Originally Posted by senojekips

The business operator got what he asked for. What I ask is "why is he surprised"?

He obviously didn't expect anyone to actually come and remove something from his business.

Originally Posted by senojekips

Perhaps he just decided that enough was enough, someone had to make a public example of this rudeness???

There are times when the authorities have more to do than run around policing such offences, this in no way reduces the wrongfulness of the act, good manners alone, should have decreed that he fly the Mexican flag below that of the Star and Stripes whilst within the US and of course vice versa if he were in Mexico.

It was a blatant slap in the face to all US citizens, pure and simple. The business operator got what he asked for. What I ask is "why is he surprised"?

I think the point being made is why contact the media before doing something.

If you see something that infuriates you to the point of action do you:
A) Get a sudden rush of blood to the head and go sort it out?
B) Check the statute books and and then send an email to the local newspaper?
C) Phone the media, wait for them to arrive and then carry out an action before making a patriotic speech?

I am betting the the answer from most people will be A not C.

Originally Posted by senojekips

Perhaps he just decided that enough was enough, someone had to make a public example of this rudeness???

There are times when the authorities have more to do than run around policing such offences, this in no way reduces the wrongfulness of the act, good manners alone, should have decreed that he fly the Mexican flag below that of the Star and Stripes whilst within the US and of course vice versa if he were in Mexico.

It was a blatant slap in the face to all US citizens, pure and simple. The business operator got what he asked for. What I ask is "why is he surprised"?

Monty, I believe there are times when the Neanderthals have their place.

Rudeness yes. Infraction of published law.Yes.

I'm looking it from a different perspective than you are.

If I had gotten that call. By his phoning the media and then waiting waiting for the media before acting. I as the responding officer can more than articulate in my report that he acted with intent and or premeditation to commit a statutory violation. In those circumstances I would have no choice but to arrest him. Whether or not I agreed with or was supportive of his point of view. Or whether or not he was acting against a breach of the law in regards to improper display of the flag.

I'm not saying that it in anyway decreases the violation. But I see nowhere where he contacted the authorities. Marsh had the best answer call the cops let them speak to him. If he refuses (he probably wouldn't if it was done right) then pursue it thru the district attorneys office and let them sort it out with the US District Attorney.

Either way I think he did the right thing.

Yeah. Good intiative. Bad Judgement.

Good for him.

Originally Posted by mmarsh

Sorry Folks,

Thats why the police are called law-enforcement, (as in they can enforce the laws, not ordinary citizens). The bar owner was wrong and it was illegal to display the flag like that, BUT its never for ordinary citizens to take the laws into their own hands. That's a very slippery slope, once you start down it on a minor thing such as this, things can very quickly get out of control. In fact, its usually what happens, the Ku Klux Klan and various gun fights in the Wild West were all about people taking the law (or what they thought was the law) into their own hands. You don't ever want to go there.

As USMC said, what the vet did, despite the best of intentions WAS vandalism and WAS criminal trespass, and probably theft as well (the vet kept the US flag).

The bar owner COULD have press charges had he wished (and he still might). Even if I was in the wrong, if someone touched my property without permission I would press charges. And who knows, had this been in Texas or Florida the bar owner might have claimed 'Castle Doctrine' protection (in defending place of business) and shot the vet dead, and THAT would have been legal. Strange world we live in isn't it?

The best solution was if the vet simply ASKED for the bar owner to change the display of flags first, which there is NO indication that he did.

Thats why TALKING to people is usually the best way of resolving disputes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
USMC

I don't disagree that the PD and the Feds have better things to do. But I think most people if they were told by a local LEO to remove an offensive display would do so. Most people are not ACLU attorneys and don't want a hassle with the local sheriff over a flag.

Ah but assuming US law is similar to Australian law then his intention is part of the crime. Did he intend it as vandalism.... or was his intention to uphold federal law? In Australia that would raise a blip on the police radar, they have better things to do then charge a veteren with vandalism for doing something that was technically (by black letter law) wrong, but by the greater good was right. Plus it would get thrown out of the magistrates court, police prosecutors wouldn't touch it and the DPP would laugh at it.

Originally Posted by senojekips

Misplaced honour??... come again? I dunno about the Netherlands Ted, but where I come from patriotism is never "misplaced". Other than that the act was against the law so he was just doing his duty as a law abiding citizen.

P.S. in this case Neanderthal is spelt with a capital letter. Go Neanderthals!!

I call it misplaced when it leads to all kind of excessive behaviour while defending your countries honour. Loving your country is one thing, carrying knifes the size of a broad sword (which is also illegal over here) to cut down other peoples flags is another!

And good catch with the capital letters.... I am usualy quite meticulous with those..... scheisse

When the plantation owners rose up against the British crown, they committed a crime.
When a Korean patriot (Ahn Jung-gun) shot the Japanese governer of the Korean peninsula, he committed a crime.
...
I can think of many examples (mostly from Korea) of "crimes" committed that saved the country.
In this case, he didn't save the country, but sometimes you have to make a stand.

AussieNick

I don't think it matters. In this case the vet crossed into someones personal property with the sole intent of doing vandalism, -he even called the press before he did it. And it doesn't matter if he was upholding the law -only LEO's have that right. Its as I said above you do not have the right to enforce the law -even if you are right.

The Ku Klux Klan terrorized the south with its interpretation of the law.

Redneck

I dont think you can compare the two cases. Both of your examples involve insurrection against the government, while this case is about a single individual appointing himself as a government law enforcement agent.