To: CarolinaGuitarman
Once again ~ the USSC made their decision in the face of the flag in question having been the property of the federal government (as a material item). It was stolen from a post office.
The USSC didn't particularly care who owned it ~ they wanted it burned.
100 posted on
06/27/2006 5:19:25 PM PDT by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
Once again ~ the USSC made their decision in the face of the flag in question having been the property of the federal government (as a material item). It was stolen from a post office.
Are you saying that the court ruled that stealing a US flag is legal? Please cite the section of the ruling that supports such a thing if this your claim.
104 posted on
06/27/2006 5:22:21 PM PDT by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: muawiyah
"Once again ~ the USSC made their decision in the face of the flag in question having been the property of the federal government (as a material item). It was stolen from a post office.
The USSC didn't particularly care who owned it ~ they wanted it burned."
The person who stole it should be charged with theft and destruction of property, NOT under an invented, unconstitutional law called flag-burning.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson