Woman Charged with Felony for Burning Homo Pride Flag

[BackAgain]

And really it’s not speech
It’s an action, a physical aggression.

Speech can take the form of action.

For instance, I can stick my middle finger high in the air in response to something mumbled by our President. Rude? Yep. Immature? Perhaps. But speech nonetheless.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

you cant burn someone else's property if that is flag belonged to someone else then they should have been arrested too...damn lighting a flag on a building should be arson

And then Kamel Toe Harris came in and paid the bond so these felons could burn again.

 

[WEATHER53]

Speech can take the form of action.

For instance, I can stick my middle finger high in the air in response to something mumbled by our President. Rude? Yep. Immature? Perhaps. But speech nonetheless.

Wrong
Speech is vocalizations of words
A silent finger give is a signal and not speech
It’s more wishfulness on part of lib loons and those that accommodate them to stretch the definition of speech into avenues not intended in order to gain protection for their acts mislabeled as speech

 

[BackAgain]

Wrong
Speech is vocalizations of words
A silent finger give is a signal and not speech
It’s more wishfulness on part of lib loons and those that accommodate them to stretch the definition of speech into avenues not intended in order to gain protection for their acts mislabeled as speech

No. I’m right. Legally, symbolic “speech” is still speech.

And although I am not a free speech absolutist (and I don’t believe that’s what the First Amendment says or means), I am actually ok with the idea that speech has to be defined in a sufficiently broad manner so as to include vocalization, the written word and symbolic expression (such as art), etc.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

And I guarantee you, this woman will NOT be charged with a hate crime.

 

[Skylar]

Speech can take the form of action.

For instance, I can stick my middle finger high in the air in response to something mumbled by our President. Rude? Yep. Immature? Perhaps. But speech nonetheless.

So burning the front of that building is free speech?

I wasn't aware that arson was protected speech. Who knew?

 

[WEATHER53]

No. I’m right. Legally, symbolic “speech” is still speech.

And although I am not a free speech absolutist (and I don’t believe that’s what the First Amendment says or means), I am actually ok with the idea that speech has to be defined in a sufficiently broad manner so as to include vocalization, the written word and symbolic expression (such as art), etc.

We disagree on this
The effect of an act that’s not from vocalizing is not speech. A concept is conveyed but not vocalized. Inferred is also an accurate definition of the act

 

[WEATHER53]

So burning the front of that building is free speech?

I wasn't aware that arson was protected speech. Who knew?

No one

 

[BackAgain]

So burning the front of that building is free speech?

Absolutely not. And I said no such thing. Nor did I imply it.

I wasn't aware that arson was protected speech. Who knew?

Nobody. It’s not remotely akin to anything ever said or suggested.

 

[WEATHER53]

Absolutely not. And I said no such thing. Nor did I imply it.

Nobody. It’s not remotely akin to anything ever said or suggested.

You stated acts that convey a message are speech

 

[RhodyPatriot]

You stated acts that convey a message are speech

The Left considers the "OK" sign to be hate speech.

 

[BackAgain]

We disagree on this
The effect of an act that’s not from vocalizing is not speech. A concept is conveyed but not vocalized. Inferred is also an accurate definition of the act

We do disagree. In the days of the creation and ratification of the first Amendment, there were no long distance communications other than the written word (or a messenger from point A to point B). But the first amendment protected written speech (like our formerly free press) despite the lack of vocalization.

 

[BackAgain]

You stated acts that convey a message are speech

Quote me as saying that.

I also said that I’m not a free speech absolutist.

I don’t believe that one can use freedom of speech to justify revealing the placement of troops in a time of war, for example. And the famous example of falsely crying “FIRE” in a crowded theater.

 

[BackAgain]

The Left considers the "OK" sign to be hate speech.

View attachment 961841

You WACIST!

 

[cnm]

Woman Charged with Felony for Burning Homo Pride Flag​

Being allowed to destroy others' property seems socialist. Nyet, tovarisch?

 

[cnm]

The Left considers the "OK" sign to be hate speech.

Everyone knows it's just 'joking'.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

That’s like being arrested for defacing a swastika.

 

[Weatherman2020]

She should have burned down a police precinct at a BLM peaceful protest, firebombed a federal courthouse with Antifa in tow, or threatened to guillotine Joe Biden at a Hamas event.

Silly person.

If she had only yelled FREE PALESTINE she would have walked away free.

 

[RhodyPatriot]

Being allowed to destroy others' property seems socialist. Nyet, tovarisch?

Because it's their property too.

Nyuk.

 

[Skylar]

you cant burn someone else's property if that is flag belonged to someone else then they should have been arrested too...damn lighting a flag on a building should be arson

It is. She was charged with arson as well. It caught other parts of the front of the building on fire.

She was eventually found mentally unfit to stand trial. She was also vandalizing police cruisers by writing "Jesus is King!" on them.