic. Go to a mosque and piss on a Koran and see what happens.

That's idiotic too. "What happens" is not the point.

Wrong. That is exactly the point. Symbols are important.

Only to the symbol-minded.

No, "what happens" isn't the point. Making the point is the point.

 

[Pogo]

Just that they were dicks. I think very poorly of assholes with no respect for the flag.

An opinion shared by many. But I still don't think anyone's really arguing that a "right" exists to assault assholes.

Except they did not assault anyone.

"Assault" is used very very loosely these days. I agree with your definition; I don't see assault. But I do see what looks like theft.

Whether this counts as assault or not, from what I read I think No1Doc at least is arguing that such a right exists:

The punks on the scooter deserved a much more serious attitude adjustment than what they got.

But for their part the two "military" guys don't seem to think that free speech exists. Ironic considering they supposedly defend it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

An opinion shared by many. But I still don't think anyone's really arguing that a "right" exists to assault assholes.

Except they did not assault anyone.

"Assault" is used very very loosely these days. I agree with your definition; I don't see assault. But I do see what looks like theft.

Whether this counts as assault or not, from what I read I think No1Doc at least is arguing that such a right exists.

But for their part the two "military" guys don't seem to think that free speech exists.

No, they exercised their own freedom of speech.

 

[Pogo]

Except they did not assault anyone.

"Assault" is used very very loosely these days. I agree with your definition; I don't see assault. But I do see what looks like theft.

Whether this counts as assault or not, from what I read I think No1Doc at least is arguing that such a right exists.

But for their part the two "military" guys don't seem to think that free speech exists.

No, they exercised their own freedom of speech.

-- using somebody else's stolen prop ... by which action they squelched somebody else's exercise of that same right.

Which one is "free" then?

 

[USNavyVet]

"Assault" is used very very loosely these days. I agree with your definition; I don't see assault. But I do see what looks like theft.

Whether this counts as assault or not, from what I read I think No1Doc at least is arguing that such a right exists.

But for their part the two "military" guys don't seem to think that free speech exists.

No, they exercised their own freedom of speech.

-- using somebody else's stolen prop ... by which action they squelched somebody else's exercise of that same right.

Which one is "free" then?

Both are free. Actions have consequences and those idiots with the upside down flag got the attention they wanted.

 

[JWBooth]

No, they exercised their own freedom of speech.

-- using somebody else's stolen prop ... by which action they squelched somebody else's exercise of that same right.

Which one is "free" then?

Both are free. Actions have consequences and those idiots with the upside down flag got the attention they wanted.

Actions have consequences. What consequence is assigned to the act of theft with the use of force, aka robbery?

 

[USNavyVet]

-- using somebody else's stolen prop ... by which action they squelched somebody else's exercise of that same right.

Which one is "free" then?

Both are free. Actions have consequences and those idiots with the upside down flag got the attention they wanted.

Actions have consequences. What consequence is assigned to the act of theft with the use of force, aka robbery?

None so far as I know. Let those unpatriotic assholes call the cops.

 

[editec]

I don't know if I'd go that far. They didn't beat anyone up.

Attempted repression of citizens 1st Amendment right?

That is a FEDERAL CRIME, R.C.

It's a violation of their civil rights.

 

[Sallow]

What these military guys did was a gross violation of the riders' freedoms of speech and yet a lot of people are cheering this on. This was wrong, plain and simple.

VIDEO: Military Men Chase Down Protesters Flying Upside-Down American Flag | Fox News Insider

Those guys need a lesson in what they are fighting for..

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Except they did not assault anyone.

"Assault" is used very very loosely these days. I agree with your definition; I don't see assault. But I do see what looks like theft.

Whether this counts as assault or not, from what I read I think No1Doc at least is arguing that such a right exists.

But for their part the two "military" guys don't seem to think that free speech exists.

No, they exercised their own freedom of speech.

So this college professor was just doing the same thing, right?

The liberal professor who stepped right into an anti-abortion trap - latimes.com

 

[Camp]

Citizens were protesting the alleged murder of other citizens by government forces, the police. Some of the protesters decided to use a method of displaying the American flag that has been used by various protesters since the 60's, a half a century. The Supreme Court has ruled that various methods of using the American flag, some far more insulting than carrying it upside down, to be constitutional.

