OutOfTheKnow
Active Member
THAT was humor.. I believe. I'm pretty new, so I'm not one of those who knows your views.
What does Memphis do about this?
- Thread starter bbsam
- Start date
OutOfTheKnow
Active Member
Have I got this right? I'm not going to go searching... bbsam, have you recently referred to the rioters in Portland, St. Louis, etc. as protestors who are just angry? Then call this guy a thug? Just curious. That sends to be what vantexan is implying.
I'm into nonviolence. Uhrin is a thug. Uhrin was not a protester. Now for you. We're violent protesters in the area you reference arrested?
Exactly, and knowing they were in violation prompted him to extinguish the blaze before it got out of hand. Bravo Zulu!
Are you saying he is a volunteer fireman? Are you saying that as a fireman he requested to see the permit?
Bbsam answers questions with questions and rarely expresses a direct opinion. Which is surprising that he feels so strongly about protecting protesters' right to inflame others who feel strongly about the flag as a symbol of the blood that was shed to protect so many here and abroad. They may have a right to do it, but they are pathetic human beings for doing so. Exact same people who spit on our soldiers coming home.
No I'm not and if you thought about it just for a second you'd realize how ludicrous that sounds. Just as ludicrous as believing a protester's right to burn a flag supersedes all else. If you believe soldiers died to give them that right you don't know the military. Ever since drugs were introduced on a broad scale we've had to endure this kind of idiocy and the country has continued to slide downhill.
I will answer with another question. When was the last time you witnessed anyone spitting on a returning soldier?
I know it sounds ludicrous but what else are we to conclude from your previous post? Another question.
On a broad basis Vietnam. Saw a woman on Facebook today screaming obscenities at returning soldiers and telling them they should all die. And part and parcel of all that was about 70 congressmen refusing to attend the inauguration which is how we show the world what a peaceful transfer of power is. Talk about needing a civics lesson. All because they didn't win.
Cause we all know how supportive the Left has been of the military over the years...
I asked a question, you answered. 40 years. Gotcha.
But unlike you and others I gave a direct answer, didn't obfuscate. I've heard plenty of criticism of the military on this forum alone, and all across the internet there are plenty virtually spitting on them. They might not be getting wet, but it hurts them just the same. Just as burning a flag for injustices done a long time ago. On the bright side I see the idea of California secession from the U.S. being allowed to go forward by their state government. Will keep my fingers crossed. Democrats will have a hard time winning the popular vote without them.
OutOfTheKnow
Active Member
I'm blessed enough to live in a city where protestors protest peacefully and to my knowledge, none have been arrested. A fairly liberal city, mind you, of about 2 million mostly run by Left leaning politicians but still a city split about down the middle politically. I only say that for context. I disagree that Uhrin was a thug. He was protesting the protestors method of protest. Flag burning is violent in nature btw. It's a way for so-called pacifists to protest by means of violence. Burning anything as a form of protest is violent.
burrheadd
KING Of GIFS
What a shocker
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
You're a Mexican, so your opinion doesn't matter.
My argument centers very simply on the FACT, the very simple FACT that even though you find it distasteful and violent, the Supreme Court has defended flag burning as expression that is constitutionally protected.
I do not see how you defend Uhrin's actions as "expression" on anything close to the level of a Supreme Court decision. He is not "expressing" anything but disdain for another's protected speech and doing it in a thuggish manner.
I've always been fascinated by liberal racists.
He was expressing his right to defend that flag. Might not be constitutionally protected, but as he wasn't a gov't entity trying to stop the burning his biggest concern was not doing anything physical to another that might have gotten him arrested. SCOTUS only ruled on people being arrested for burning the flag, not on fellow citizens defending flags from burning.
