Posted on 02/08/2010 8:46:03 AM PST by lbryce
When does bragging become illegal?
Federal courts in California and Colorado will soon hear two cases that struggle with the question of whether lying about military service is a criminal offense.
In California, Xavier Alvarez said during a public meeting that he received the Medal of Honor for his time in the Marines. Alvarez never served in the military and pleaded guilty to misrepresenting himself on the condition that he could appeal on the basis of the First Amendment.
In Colorado, Rick Strandlof said he was a former Marine with a Purple Heart and Silver Star, claims which he used when establishing a non-profit organization to help homeless veterans (he was posing as "Rick Duncan," according to The Denver Post). He was charged with five misdemeanors.
The crimes of both men are punishable via the the Stolen Valor Act, which established in 2006 that lying about earning an American military medal is a crime and could carry a punishment of up to a year in jail. The law forbids anyone to wear a military medal that was not earned.
AP via Washington Post: Dozens of people have been arrested under the law at a time when troops coming home from wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have been embraced as heroes. Almost all of the impostors were ordered to perform community service.,
While the First Amendment does not protect lewd, libelous or imminently dangerous speech, does this mean it protects lies about military service as long as those lies do not hurt another person?
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
“Sorry if I don’t buy into your convoluted vision for what ails America. I can do without your kind.”
Ah, yes, nanny-staters from the Right.
I, for one, stand with Ronald Reagan who believed that government was not the knee-jerk answer.
The highest praise to a soldier is to defend the Constitution for which he fought, and which he swore to uphold.
Destroying the Constitution to chase some preening fake soldiers does real soldier a disservice.
Yes, not only a crime, in some extreme cases, it must be arrest, public trial, and the reopening of Portsmouth Naval Prison and sentence of 150 years on p!ss-n-pvnk; CCTC in cell live to FauxNoose 24/7—and that’s just my second choice...
Semper Fidelis
Dick G
**********
Would this be doable and still not run afoul of the constitution?
Amend the Law to put all matters of Fraud related to misrepresentation of military service, or lack thereof, under the full authority of the UCMJ and a military court.
“My uncle thought he was St. Jerome.”
What branch of service did you serve in my friend and in what years?
Also, please let Mary and Chuck know. These phonies need to have the spotlight shined on them and the Schantags will do just that.
Mary and Chuck Schantag
P.O.W. Network
http://www.pownetwork.org/phonies/list_of_names.htm
Email: info@pownetwork.org
---
Send treats to the troops...
Great because you did it!
www.AnySoldier.com
What about them?
If they are doing it fraudulently for gain (a fake charity, or something like that) get them for fraud.
If, like Kerry, they lied under oath nail them for perjury.
If neither of these are applicable, you are probably worrying too much. People lie, have lied, and continue to lie. Trying to explicitly criminalize every single form of perfidious behavior is fruitless.
Why do you feel this legislation is necessary?
How about making proven participation in voter fraud a capitol offense?
Correction for the word Nazis: capitol should be capital.
Code Stink and C.ANSWER held rallies and got these traitors on radio spewing racist agitprop against the United States government and the war effort with bogus claims of “war crimes” “observed”. They emboldened the enemy in a time of war and sank morale among the citizenry and troops.
That is treason. Lord Haw Haw was hanged for it and Axis Sally incarcerated.
Treason is not protected speech and neither is slander, perjury, libel, etc.
If you believe it is treason, than you have no reason to support another law banning it. What is your point?
I do not recall saying anything about protected speech, but this assertion (once again) shows why the law in question is superfluous. Your strawman is showing...
The act of betraying the nation is treason.
Falsely wearing unearned medals is “stolen valor”. Fabrication of “degrees” that were not earned. It is its own crime.
Identity theft is protected speech in your blind eye then. Come on now really, stealing someone’s SS# to obtain a job isn’t “really” wrong, right?
The legislators have already spoken out to protect those social security payments made by the SS “squatter” (so that he can still get the money he paid in).
What’s the harm?
I have no idea where you got that idea. With identity theft, depending on the details, we are talking about theft or fraud. Already covered by existing laws, no need to make it its own crime.
The legislators have already spoken out to protect those social security payments made by the SS “squatter” (so that he can still get the money he paid in).
Another problem we would not have if we enforced Constitutional limits on governmental powers. A private organization would get taken apart in the courts for running a Ponzi scheme like Social Security.
True by definition (trivially true, for the more rigorously inclined). A is A. I do not recall denying that.
Falsely wearing unearned medals is “stolen valor”. Fabrication of “degrees” that were not earned. It is its own crime.
Please. There is a difference between an act being morally wrong and being a crime. If there were not, we would have to herd the whole human race into prison cells right now. If harm is done (fraud, perjury, or your example of treason) than it is to be punished as such. If not, then you worry too much.
Valor can not be stolen. One has it or one does not. It is not contained in a hunk of metal or a piece of ribbon. Credit or glory can be wrongfully demanded. In this, fabricated military actions are worse in degree, but not worse in substance than a fish story told in a local pub.
The government has to narrowly tailor criminal statutes to comply with the Constitution. It can't write them broadly, prosecute with discretion, then defend a dangerous law on the basis that their judgment in enforcing the law should be good enough for the courts.
When the government can argue that lying is generally dangerous to the common good (and therefore punishable by a fine and/or prison time), our days of speaking truth are numbered.
Churches, pro life groups, climate change deniers, and many more will be silenced for good if the 1st Amendment isn't protected.
That said, nothing in the Constitution prevents prosecution for fraud.
Still don’t see how you equate misrepresenting ones military background and military honors with free speech.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.