lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Sheriff Joe
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 04-30-2009, 04:24 AM   #41
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
My son had heard that if a U.S. flag touches the ground it is supposed to be destroyed.

He thought is was a curious practice, because "it's just a flag". I had to explain to him that some people had very interesting beliefs when it came to the importance of certain pieces of cloth. I explained what "the rule" was, but agreed with his assessment that the whole thing was pretty silly
I quite clearly remember having the same conversation with my parents. I got the symbolism, but overall thought and still think its silly.

I had no idea till today, though, that it was actually a crime to fly a flag over the US flag though. My feelings have gone from silly to flabbergasted, and just a little angry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommycat View Post
Actually symbolically placing one flag over another represents which one controls the other. If you notice at the UN all flags are placed at (roughly) equal heights. Placing one higher symbolizes rule over the lower flag. Placing a Mexican flag over the US flag IS a slap in the face to the veteran.

It's all flag etiquette really. Either fly the US flag on equal ground as the Mexican flag or only fly one of the two. Of course it is considered rude to fly a foreign flag on another country's soil.
I can see the -symbolism- behind the idea that a flag being higher than another represents power. Completely understandable.

What I don't understand, however, is why it is apart of law when we seem to have this thing about Freedom and all that stuff. Other than pride, what is it hurting?

I mean, if Flag Desecration is legal why not flying a flag higher than another?

C'mon. That is just a little insane.
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2009, 04:45 AM   #42
Tommycat
>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,578
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery View Post
I can see the -symbolism- behind the idea that a flag being higher than another represents power. Completely understandable.

What I don't understand, however, is why it is apart of law when we seem to have this thing about Freedom and all that stuff. Other than pride, what is it hurting?

I mean, if Flag Desecration is legal why not flying a flag higher than another?

C'mon. That is just a little insane.
Basically it comes down to being that you are claiming that country for the one higher up. Or you are claiming that territory for the country whose flag is raised the highest. Technically it could be construed as a declaration of war.


"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2009, 04:54 AM   #43
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommycat View Post
Basically it comes down to being that you are claiming that country for the one higher up. Or you are claiming that territory for the country whose flag is raised the highest. Technically it could be construed as a declaration of war.
I am afraid of flags now...

It seems like an outdated law at least. Like, back in the days when throwing your flag down basically meant you owned that land. Doesn't really work that way anymore.
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2009, 05:01 AM   #44
Darth Avlectus
If Sunday you're free...
 
Darth Avlectus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Why don't you come with me...
Posts: 4,275
Current Game: Poisoning pigeons in the park.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles View Post
Slippery-Slope

Specifically:

Emphasis added.

The fact that he has already demonstrated a willingness to employ questionable tactics to infringe on some individuals constitutes as an argument that he is capable of doing so for others.

Or more simply: If you have a co-worker that walks around punching people in the eye, it isn't a slippery-slope to posit that one day he might walk up and give you a shiner.
There is not reason enough evidence to believe one event must inevitably follow another without argument for such claim. The fact itself that he is willing to employ questionable tactics may have merit. However the flaw in your argument is that he is already capable of doing so, given his position.

By the by: If I had a violent coworker (and I do speak from experience) who was going around decking people in the eye, well sure he might come at me, that's not what I find fallacious. The emphasis, however, speaks to conjecture. Which prove's nothing but one's own paranoia. Not a good argument.

Furthermore, as construction is one of my occupations and I work around dangerous power tools: If you appear to be unstable or dangerous, I won't hire you. Plain and simple. If you prove it after the fact, well, you are no sheriff if you're coming to me for work. I have also a legal right to defend myself and to fire you if you prove dangerous. I may even press charges. Fair warning: if you intend to go that way, I've been in situations where people have even used weapons (knives, guns, pipes) and tried to kill me. .....I'm not dead. I can and will defend myself, especially if law enforcement's ETA is 15 minutes where I don't have but 30 seconds because you're lunging at my throat.

Quote:
Thanks for clarifying, however this isn't very helpful. I'm quite positive that I've heard Sheriff Joe argue that he is doing precisely that right now, yet here we are having the debate. Did you have something more specific in mind?
Well, you asked where breaking the law to enforce it might be acceptable. The "shakiness" you attested to would imply that it isn't kosher w.r.t. staying within the bounds of the laws. You have even pointed out that: Just because you have probable cause, it does not make a case. So even if the guy is as dirty as they come, you still had to overstep your bounds and I'd imagine you'd still catch some kind of hell even if you succeeded.

In terms of what to go on...did you have some other criteria? Just for the record, no I'm not necessarily in support of Arpaio's tactics on a frivolous level. However, if you have a camper/truck/van that doesn't look well maintained, driver is acting weird avoidant or distant, and vehichle's possibly large enough that it might be carrying contraband cargo as in: drugs, weapons, or most relevant illegals...that constitutes "suspicious enough to be pulled over".

Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery View Post
Well, one it is ironic that a vet who fought for free speech was insulted at an expression of free speech...
They know they are in another country. It's contempt.

Quote:
Two, kind of a douche for pulling down someone's property and destroying it.
Funny thing is you were so quick to get on it when someone showed the least bit of disapproval for the president with a sign (which too is expression). Nice ad hominem to the vet, BTW.

Quote:
Three, again ironic that he's stopping expression even though he fought for it...
It's in contempt of the symbol of the country's sovereignty. I rather suspect you'd also take their side in their own country if one of ours did the same thing.

Nice to see your standards allow us to be 'walked on'.

Quote:
Four, how outside of a political cartoon is it insulting?
You fought for your country, possibly took a debilitating injury for it. You see its glory being stepped on by a business who feels it is their land and not all of our land. Contempt.

Quote:
And five:

What an absolutely appalling law to have, and frankly I'm insulted that we consider ourselves that highly as a country and would actually make something like putting one flag over another a crime like this was some kind of political cartoon.
No, when you raise a flag it symbolizes sovereignty over that land of that symbol. This is the way EVERY nation is. Has been for a long time. Will be long after you or I are dead.

Quote:
What a joke.
I dare you to say all of that to an American legion full of vets during one of their meetings. Not worth your time? Not worth tolerating the blatant contempt, either.

Seems like to you everyone BUT the USA is allowed to be proud of displaying their soverignty. If USA does it, we're automatically arrogant?

What the ****?

Don't even try to tell me "but it was formed with blood on our hands" as justification--you won't find any nation in the world that wasn't formed that way.

Quote:
I see what you're saying though. But, ask yourself this: If he truly thought Mexico was an amazing place to be... why was he in Reno? His actions speak louder than his expression.
If you come into a country demanding to be a part of it and then spit on it once in, that's Arrogant, contemptuous, and ungrateful. I would not, as a guest, deprecate those who would have taken me in no matter how repugnant I felt those persons to be. There is an unsaid level of mutual respect. It's what makes civility great--without which you have nothing but squabbling and it is doomed to failure.

Here America is handing out $$$ to you, and you shout VIVA le Mexico? Bull****. I don't have to take that and I won't.
Darth Avlectus is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2009, 05:14 AM   #45
Tommycat
>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,578
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery View Post
I am afraid of flags now...

It seems like an outdated law at least. Like, back in the days when throwing your flag down basically meant you owned that land. Doesn't really work that way anymore.
Can't remember which country it was, but I remember reading that if you raised another country's flag on their soil you could be beheaded. Not sure if it's practiced anymore, but... The US isn't the only one with laws regarding flags. It's all Britain's fault. If they hadn't used flags to take countries... haha...


"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2009, 05:35 AM   #46
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity View Post
They know they are in another country. It's contempt.
So? Its contempt to burn a flag, but that's legal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity
Funny thing is you were so quick to get on it when someone showed the least bit of disapproval for the president with a sign (which too is expression). Nice ad hominem to the vet, BTW.
You'll have to direct me to that post, as I don't remember going up to someone's poster and ripping it in half because I disagreed with it.

Destroying another's property is also illegal, good sir. He's still a douche for doing it regardless if he's a vet or not. If he had a problem, he should have called the police or something instead of being a vigilante.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity
It's in contempt of the symbol of the country's sovereignty. I rather suspect you'd also take their side in their own country if one of ours did the same thing.
Its a flag. A representation of a country. Why should it be a huge deal if someone decides to post a flag?

If you wanna go down to Mexico, or go over to France and fly the American flag be my guest.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity
Nice to see your standards allow us to be 'walked on'.
My standard are that they should be allowed to express their beliefs and opinions as long as they are not harming anyone.

The ones being walked on in this situation are the ones who express themselves by posting a flag, and are then arrested. That seems more like freedoms being walked on in my opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity
You fought for your country, possibly took a debilitating injury for it. You see its glory being stepped on by a business who feels it is their land and not all of our land. Contempt.
They fought for freedoms within the country.

How is it possible that you have the right to say "Mexico rules!" in America, or "Texas should break from the US", and even burn a flag, but when you post a flag higher than another you've suddenly crossed the line?

Outdated hypocrisy. He fought to uphold freedoms and he, and apparently the law now, are quashing that by disallowing this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity
I dare you to say all of that to an American legion full of vets during one of their meetings. Not worth your time? Not worth tolerating the blatant contempt, either.
What? Tell them that posting a flag higher than ours is disrespectful, but that taking away the freedom to do so is an appalling, arrogant thing to do?

