FLAG burning being challenged by Trump

[mojo84]

Hey, if a guy chooses to burn a flag that he owns and does not cause damage to someone else's property, then so what? Well, so he's obviously an idiot, not worth getting excited about. But suggesting that he should be jailed or lose his citizenship is beyond the pale, i.e. even dumber yet. I'm afraid our common sense is in decline.

Do you believe a person can legally burn whatever they want on a public street or sidewalk as long as it's their own property they are burning?

No.

Why is a flag different?

[nightmare69]

It's a class A in Texas and as long as the law exists LEOs will enforce it.

[4WG 2WB]

It's a class A in Texas and as long as the law exists LEOs will enforce it.

I wonder if any of them will arrest a NFL players for disorderly conduct if they refuse to stand during the national anthem.

[nightmare69]

It's a class A in Texas and as long as the law exists LEOs will enforce it.

I wonder if any of them will arrest a NFL players for disorderly conduct if they refuse to stand during the national anthem.

No law says you shall stand durning the pledge of allegiance. There is a law against burning a flag in the Texas Penal Code.

TPC: Sec. 42.11. DESTRUCTION OF FLAG. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly damages, defaces, mutilates, or burns the flag of the United States or the State of Texas. ... (d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

[ScottDLS]

It's a class A in Texas and as long as the law exists LEOs will enforce it.

I wonder if any of them will arrest a NFL players for disorderly conduct if they refuse to stand during the national anthem.

No law says you shall stand durning the pledge of allegiance. There is a law against burning a flag in the Texas Penal Code.

TPC: Sec. 42.11. DESTRUCTION OF FLAG. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly damages, defaces, mutilates, or burns the flag of the United States or the State of Texas. ... (d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

Will their department defend them against the inevitable Federal civil rights lawsuit for arresting someone for Constitutionally protected speech? Does Texas enforce a law against sodomy after losing Lawrence vs. Texas in 2003?

Can we please prohibit abortion in the 2017 session? While we're ignoring precedent, let's legalize machine guns for private use. All these are arguably Constitutional, but that's my opinion not the Supreme Court's... Start ignoring Federal courts and it may not go your way when a different party is in power...

[nightmare69]

It's a class A in Texas and as long as the law exists LEOs will enforce it.

I wonder if any of them will arrest a NFL players for disorderly conduct if they refuse to stand during the national anthem.

No law says you shall stand durning the pledge of allegiance. There is a law against burning a flag in the Texas Penal Code.

TPC: Sec. 42.11. DESTRUCTION OF FLAG. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly damages, defaces, mutilates, or burns the flag of the United States or the State of Texas. ... (d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

Will their department defend them against the inevitable Federal civil rights lawsuit for arresting someone for Constitutionally protected speech? Does Texas enforce a law against sodomy after losing Lawrence vs. Texas in 2003?

Can we please prohibit abortion in the 2017 session? While we're ignoring precedent, let's legalize machine guns for private use. All these are arguably Constitutional, but that's my opinion not the Supreme Court's... Start ignoring Federal courts and it may not go your way when a different party is in power...

It's not an LEOs job to pick and choose which laws to enforce. They enforce the laws that are passed by our legislature. You have a problem with a specific law take it up with them. I see someone burning a flag while in duty I'll arrest said person as the law allows me to do so. Then it's up to the courts to decide to pursue charges.

[ScottDLS]

It's a class A in Texas and as long as the law exists LEOs will enforce it.

I wonder if any of them will arrest a NFL players for disorderly conduct if they refuse to stand during the national anthem.

No law says you shall stand durning the pledge of allegiance. There is a law against burning a flag in the Texas Penal Code.

TPC: Sec. 42.11. DESTRUCTION OF FLAG. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly damages, defaces, mutilates, or burns the flag of the United States or the State of Texas. ... (d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

Will their department defend them against the inevitable Federal civil rights lawsuit for arresting someone for Constitutionally protected speech? Does Texas enforce a law against sodomy after losing Lawrence vs. Texas in 2003?

Can we please prohibit abortion in the 2017 session? While we're ignoring precedent, let's legalize machine guns for private use. All these are arguably Constitutional, but that's my opinion not the Supreme Court's... Start ignoring Federal courts and it may not go your way when a different party is in power...

It's not an LEOs job to pick and choose which laws to enforce. They enforce the laws that are passed by our legislature. You have a problem with a specific law take it up with them. I see someone burning a flag while in duty I'll arrest said person as the law allows me to do so. Then it's up to the courts to decide to pursue charges.

it's not a LEO's job to defy the orders of a Federal court, by enforcing a law that is ruled unconstitutional, whether the Legislature gets around to repealing it or not. This has been clear precedent for over 200 years. Do you still arrest homosexuals for sodomy, or did the legislature get rid of that one after Lawrence?

[Liberty]

it's not a LEO's job to defy the orders of a Federal court, by enforcing a law that is ruled unconstitutional, whether the Legislature gets around to repealing it or not. This has been clear precedent for over 200 years. Do you still arrest homosexuals for sodomy, or did the legislature get rid of that one after Lawrence?

This is the root of a lot of the problem, there is never repercussion for these types of arrest and prosecutions. Its always the citizen that suffers. Never the cops or the prosecuting lawyers that push on in these silly cases. If you burn a flag they arrest you. You spend time in jail, You pay the lawyer, the bond, you go to court and found innocent. The one who is charged is still paying the price. The lawyers and cops who press this thing forward never skip a payday.
Yet, we wonder why there is so much angst among some Americans. The people treated like this are then motivated to start burning flags.

