Doesnt Congress have anything better 2 do

Get this-I just found them on line in PDF format, ready for your viewing pleasure:

http://www.enlisted.info/field-manuals/fm-3-7-NBC-field-hand book.shtml

Oh noez, now you're telling terrorist what we do!

[/sarcasm]

Wow, this thread went absolutely nowhere...   The last 6 pages were an impressive display of non-progress.  I will therefore cut back to the essence, in an impressive display of arrogance, by quoting myself:

Clark Kent wrote: 1.  Burning a flag is (usually) expression of political belief or criticism, i.e. political speech. 2.  Political speech (like criticizing the government) is the principal reason we even HAVE the first amendment. 3.  Political speech is the most protected form of speech of all, because political speech (specifically including dissident speech and criticism of government) is central to the existence of a democracy. Therefore, it is rather obvious that prohibiting flag-burning is not only unconstitutional (as the Court has pointed out in the past), but also simply un-American and un-Democratic.

To add to that, Rico (and others) pointed out that flag-burning is (or at least can be) a very effective form of speech.  That, of course, only makes it MORE important to protect this form of speech.  If only ineffictive speech is protected, what kind of protection is that?

PRINCIPLE:  It is specifically the EFFECTIVE, POWERFUL speech that needs protecting.

Linus also pointed out that a majority of Americans don't like flag-burning, and perhaps even think it should be illegal.  That, of course, only makes it MORE important to protect this form of speech.  If only popular speech is protected, why bother with the First Amendment?  The popular opinion doesn't need protection.

PRINCIPLE:  It is specifically the UNPOPULAR speech that needs protection.

So flag-burning is unpopular, powerful, political speech.  What speech could possibly be MORE deserving of protection?

 

Yep. I dont think books should be baned. It only gives them more power, it makes them more meaningful. In my eyes, its an honor. Great books have been baned, Huck Fin, Uncle Toms Cabin, Slaughterhouse Five. Lots of books have been baned. But banning books doesnt mean much, it just means you cant get them at school libraries, but you can still get a hold of them. Its when a book is silently killed because of controvercy, thats when we have a problem. When the author is given 6,000 dollars in shut up money to go away, then the book dies. Or when from presure from outside sources forces retailers to kill a book, pull it from the shelves and stick in the basement. When the press puts so much negative controvercy on a book, like Fortunate Son published under Soft Skull publishing. Banning books is dangerous, but its when books are silently killed without the publics knowledge, that when we have a problem, and usualy, no one knows about it.

Resurrecting this old thing, as we may see some action on flag-burning soon.

Story here.  Kid burns flag, kid gets arrested.

Could be interesting.

Oh, he clearly violated the law, and should be convicted.

But it is inevitable that after his conviction, somebody will appeal the flag-burning conviction on constitutional grounds.  That's when the fun begins...

*me anticipates with glee*

You can never own a flag, that's impossible. Because the flag is a piece of America, YOU CANT OWN AMERICA. That teenager is on a bad path. He needs to clean up his act before he winds up dead.

Glassjaw wrote: "The teenager was released from jail Thursday on his own recognizance while he awaits his Aug. 2 trial on charges of desecrating a venerated object, underage drinking, littering, evading arrest, burning personal property and theft." I don't get it?  It's illegal to burn personal property?

Other people's personal property...

The dad sounds like an idiot in the article.

Dad wrote: Staley, 18, is accused of taking the flag from a residence and setting it on fire. His father said the teenager "has no reason for anger against the United States" and could easily have ignited a garbage can instead of a flag. "He was brought up in church, and he knows right from wrong," Doc Staley said. Doc Staley said his son has been "floundering around" since dropping out of high school. "This is where the drinking came in. And he's not very good at it," the father said.

Sure the kid has lots of reasons to be mad at the United States. Maybe he has friends that are serving in Iraq or comming home in a body bag, maybe he is getting pressured into enlisting into a military force in which he doesnt agree with. Maybe he is mad that he earned a crappy education.... The list can go on and on....

I am wondering if this law will ever be stuck down by the supreme court.

[charges of desecrating a venerated object -

The Tennessee flag-burning statute makes the crime a misdemeanor, punishable by less than a year in jail and up to $2,500 fine.]

Bump since the topic keeps creeping into other threads.