Sure. Know any vets? I'll talk with my grandfather next time I meet him if you'd like.

The law is an outdated joke. Not the concept; the law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity
Seems like to you everyone BUT the USA is allowed to be proud of displaying their soverignty. If USA does it, we're automatically arrogant
As I said above, I give you permission to fly the American flag in any other country with freedoms for the same reason I think that Mexican man should have the right to post his flag.

But yes, regardless of legality, area, country, etc it is still an arrogant thing to do. Thing is, you have the right to be arrogant in America.

Or, so I thought.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity
What the ****?
Yes, those would be my feelings on this law.

My problem is that it is a LAW. The symbolism, your anger, and other such things I can understand. What I do not understand is why this is still a law and something that can be punished.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity
Don't even try to tell me "but it was formed with blood on our hands" as justification--you won't find any nation in the world that wasn't formed that way.
What?
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2009, 05:54 AM   #47
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity View Post
There is not reason enough evidence to believe one event must inevitably follow another without argument for such claim.
Already addressed this. There is an argument that one event could follow another on the basis that a precedent has been set. Therefore not a slippery slope as you keep insisting.

Glad to see you read the link. Sorry to see that you're still not quite there on the content.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity View Post
The fact itself that he is willing to employ questionable tactics may have merit. However the flaw in your argument is that he is already capable of doing so, given his position.
The flaw in my argument that he is capable of doing something is that he's already doing it?

Are we talking about my actual argument or are we still chasing down your slippery-slope strawman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity View Post
By the by: If I had a violent coworker (and I do speak from experience) who was going around decking people in the eye, well sure he might come at me, that's not what I find fallacious. The emphasis, however, speaks to conjecture. Which prove's nothing but one's own paranoia. Not a good argument.


Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity View Post
<snippety-snip non-sequitur>
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity View Post
Well, you asked where breaking the law to enforce it might be acceptable. The "shakiness" you attested to would imply that it isn't kosher w.r.t. staying within the bounds of the laws. You have even pointed out that: Just because you have probable cause, it does not make a case. So even if the guy is as dirty as they come, you still had to overstep your bounds and I'd imagine you'd still catch some kind of hell even if you succeeded.
uh huh



Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity View Post
In terms of what to go on...did you have some other criteria? Just for the record, no I'm not necessarily in support of Arpaio's tactics on a frivolous level. However, if you have a camper/truck/van that doesn't look well maintained, driver is acting weird avoidant or distant, and vehichle's possibly large enough that it might be carrying contraband cargo as in: drugs, weapons, or most relevant illegals...that constitutes "suspicious enough to be pulled over".
Sheriff Joe drives into Guadalupe on a Friday night, sets up check points and starts pulling over hispanics with cracked windsheilds, etc. Not the same thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity View Post
I rather suspect you'd also take their side in their own country if one of ours did the same thing.
Mmmm, no. I'm pretty sure I have better things to do with my time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity View Post
You fought for your country, possibly took a debilitating injury for it. You see its glory being stepped on by a business who feels it is their land and not all of our land. Contempt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Carlin
Now you´ve probably noticed I don´t feel about that "war," the way we were told we were supposed to feel about that war ... the way we were ordered and instructed by the United States Government to feel about that war ... you see, I tell ya ... my mind doesn´t work that way ... I got this real moron thing I do - it´s called, "thinking," - and I´m not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions. I don´t just "roll over" when I´m told to.

Sad to say most Americans just "roll over" [tchock] on command. Not me - I have certain rules I live by.

My first rule: I don´t believe anything the government tells me. Nothing. Zero. Nope.

And I don´t take very seriously the media or the press in this country, who, in the case of the Persian Gulf War were nothing more than unpaid employees of the Department of Defense, and who, most of the time functioned as sort of an unofficial public relations company for the United States Government.

So, I don´t listen to them, I don´t *really* believe in my country, and I gotta tell ya folks, I don´t get all choked up about yellow ribbons and American flags. I consider them to be symbols, and I leave symbols to the symbol-minded.

Last edited by Achilles; 04-30-2009 at 06:00 AM.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2009, 06:12 AM   #48
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Carlin
<snip>
Good ol' George. His words shall live on.

If Skin or ET could rip this current conversation about symbols into another thread it would be appreciated.
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-30-2009, 08:44 AM   #49
Tommycat
>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,578
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery View Post
My problem is that it is a LAW. The symbolism, your anger, and other such things I can understand. What I do not understand is why this is still a law and something that can be punished.
All countries have a law regarding their flag and the display of such. Sure it may be an outdated legal concept, but it is what their country expects. I mean for instance the PRC National Flag Ordinance. It's just easier to find our laws than most other countries.


"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > Sheriff Joe

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:48 AM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.