[nightmare69]

It's a class A in Texas and as long as the law exists LEOs will enforce it.

I wonder if any of them will arrest a NFL players for disorderly conduct if they refuse to stand during the national anthem.

No law says you shall stand durning the pledge of allegiance. There is a law against burning a flag in the Texas Penal Code.

TPC: Sec. 42.11. DESTRUCTION OF FLAG. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly damages, defaces, mutilates, or burns the flag of the United States or the State of Texas. ... (d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.

Will their department defend them against the inevitable Federal civil rights lawsuit for arresting someone for Constitutionally protected speech? Does Texas enforce a law against sodomy after losing Lawrence vs. Texas in 2003?

Can we please prohibit abortion in the 2017 session? While we're ignoring precedent, let's legalize machine guns for private use. All these are arguably Constitutional, but that's my opinion not the Supreme Court's... Start ignoring Federal courts and it may not go your way when a different party is in power...

It's not an LEOs job to pick and choose which laws to enforce. They enforce the laws that are passed by our legislature. You have a problem with a specific law take it up with them. I see someone burning a flag while in duty I'll arrest said person as the law allows me to do so. Then it's up to the courts to decide to pursue charges.

it's not a LEO's job to defy the orders of a Federal court, by enforcing a law that is ruled unconstitutional, whether the Legislature gets around to repealing it or not. This has been clear precedent for over 200 years. Do you still arrest homosexuals for sodomy, or did the legislature get rid of that one after Lawrence?

Should local LEOs arrest anyone using marijuana in states that legalized it since it's still illegal under federal law? We let the Feds handle their vast matrix of laws they created and only a team of lawyers can interpret. My license says Texas, not US.

If I see a couple having sex in public yes I will arrest for lewd conduct.

[ScottDLS]

...

it's not a LEO's job to defy the orders of a Federal court, by enforcing a law that is ruled unconstitutional, whether the Legislature gets around to repealing it or not. This has been clear precedent for over 200 years. Do you still arrest homosexuals for sodomy, or did the legislature get rid of that one after Lawrence?

Should local LEOs arrest anyone using marijuana in states that legalized it since it's still illegal under federal law? We let the Feds handle their vast matrix of laws they created and only a team of lawyers can interpret. My license says Texas, not US.

If I see a couple having sex in public yes I will arrest for lewd conduct.

You're missing my point here. Earlier you stated that you would arrest someone engaging in Constitutionally protected speech, because there remains a Texas law against flag burning. This in defiance of a Federal court (SCOTUS) ruling that flag burning is protected speech. This is a good way to lose a Federal lawsuit as well as (possibly) end up in federal prison on a civil rights conviction. Is it the policy of your department to defy Federal court rulings that you don't like, or was this you speaking as an individual?

In Lawrence vs. Texas (2003) LEO's in Texas served a warrant on the wrong location (imagine that...), in the process of serving the (illegal?) warrant, they observed two men privately engaged in an "act" prohibited by Texas law. They arrested the men for violation of the Texas sodomy statute. SCOTUS ruled (wrongly, in my opinion) that the Texas statute was unconstitutional and that like abortion, the conduct was protected by the men's right to privacy. Assuming that this statute is still on the books, is it the policy of your department to arrest people for this private conduct? Even in defiance of the SCOTUS ruling that the statute is invalid?

Finally, there is a Texas law against possessing marijuana, so you can arrest someone for that. There's a federal law even in Colorado against marijuana...depending on state law LEO's in CO may still arrest someone for violating Federal law, but they then have to turn them over to the US Attorney to prosecute. Feds cannot force state LEO's to enforce Federal law, but they CAN prohibit them from violating Federal law by enforcing an illegal State statute.

PS:
Trump has some autocratic tendencies. I voted for him anyway because he's way better than Hillary. However, it's disturbing to see him state that he would make flag burning illegal, even though it has already been ruled protected speech. Now if he said he was going to appoint judges and justices that would apply the Constitution, and he believes that the Constitution doesn't protect flag burning...well that might be better, though I still disagree. Maybe he said that, I didn't hear his remarks on the issue.

[kvaca]

Doesn't anyone think he's being mildly sarcastic with his tweet?
Look up the Flag Protection Act of 2005.

[Eric Lamberson]

As pointed out earlier, 18 U.S. Code § 700 is pretty clear. The problem (as usual) is that the laws on the books are often not enforced.

[Bitter Clinger]

[Mxrdad]

Doesn't anyone think he's being mildly sarcastic with his tweet?
Look up the Flag Protection Act of 2005.

I do think he was just stating his opinion when he remarked about it and I doubt he will act on it. The problem is, when the (soon to be) President of the USA states his opinion, its reasonable to wonder if he will act on his opinions or just blow it off. I think he has a lot more critical issues to deal with and doubt he will spend the time to reverse the SCOTUS ruling on this matter.

He really needs to watch his tweets.

[anygunanywhere]

Doesn't anyone think he's being mildly sarcastic with his tweet?
Look up the Flag Protection Act of 2005.

I do think he was just stating his opinion when he remarked about it and I doubt he will act on it. The problem is, when the (soon to be) President of the USA states his opinion, its reasonable to wonder if he will act on his opinions or just blow it off. I think he has a lot more critical issues to deal with and doubt he will spend the time to reverse the SCOTUS ruling on this matter.

He really needs to watch his tweets.

So Trump needs to watch his tweets while hundreds of thousands of prog leftist commies tweet to kill us, call us racist, and other phobic types. degrade us for supposedly hating women, and other lies?

I don't think so. We do not need a politically correct president anymore.