“I’ll go to jail” – Florida Veteran told to remove military flags from restaurant pro

I think the law itself is rather silly.

Heck!~ it even sounds unconstitutional to me

It is, however, a LOCAL ORDINANCE and therefore may not be subject to the constitution's 1st Amendment protections.

I suggest you educate yourself on the 14th Amendment.

Yeah, I see your argument, QW.

AS I already stated :it even sounds unconstitutional to me


So the question as it regards this case is does this local ordinance really violate this guys 1st amendment right of free expression?

If it truly does then YES, the 14th amendment does give this guy the RIGHT to sue in a FEDERAL court.

And that is what he will have to do, too, I suspect.

He will have to convince a FEDERAL court to take this case.
 
How can anyone be against a law he’s never read.

And if you’ve read the law, cite it so others can make an informed decision.

Do your own research bud.

So you have no idea as to the text of the ordinance and oppose something you know nothing about. How are you going to get a 'law' overturned you're completely ignorant of.

I have well researched the issue and the law involved. The "patriot" is full of shit. This is not a "Freedom of Speech" issue. It is more of a poorly written law where terms should be more clearly defined. No one is saying he cannot fly his flags, he needs a permit. I believe he has a reasonable basis for possibly having the law overturned as written.

However, back to your comment, I have a real problem posting my research for those who are too lazy to do their own work and become educated regarding an issue . Get off your ass and do some research then you can actually have a position based in fact rather than make your claims regarding what I have done or not done....:doubt:
 
Are you ALWAYS so totally fucking stupid? Or do you just have a compulsive need to jump in to reaffirm your imbecility every once in a while?

good reply !!

as a side note, i believe you need to modify your tag line, it now reads: Liberals think they are smart.
it should read: Liarberals FEEEEL they are smart. :clap2: :clap2:
 
I am against that law as well. Put your money where your mouth is and contribute your dollars to his fine or cause. I have already stated I would help him have the law overturned.

What I do or don't do is not your concern.

I was responding only to your silly contention that he was dumb.

You are wrong in that. He was not dumb. He was very stand-up.

That is not stand up. That is asinine. He is using an emotional platform because he is pissed, if he meant business he would fight this in a more appropriate forum where he could actually make a difference instead of a little stink.

Wrong. It was very stand up.

He can make his case in the manner he deems appropriate and warranted under the specific circumstances.

That asshole "law" is too absurd to credit. It is facially UnConstituional and he therefore has a perfectly legitimate right to expose it for what it is.

He is making a difference, too. He got that idiot local ordinance nationally recognized and got the debate, in which YOU are participating, under way.
 


The article does not say what specific city code he violated, since it was newly passed, I imagine he'll be given an exception. However, some cities are weary about giving out even reasonable exceptions, because then everyone will want one.

So?

That might be reason to consider the prospect that the ordinance was fucking stupid in the first place.

Just rescind it.

Problem solved.
 


The article does not say what specific city code he violated, since it was newly passed, I imagine he'll be given an exception. However, some cities are weary about giving out even reasonable exceptions, because then everyone will want one.

So?

That might be reason to consider the prospect that the ordinance was fucking stupid in the first place.

Just rescind it.

Problem solved.

Governments do not like rescinding laws, even if they are absurd.
 
Why not just apply for the permit and avoid all the drama? I doubt it's all that hard.

Hardly the point. Once the citizen knuckles under to what amounts to an illegal ordinance it sets a precedent. We then go down a road we need not travel.
Surely you support the right of the citizens to peacefully protest incorrect laws and if need be, seek redress in the Courts?
Or are you simply so pro government and in support of politicians ability to enter into every facet of our lives, you cannot see anything wrong here?..
Or do you just have a shitty attitude toward military both active and retired?
 
"Liberal" or not liberal is NOT the issue.

The issue is why the FUCK should ANY city demand that any proprietor of any business apply for "permit" to fly the colors of any of our services? If he wanted to fly a banner for Pepsi, I can see how that might come within the parameters of regulation of commercial activity.

But he's not advertising or recruiting for any of the armed services. He is HONORING those who have served. And if that's not free speech, then what exactly IS free speech?

We are a nation of laws. I also think this is a stupid law. We don't have to like the laws....but we do sort of have to obey them.

This dude will probably get his way in the end. These things have a way of working themselves out.
No..That is where you are wrong. We have the right to protest unjust laws and seek redress in the courts to have these unjust laws overturned.
Is that what you mean by "working themselves out"?
 
The article does not say what specific city code he violated, since it was newly passed, I imagine he'll be given an exception. However, some cities are weary about giving out even reasonable exceptions, because then everyone will want one.

So?

That might be reason to consider the prospect that the ordinance was fucking stupid in the first place.

Just rescind it.

Problem solved.

Governments do not like rescinding laws, even if they are absurd.

