ILLEGAL TO BURN FLAG OR MARK FLAG IN ARIZONA

Arizona Revised Statutes

[Traitor Exposer]

Law: A class 2 misdemeanor occurs if one places a mark upon a flag which is "likely to provoke physical retaliation". Country: USA State: Arizona

Citation: 13-3703. Abuse of venerated objects; classification

A. A person commits abuse of venerated objects by intentionally:

1. Desecrating any public monument, memorial or property of a public park; or

2. In any manner likely to provoke immediate physical retaliation:

(a) Exhibiting or displaying, placing or causing to be placed any word, figure, mark, picture, design, drawing or advertisement of any nature upon a flag or exposing or causing to be exposed to public view a flag upon which there is printed, painted or otherwise produced or to which there is attached, appended or annexed any word, figure, mark, picture, design, drawing or advertisement; or

(b) Exposing to public view, manufacturing, selling, offering to sell, giving or having in possession for any purpose any article of merchandise or receptacle for holding or carrying merchandise upon or to which there is printed, painted, placed or attached any flag in order to advertise, call attention to, decorate, mark or distinguish the article or substance; or

(c) Casting contempt upon, mutilating, defacing, defiling, burning, trampling or otherwise dishonoring or causing to bring dishonor upon a flag.

B. The provisions of this section shall not apply to:

1. Any act permitted by a statute of the United States; or

2. Any act permitted by United States military regulations; or

3. Any act where the United States government has granted permission for the use of such flag; or

4. A newspaper, periodical, book, pamphlet, circular, certificate, diploma, warrant, commission of appointment to office, ornament, picture, badge or stationery on which shall be printed, painted or placed such flag and which is disconnected from any advertisement for the purpose of sale, barter or trade.

C. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Desecrate" means defacing, damaging, polluting or otherwise doing a physical act in a manner likely to provoke immediate physical retaliation.

2. "Flag" means any emblem, banner or other symbol, of any size, composed of any substance or represented on any substance that evidently purports to be the flag of the United States or of this state.

D. Abuse of venerated objects is a class 2 misdemeanor.

[photogirl]

Bump

[CyberCowboy777]

Don't defend it then

Porn may be legal and I have no desire to change that, but I don't sit on a high horse defending it.

The animals can defend themselves.

[KantianBurke]

I'll continue to defend a practice that I find personally odious because of the principle which I do not. Namely that we are guarenteed certain rights and liberties by our creator that cannot be taken away by our govt. Forbiding a person to engage in a form of speech violates that precept imho and thus is something that should be protected.

[RonF]

Another example of a legislature writing a bad law that can be counted on to be overturned after a court battle that will transfer huge amounts of money from taxpayers to lawyers and special interest groups so that the legislators can make emotional but worthless appeal to unthinking voters.

[CyberCowboy777]

Defending the right in military service I understand.

Defending the right in court I understand.

Defending it here?

Why?

I don't go around defending homosexuals rights to 'do' what they want. They have their own defense - and I have more important fights to win.

Why do you feel it necessary to fight for this rather than focusing this energy on tax cuts or 2nd amendment issues?

You only have a limited amount of time - don't waste it on flag burners.

[KantianBurke]

Like I said previously, my view is centered upon a defense of our G-d given rights as funneled through the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Burning a US flag is, however loathsome an activity, a form of expression that I see as worth defending. To the point that I am see it as my duty to serve my country. I defend it on FR as, this being a conservative website, I see it as an issue of govt trying to regulate what only G-d should. Once again I don't agree with it and I certainly wouldn't do it but there are other legal activities I don't engage in. Smoking for instance. Gambling for another.

[CyberCowboy777]

Fine

I just think you waste time and talents better spent on the defense of our 2nd Amendment rights or decreasing the size of Government.

Especially since there is no law keeping us from burning a flag.

I'll not waste my time on a non-issue, just to give aid and comfort to anti-Americans who use the 1st to show hate for me and my Country.

But you go ahead, even though it has no purpose, you give 'em aid and comfort.

[CyberCowboy777]

btw - what does buring a U.S. flag say?

Do you think it can hurt others?

Would you rather have a punch to the gut or watch a U.S. flag burn?

I am not convinced that intent = harassment

[KantianBurke]

I like to think every bit of the Bill of Rights are worth defending including those utilized for unpopular purposes.

[CyberCowboy777]

We are not debating whether the 1st amendment should be defended. I never even remotely suggested that.

I question whether one action claiming protection under that defended right should garner so much attention.

I also question any American who would waste their time defending flag burners when no threat exist to the 1st Amendment. Why would a man claim to love America and yet spend time not on the 2nd Amendment which is really threatened but on the 1st Amendment which is not threaten at all?

I am also not convinced that burning a U.S. flag is not unlike yelling 'fire' in a theater or threatening the POTUS with action - not words.

[KantianBurke]

looks like we're going to have to agree to disagree then. FWIW, you won't find a better defender of the 2nd Amendment than myself. Godd day.

[Protagoras]

I think we need to DE-CRIMINALIZE punching out those who do burn or deface the flag.

Or anything else we don't agree with. Screw that free speech stuff, lets punch out anyone we disagree with. </ sarcasm>

And they claim libertarians are anarchists? LOL

[Protagoras]

Flag burners shouldn't be imprissoned, but neither should the person who punches them in the face.

Cool concept for Republicans to advance. "We think violence should be allowed by citizens on other citizens for certain non-criminal behaviors." Sounds like a platform they could run on.

[Protagoras]

I like to think every bit of the Bill of Rights are worth defending including those utilized for unpopular purposes.

Popular activities don't need protection. That is why we needed a bill of rights.

[Protagoras]

"There is all the difference in the world between defending the right to desecrate the flag and defending flag desecration itself. It is the the difference between a free society and an unfree society."

Roger Pilon
Director of constitutional studies for the Cato Institute In testimony to a congressional committee May 23, 1999

[steplock]

That was meant to show the absolute stupidity of MOST laws!

People have to take responsibility for their actions AND learn to ACCEPT the consequences for their actions.

If you want to insult someone to their face, don't be surprised if they break your nose.

The law has NO PLACE in petty disputes.

Hmmm..breaking the nose WOULD be just a bit too much - maybe - medical expenses should be paid - but that would be the extent of it! The combatants could still part as friends at this point.

Take me to court for a stupid action like this, and someone would find some DIRE consequences for that!

[Protagoras]

Most laws are stupid, but none of those which defend rights are stupid. The fundemental role of government is to defend rights. And people have a right to speak or otherwise make their opinions known without fear of phsical violence from others.

The consequences for punching me in the nose might include deadly force being used on the attacker. The right of self defence is fundamental. Governments have been instituted to prevent that type of violence in society.

A person who burns a flag violates no one else's rights, only their sensibilities. A person who attacks someone else does, that is the difference.

[CyberCowboy777]

We don't really disagree.

The right exsist. I would not defend them (flag burners) directly myself, but you may be a better man than I.

I just get pissy about the whole thing.

FRegards

[Antiwar Republican]

It's a good thing President Bush didn't sign that flag in Arizona!