Speakeasy forum

General discussion

maybe it's time for PC to take a back seat?

by jonah jones / June 22, 2005 11:53 AM PDT
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: maybe it's time for PC to take a back seat?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: maybe it's time for PC to take a back seat?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) or allow burners to be used ast targets:)
by Mark5019 / June 22, 2005 12:04 PM PDT
Collapse -
It was a bad idea years ago, and still is.
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / June 22, 2005 1:40 PM PDT

Despicable as the act is, making it illegal would destroy another symbol of the supremacy of Free Speech in this country -- a very bad idea, though I sure the majority here disagree. After all, we've already destoyed the site of the major Civil Rights and anti-war marches of the 60's and 70's for a World War II Memorial Sad

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
ok you can burn it
by Mark5019 / June 22, 2005 1:42 PM PDT

can a vet beat the holly crap out of you and will that be considered free speach.

mind you this wasnt directed at you dave just the scum who burns my flag

Collapse -
Mark, if someone takes your flag
by Dan McC / June 23, 2005 12:02 AM PDT
In reply to: ok you can burn it

you can have them arrested for theft.

If someone burns their own flag and you beat them up they can have you arrested for assault and battery.

That's the law.

Dan

Collapse -
well if you burn it i hope soon
by Mark5019 / June 23, 2005 12:06 AM PDT

wont be legal, unless it touched the ground

ok can i burn them then?

Collapse -
Your post is not clear, Mark.
by Dan McC / June 23, 2005 12:35 AM PDT

What do you mean?

Dan

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) your so smart figure it out
by Mark5019 / June 23, 2005 12:44 AM PDT
Collapse -
I'll get a team on it, Mark.
by Dan McC / June 23, 2005 12:50 AM PDT

But you didn't give them much to work with.

Dan

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) thats only your opinion
by Mark5019 / June 23, 2005 12:56 AM PDT
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) lol. Fine, Mark.
by Dan McC / June 23, 2005 1:44 AM PDT
Collapse -
Talk about personal attacks.........
by Glenda / June 25, 2005 12:38 AM PDT

Why don't you just back off? I would dare to say if you spent some time reading what Mark has to say instead of looking for errors, you would understand what he has said! Someone posted a while back, a letter with all but the first and last letters misspelled, and guess what? YEP! You could read it just fine!

Collapse -
What if...
by gooslojo / June 23, 2005 12:08 AM PDT

Mark simply grabbed the flag and put the fire out without physical confrontation.
Which one would the "Ambulance Chaser" represent?

Collapse -
and if i acidently
by Mark5019 / June 23, 2005 12:22 AM PDT
In reply to: What if...

sprayed the jo woth a solution:D

Collapse -
What solution?
by Dan McC / June 23, 2005 12:52 AM PDT
In reply to: and if i acidently

What's a 'jo'?

Was it really an accident?

Dan

Collapse -
if i said what jo was it be pulled
by Mark5019 / June 23, 2005 2:01 AM PDT
In reply to: What solution?

and why not find out dan find a vet burn the flag and pickup your teeth:d
acident who knows but if i was the vet id ask for a jury trial and make sure there were vets on jury.

think id get off:D
and if not be worth it:D

soulution be fire retardent.

Collapse -
I miss your meaning of
by Dan McC / June 23, 2005 2:08 AM PDT

this: "if i said what jo was it be pulled"

I have no interest in burning a flag, Mark.

Dan

Collapse -
Probably neither.
by Dan McC / June 23, 2005 12:37 AM PDT
In reply to: What if...

There's no real money in defending civil liberties. And it's unlikely that there's an actionable party that has deep pockets.

Dan

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Your Blue Blood Is Showing,Dan
by gooslojo / June 23, 2005 12:42 AM PDT
In reply to: Probably neither.
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) How so?
by Dan McC / June 23, 2005 12:56 AM PDT
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) $88,000 was for civil liberties?
by jonah jones / June 23, 2005 12:44 AM PDT
In reply to: Probably neither.
Collapse -
The Epitome Of PC
by gooslojo / June 22, 2005 2:59 PM PDT

The topic reads ,partially, "PC .."take a back seat" and there you are.
I'll never forget the clip of Rick Monday swooping in on the idiot fan that jumped the left field wall and tried to burn the flag in the outfield.Classic.And the next day not one word about free speech violations and no scumbag lawyers giving the press sound bytes.