A couple of government agents or employees, perhaps and probably off duty, out of uniform decided to ignore the rights of the protesters and disregard the half century tradition of citizens protesting against the government with the use of an upside down flown flag and conducted a crime of theft and possibly assault in public as they announced they were military personel and projected the image of serving military personel as bullies and thugs who could do what they wanted, when they wanted due to their affiation with the government and without concern for being charged with a crime or in any way having to answer for their misdeed. This during protest about other government representatives being able to do what they wanted, when they wanted without having to be concerned about their misdeeds, even murder.

All the constitutional rights to protest, petition, assemble, speech and disagree with the government seem minor compared to murder by government agents. If they are allowed to murder than surely a little theft and thuggery should be no big deal.

 

[Indofred]

I don't know if I'd go that far. They didn't beat anyone up.

But they did stop someones constitution rights.
I think that is reason enough.

 

[BobPlumb]

The servicemen did not lay a finger on the guys on the scooter. The flag was dropped, not physically taken from the scooter guys. If the scooter guys has stayed rather than retreating, what would have happened? Perhaps they would have received an ass kicking. Perhaps not! Who is to say the service men would not have given the scooter guys a nice cussing out?

Yes, it is wrong to infringe on someone's right to free speech. However, each person needs to use common sense in exercising free speech. Don't walk up to a tough guy in a bar and call the lady on his arm a whore. He will proceed to violate your right to free speech in a violent way. The guys on the scooter did the equivalent of calling The Lady our service men fought for a whore!

 

[jasonnfree]

"We serve our country", the military guys said. I wonder what they'd say if they knew that the flag they cherish and maybe even the uniforms they wear are made in a communist country, China. All for corporate profit of course. Commanding officers used to tell the guys how to act when off duty.

 

[jasonnfree]

The servicemen did not lay a finger on the guys on the scooter. The flag was dropped, not physically taken from the scooter guys. If the scooter guys has stayed rather than retreating, what would have happened? Perhaps they would have received an ass kicking. Perhaps not! Who is to say the service men would not have given the scooter guys a nice cussing out?

Yes, it is wrong to infringe on someone's right to free speech. However, each person needs to use common sense in exercising free speech. Don't walk up to a tough guy in a bar and call the lady on his arm a whore. He will proceed to violate your right to free speech in a violent way. The guys on the scooter did the equivalent of calling The Lady our service men fought for a whore!

But you said that the scooter guys would have probably been hurt if they hadn't retreated. If you get your butt kicked in the bar like you said, the tough guy would still be committing assault and risking arrest, legally.

 

[bripat9643]

I don't know why this is so hard to understand, but a person can't violate anyone's right to free speech.

The only way those rider's "freedom of speech" could have been violated is if the government had passed a law making it illegal.

Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. They pissed off a Marine, and there was a consequence for that.

If I went into the bar down the street and called the biggest guy there an asshole, he'd probably throw me through the wall. Perhaps that would be "assault", but there's no way you can argue he violated my freedom of speech.

You're a fucking moron. Do you really think a guy who throws you through a wall shouldn't go to jail?

 

[bripat9643]

No, they exercised their own freedom of speech.

-- using somebody else's stolen prop ... by which action they squelched somebody else's exercise of that same right.

Which one is "free" then?

Both are free. Actions have consequences and those idiots with the upside down flag got the attention they wanted.

You're an asshole who obviously condones assault.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Assault? Yes, assault was committed by the protestors when they threw rocks at the police.
I can and do sympathize with the alleged cause being protested but it does not give them any legal or moral right to assault anyone else.

No, I certainly do NOT claim that it would have been legal for the"military men" to assault the protestors but that in no way implies that I do not think they richly deserved a good ass-kickin. Unfortunately folks don't always get what they deserve.

 

[USNavyVet]

-- using somebody else's stolen prop ... by which action they squelched somebody else's exercise of that same right.

Which one is "free" then?

Both are free. Actions have consequences and those idiots with the upside down flag got the attention they wanted.

You're an asshole who obviously condones assault.

Ah did I hurt your little feelings? Boo hoo.

Go troll someone else.