Flag burning

[The_Squid]

1 minute ago, Bryan said:

That's a good point. If someone were to burn a Rainbow flag at a pride march, would that freedom of expression be protected? I have a strong feeling that some would try to argue that is a hate crime.

Burning a symbol that means something to a given group is not just "expression", it's a provocation. You are deliberately trying to get a reaction out of those people. So sure, you have a 'right' to do it, but if you somehow end up wrapped in that flag while it still burns, that's on you.

Can you show us any examples of burning symbols being prosecuted as hate speech?

[Bryan]

Just now, Bonam said:

No, it's not on you, it's on the murderer who killed you by causing you to be burned to death. 

One flag is unlikely to burn someone to death. 

[Bryan]

1 minute ago, The_Squid said:

Can you show us any examples of burning symbols being prosecuted as hate speech?

That I know of not yet, but the lunacy of the HRCs and the like reaches ever more ridiculous proportions on an almost daily basis. We have new laws stating that using the wrong pronoun is hate speech. It's not a stretch at all to think that some of those same people would at least put forth the notion that burning the pride flag would be hate speech.

[The_Squid]

Just now, Bryan said:

That I know of not yet, but the lunacy of the HRCs and the like reaches ever more ridiculous proportions on an almost daily basis. We have new laws stating that using the wrong pronoun is hate speech. It's not a stretch at all to think that some of those same people would at least put forth the notion that burning the pride flag would be hate speech.

Of course "some people would"...   just like "some people" (right wingers, generally) think burning the national flag should be illegal.  

But until it happens, then it's not the case and you're just blowing smoke.

[Bryan]

18 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

Of course "some people would"...   just like "some people" (right wingers, generally) think burning the national flag should be illegal.  

But until it happens, then it's not the case and you're just blowing smoke.

That would be a credible sentiment if the reality was not that those extremes are exactly what kinds of legal positions are being increasingly put forward. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Bryan said:

That's a good point. If someone were to burn a Rainbow flag at a pride march, would that freedom of expression be protected? I have a strong feeling that some would try to argue that is a hate crime.

Burning a symbol that means something to a given group is not just "expression", it's a provocation. You are deliberately trying to get a reaction out of those people. So sure, you have a 'right' to do it, but if you somehow end up wrapped in that flag while it still burns, that's on you.

 

No, that would still be on the person that wrapped you in it.

I would support the burning of  a Rainbow flag as much as I would support the burning of a US, Confederate or Nazi flag.  It has nothing to do with my opinions of the views being expressed.  It only has to do with my support for the freedom to express them.

Edited December 1, 2016 by bcsapper

[Bonam]

10 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I would support the burning of  a Rainbow flag as much as I would support the burning of a US, Confederate or Nazi flag.  It has nothing to do with my opinions of the views being expressed.  It only has to do with my support for the freedom to express them.

Indeed. I'm honestly puzzled at all the people on here who don't think this is the obviously correct position. I guess decades of censorship and language police has really eroded people's support for free speech. 

[Bryan]

1 minute ago, Bonam said:

Indeed. I'm honestly puzzled at all the people on here who don't think this is the obviously correct position. I guess decades of censorship and language police has really eroded people's support for free speech. 

Burning isn't talking though. It's deliberate provocation. Getting people upset is the purpose. If you do it, don't be surprised if people do actually get upset.

[Bonam]

Just now, Bryan said:

Burning isn't talking though. It's deliberate provocation. Getting people upset is the purpose. If you do it, don't be surprised if people do actually get upset.

They can be upset all they want. And they can express being upset however they want, so long as they don't commit crimes in the process. But you apparently seem to think that if someone burns a flag it's ok to set them on fire. 

[Bryan]

15 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 

No, that would still be on the person that wrapped you in it.

 If I wrap you in something, it's literally on you.

[Bryan]

1 minute ago, Bonam said:

They can be upset all they want. And they can express being upset however they want, so long as they don't commit crimes in the process. But you apparently seem to think that if someone burns a flag it's ok to set them on fire. 

Depends on your definition of "OK". Would the person retaliating be legally responsible for their actions? Of course. Would I have sympathy for a provocateur who gets responded to with violence? None whatsoever.

[The_Squid]

5 minutes ago, Bonam said:

They can be upset all they want. And they can express being upset however they want, so long as they don't commit crimes in the process. But you apparently seem to think that if someone burns a flag it's ok to set them on fire. 