The days of pinkey raised wine sippin' fools who decide what is "correct" needs to end ..NOW!
Back seat hell...stick 'em in the trunk!!

Collapse -
Say WHAT?
by Paul C / June 22, 2005 8:12 PM PDT
After all, we've already destoyed the site of the major Civil Rights and anti-war marches of the 60's and 70's for a World War II Memorial.

News flash, Dave: Without the sacrifices and efforts of those who served, fought and in many cases died in WWII, there may not have been free speech rights left to enable the protests of the 1960's, leaving aside the fact that the Nazis and Japanese weren't very big on human rights.

The land was so very properly used for this memorial that I find it incredible that you'd find time to complain about this...
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) It's a military thing. DK doesn't like it.
by Kiddpeat / June 25, 2005 12:56 AM PDT
In reply to: Say WHAT?
Collapse -
Hate to have to agree with Dave K on this one.
by EdH / June 22, 2005 8:55 PM PDT

At least the first part.

Besides IMHO it's completely unenforceable.

Collapse -
Unenforceable?
by Evie / June 23, 2005 1:18 AM PDT

Laws against cross burning are enforced, and it is a hate crime. Specifically because this "free speech" is somewhere in the spectrum from harrassment to inciting violence. IMO at this point flag burning -- which provides propaganda and certainly incites enemies of our country -- is on the same par. Not sure about an amendment, however, but if there ARE hate crimes laws, flag burning sure should be included among them!

Evie Happy

Collapse -
What if...
by EdH / June 23, 2005 1:32 AM PDT
In reply to: Unenforceable?

You make a flag with 11 stripes? Or little snowflakes instead of stars, or a field of black rather than blue and burn that? Did you desecrate an American flag or something else? The courts could easily be clogged with cases where it's not even certain that what was burned was an American flag.

I can think of countless such examples.

Also I guarantee that such an Amendment would increase the incidence of flag desecration immensely just from people challenging the law or trying to gain attention. From a practical standpoint it would have the exact opposite effect as what's desired.

Not needed IMHO. We have gotten along nicely without this for two centuries. Desecrating the flag is repugnant but does bot harm anyone.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Spot on, Ed.
by Dan McC / June 23, 2005 1:46 AM PDT
In reply to: What if...
Collapse -
will only provoke hate
by kmarchal / June 23, 2005 2:11 AM PDT

Burning the American flag in protesting (peace march) is mindlessly and will only provoke hate.
This will only pissoff far many more people than it will persuaded. This act I believe did more to divide this country then anything else.

United States Supreme Court Justice William Brennan when in 1989 he declared flag burning constitutionally protected speech: "We do not consecrate the flag by punishing its desecration for in so doing we dilute the freedom that this cherished emblem represents." This is a source of national strength, not weakness; let this be the law.

But the law should allow provision if burning the flag in protest provokes a riot the ones provoking should be punished as committing a hate crime.

Collapse -
Inciting to riot is already a crime.
by Dan McC / June 23, 2005 2:14 AM PDT
In reply to: will only provoke hate

I don't believe it is prosecuted frequently, but specifying flag burning in that statute would not increase its prosecution much, if at all.

Was that your idea?

Dan

Collapse -
In short
by kmarchal / June 23, 2005 4:02 AM PDT

you should not be able to promote hate; only to make a political point and then seek refuge in the First Amendment. In short nothing good can come from burning the flag.

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Help 51,912 discussions
icon
Computer Newbies 10,498 discussions
icon
Laptops 20,411 discussions
icon
Security 30,882 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 21,253 discussions
icon
Windows 10 1,672 discussions
icon
Phones 16,494 discussions
icon
Windows 7 7,855 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 15,504 discussions

REVIEW

Meet the drop-resistant Moto Z2 Force

The Moto Z2 Force is really thin, with a fast processor and great battery life. It can survive drops without shattering.