True. But that's still a wonderfully simple and effective remedy to the self-made problem that city created.

And the fact that they may not like doing it is not a convincing argument not to try to force them to.
 
We are a nation of laws. I also think this is a stupid law. We don't have to like the laws....but we do sort of have to obey them.

This dude will probably get his way in the end. These things have a way of working themselves out.

We have to obey laws? Does that mean that Rosa Parks was wrong when she refused to move to the back of the bus? Or does you nation of laws schtick only apply when you like the law?

Your seriously comparing this to rosa parks? Your comparing this to the government, the entire government oppressing an entire race of people to this?

If this is the case, you can compare rosa parks to every law you dont like.

Fuck you.

"Fuck you"...Nice! You do realize you just lost every ounce of credibility you may have had...And you LOST the argument. In fact you got handed the halo. The big fucking donut...Oh fer....
I like how the mere mention of a person such as Rosa Parks gets a reaction from you libs as though someone just poured battery acid on an open sore.
You people are surely amusing.
 
So?

That might be reason to consider the prospect that the ordinance was fucking stupid in the first place.

Just rescind it.

Problem solved.

Governments do not like rescinding laws, even if they are absurd.

True. But that's still a wonderfully simple and effective remedy to the self-made problem that city created.

And the fact that they may not like doing it is not a convincing argument not to try to force them to.

I agree with you. I think government should be forced to start over, and justify everything they do to the people.
 
What I do or don't do is not your concern.

I was responding only to your silly contention that he was dumb.

You are wrong in that. He was not dumb. He was very stand-up.

That is not stand up. That is asinine. He is using an emotional platform because he is pissed, if he meant business he would fight this in a more appropriate forum where he could actually make a difference instead of a little stink.

Wrong. It was very stand up.

He can make his case in the manner he deems appropriate and warranted under the specific circumstances.

That asshole "law" is too absurd to credit. It is facially UnConstituional and he therefore has a perfectly legitimate right to expose it for what it is.

He is making a difference, too. He got that idiot local ordinance nationally recognized and got the debate, in which YOU are participating, under way.

Do a little research on your "hero" he is an opportunist and a creep that is using military service as means to make money.
 
That is not stand up. That is asinine. He is using an emotional platform because he is pissed, if he meant business he would fight this in a more appropriate forum where he could actually make a difference instead of a little stink.

Wrong. It was very stand up.

He can make his case in the manner he deems appropriate and warranted under the specific circumstances.

That asshole "law" is too absurd to credit. It is facially UnConstituional and he therefore has a perfectly legitimate right to expose it for what it is.

He is making a difference, too. He got that idiot local ordinance nationally recognized and got the debate, in which YOU are participating, under way.

Do a little research on your "hero" he is an opportunist and a creep that is using military service as means to make money.

Oh? Did you make that up? Or was it the little doggy in your sig?
 
There are codes likes these all over the place. Although most are for "new" placement, not established uses. I would think an application for a simple variance would have handled this whole thing. Show up to the hearing with a bunch of vets. Can't see the city fighting it after that kind of a public display.
 
There are codes likes these all over the place. Although most are for "new" placement, not established uses. I would think an application for a simple variance would have handled this whole thing. Show up to the hearing with a bunch of vets. Can't see the city fighting it after that kind of a public display.

Spot on post!!!!
 
"Liberal" or not liberal is NOT the issue.

The issue is why the FUCK should ANY city demand that any proprietor of any business apply for "permit" to fly the colors of any of our services? If he wanted to fly a banner for Pepsi, I can see how that might come within the parameters of regulation of commercial activity.

But he's not advertising or recruiting for any of the armed services. He is HONORING those who have served. And if that's not free speech, then what exactly IS free speech?

Because some low-life wants to make commercial advantage by naming his bar as if were a VFW post and flying military flags. This is not patriotism any more than charity bingo in Florida is religion. I'd like to see his 990 and find out where this "non-profit" is donating the profits. I'll bet anyone a beer at the Air Commando Association bar down the street that all of it goes to him.
 
"Liberal" or not liberal is NOT the issue.

The issue is why the FUCK should ANY city demand that any proprietor of any business apply for "permit" to fly the colors of any of our services? If he wanted to fly a banner for Pepsi, I can see how that might come within the parameters of regulation of commercial activity.

But he's not advertising or recruiting for any of the armed services. He is HONORING those who have served. And if that's not free speech, then what exactly IS free speech?

Because some low-life wants to make commercial advantage by naming his bar as if were a VFW post and flying military flags. This is not patriotism any more than charity bingo in Florida is religion. I'd like to see his 990 and find out where this "non-profit" is donating the profits. I'll bet anyone a beer at the Air Commando Association bar down the street that all of it goes to him.


Nobody gives a fuck what YOU want to see.
 

Forum List

Back
Top