I agree.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/brooklyn-fink-ubc-pride-flag-1.3553719

Here is a pride flag burning.  It's a bit unusual, since the person that did it is transsexual.  The person who did it was charged with mischief.  HOWEVER, it was not her flag to burn!  She stole and burnt the one that was raised at UBC.  Well, you can't take someone else's property and burn it.

If this was her own flag, I don't see that she would have been charged with anything.  

Edited December 1, 2016 by The_Squid

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Bryan said:

 If I wrap you in something, it's literally on you.

Ah, in that sense? I see.  Awkward language, though.

[Bonam]

1 minute ago, Bryan said:

Depends on your definition of "OK". Would the person retaliating be legally responsible for their actions? Of course. Would I have sympathy for a provocateur who gets responded to with violence? None whatsoever.

So you're totally cool with when Muslim extremists kill people who drew a cartoon that "provoked" them? 

[Bonam]

13 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

Here is a pride flag burning.  It's a bit unusual, since the person that did it is transsexual.  The person who did it was charged with mischief.  HOWEVER, it was not her flag to burn!  She stole and burnt the one that was raised at UBC.  Well, you can't take someone else's property and burn it.

If this was her own flag, I don't see that she would have been charged with anything.  

Agreed. 

[The_Squid]

6 minutes ago, Bonam said:

So you're totally cool with when Muslim extremists kill people who drew a cartoon that "provoked" them? 

No, no....  not THOSE people.....  but if OUR side punches a hippy in the face, then that's all good!!

Bryan seems to like the "free speech for me, but not for thee" philosophy.  He can say whatever he wants.... but hippies should be punched in the face cuz they're "provocateurs"...

[Guest]

Just now, The_Squid said:

No, no....  not THOSE people.....  but if OUR side punches a hippy in the face, then that's all good!!

Bryan seems to like the "free speech for me, but not for thee" philosophy.  He can say whatever he wants.... but hippies should be punched in the face cuz they're "provocateurs"...

Actually they should just use the, umm, back door.

[Bryan]

46 minutes ago, Bonam said:

So you're totally cool with when Muslim extremists kill people who drew a cartoon that "provoked" them? 

Totally cool? No. But if I do it right in front of a Mosque that is just letting out, and they attack me, that is MY fault. I put myself in that position and incited a situation that otherwise would not have happened.

[Guest]

Just now, Bryan said:

Totally cool? No. But if I do it right in front of a Mosque that is just letting out, and they attack me, that is MY fault. I put myself in that position and incited a situation that otherwise would not have happened.

Not really.  They still would be wrong for killing you.  You're blaming the victim.  Try it with women and tube tops.

[Bryan]

40 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

No, no....  not THOSE people.....  but if OUR side punches a hippy in the face, then that's all good!!

Bryan seems to like the "free speech for me, but not for thee" philosophy.  He can say whatever he wants.... but hippies should be punched in the face cuz they're "provocateurs"...

WHEN they are provocateurs. There is a difference.

[Bryan]

Just now, bcsapper said:

Not really.  They still would be wrong for killing you.  You're blaming the victim.  Try it with women and tube tops.

Both things are true at the same time. Illegal actions remain illegal, but if you put yourself into harms way, you are also responsible for what happens to you. 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Bryan said:

Both things are true at the same time. Illegal actions remain illegal, but if you put yourself into harms way, you are also responsible for what happens to you. 

It's a tough argument to make, and to refute.  Like I said, try it with rape. 

I understand that if I walk onto a zebra crossing I have the right of way, but if I get run over by a bus I'm still dead.

[Bryan]

5 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

It's a tough argument to make, and to refute.  Like I said, try it with rape. 

It's the same premise, just a more abhorrent outcome. You shouldn't have to be careful what you wear, where you go, who is there, how much you have to drink, etc, etc. But you absolutely do have to be careful about these things. There are bad people out there, and if you deliberately present yourself to them in a manner that allows them to take advantage of you, you are still the one who put yourself in danger.

[Bonam]

2 minutes ago, Bryan said:

There are bad people out there, and if you deliberately present yourself to them in a manner that allows them to take advantage of you, you are still the one who put yourself in danger.

So then do you now agree that the people who would react violently to someone peacefully burning a flag are "bad people"? Rather than sympathizing with such action as you previously mentioned?

[Bryan]

11 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I understand that if I walk onto a zebra crossing I have the right of way, but if I get run over by a bus I'm still dead.

Lets say you step off a curb and get hit by anything, and maybe you do survive. Perhaps the cross walk lights were on, and the cars were supposed to stop. Legally the driver that hits you is in the wrong, but you are still the one that stepped in front of a moving car. You still caused a collision to happen that would not have otherwise occurred.