Quoting Post Archived Topic: It will not be bumped to the top of the forum. Topic Police Seize Upside Down Flag for Being "Disruptive" Membername   Not a member? Sign Up Free (takes 20 seconds) Password   Forgotten your password? Post Font: Verdana Arial Black Georgia Comic Sans Impact   Size: Tiny Normal Big Huge   Color: Default Dark Red Red Orange Brown Green Olive Cyan Blue Dark Blue Indigo Black [ Check Spelling ] [ Post Preview ] [ LiveTags ] Quote: from [m]Bud2400[/m] at 11:46 pm on July 10, 2009[quote][quote][b]Dispute over flag protest erupts in Wisc. village[/b] [b]WAUSAU, Wis. - An American flag flown upside down as a protest in a northern Wisconsin village was seized by police before a Fourth of July parade and the businessman who flew it — an Iraq war veteran — claims the officers trespassed and stole his property.[/b] A day after the parade, police returned the flag and the man's protest — over a liquor license — continued. The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin is considering legal action against the village of Crivitz for violating Vito Congine Jr.'s' First Amendment rights, Executive Director Chris Ahmuty said. "It is not often that you see something this blatant," Ahmuty said. In mid-June, Congine, 46, began flying the flag upside down — an accepted way to signal distress — outside the restaurant he wants to open in Crivitz, a village of about 1,000 people some 65 miles north of Green Bay. He said his distress is likely bankruptcy because the village board refused to grant him a liquor license after he spent nearly $200,000 to buy and remodel a downtown building for an Italian supper club. Congine's upside-down-flag represents distress to him; to others in town, it represents disrespect of the flag. [b]Hours before a Fourth of July parade, four police officers went to Congine's property and removed the flag under the advice of Marinette County District Attorney Allen Brey.[/b] Neighbor Steven Klein watched in disbelief. [b]"I said, 'What are you doing?' Klein said. "They said, 'It is none of your business.'"[/b] The next day, police returned the flag. Brey declined comment Friday. [b]Marinette County Sheriff Jim Kanikula said it was not illegal to fly the flag upside down but people were upset and it was the Fourth of July. "It is illegal to cause a disruption," he said.[/b] The parade went on without any problems, Kanikula said. Village President John Deschane, 60, an Army veteran who served in Vietnam, said many people in town believe it's disrespectful to fly the flag upside down. [b]"If he wants to protest, let him protest but find a different way to do it," Deschane said.[/b] Congine, a Marine veteran who served in Iraq in 2004, said he intends to keep flying the flag upside down. [b]"It is pretty bad when I go and fight a tyrannical government somewhere else," Congine said, "and then I come home to find it right here at my front door."[/b][/quote] Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090710/ap_on_re_us/us_upside_down_flag It might seem like a tiny little thing, but I believe it to be a step toward trampling our right to free speech and protest, as is guaranteed by the first amendment of the US constitution. What are your thoughts?  Is it okay to censor this sort of thing if it's deemed to be "disruptive"?  Is protest even all that possible if it's not disruptive in some manner?[/quote] FAQ Keyword Search: Post Options Favorites Manager Notify me of new replies to this topic by email Notify me of new replies to this topic by private message Original Post Bud2400 Posted at 11:46 pm on July 10, 2009 Dispute over flag protest erupts in Wisc. village WAUSAU, Wis. - An American flag flown upside down as a protest in a northern Wisconsin village was seized by police before a Fourth of July parade and the businessman who flew it — an Iraq war veteran — claims the officers trespassed and stole his property. A day after the parade, police returned the flag and the man's protest — over a liquor license — continued. The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin is considering legal action against the village of Crivitz for violating Vito Congine Jr.'s' First Amendment rights, Executive Director Chris Ahmuty said. "It is not often that you see something this blatant," Ahmuty said. In mid-June, Congine, 46, began flying the flag upside down — an accepted way to signal distress — outside the restaurant he wants to open in Crivitz, a village of about 1,000 people some 65 miles north of Green Bay. He said his distress is likely bankruptcy because the village board refused to grant him a liquor license after he spent nearly $200,000 to buy and remodel a downtown building for an Italian supper club. Congine's upside-down-flag represents distress to him; to others in town, it represents disrespect of the flag. Hours before a Fourth of July parade, four police officers went to Congine's property and removed the flag under the advice of Marinette County District Attorney Allen Brey. Neighbor Steven Klein watched in disbelief. "I said, 'What are you doing?' Klein said. "They said, 'It is none of your business.'" The next day, police returned the flag. Brey declined comment Friday. Marinette County Sheriff Jim Kanikula said it was not illegal to fly the flag upside down but people were upset and it was the Fourth of July. "It is illegal to cause a disruption," he said. The parade went on without any problems, Kanikula said. Village President John Deschane, 60, an Army veteran who served in Vietnam, said many people in town believe it's disrespectful to fly the flag upside down. "If he wants to protest, let him protest but find a different way to do it," Deschane said. Congine, a Marine veteran who served in Iraq in 2004, said he intends to keep flying the flag upside down. "It is pretty bad when I go and fight a tyrannical government somewhere else," Congine said, "and then I come home to find it right here at my front door." Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090710/ap_on_re_us/us_upside_down_flag It might seem like a tiny little thing, but I believe it to be a step toward trampling our right to free speech and protest, as is guaranteed by the first amendment of the US constitution. What are your thoughts?  Is it okay to censor this sort of thing if it's deemed to be "disruptive"?  Is protest even all that possible if it's not disruptive in some manner?

Replies Elm Posted at 9:08 am on July 12, 2009 I can see official oppression and illegal search and seizure charges coming to an officer, a sheriff and a DA near him. airemaye Posted at 11:19 pm on July 11, 2009 Free speech, people, free speech. Part of free speech is be able to do whatever you want to do with the flag. Dissent is the highest form of patriotism. <-- I'm a very big advocate of that phrase. xKathrynx Posted at 11:15 pm on July 11, 2009 I'm naturally a patriotic person, standing behind on men and women and what they stand for, but it was wrong and illegal for the police to take down that flag. Regardless of it causing a disruption, they can't take a person's property without warrant or belief that it's physically harmful to someone. Let the man protest his way, it's meant to draw attention. Neodymie Posted at 10:40 pm on July 11, 2009 Lol I think he's about to get his liquor license. jakelong Posted at 3:03 am on July 11, 2009 however, one could make the argument saying it's treasonous I'm not for or against it, just saying Not to criticize you personally but one thing which always bothers me is how we often use the word "treason" to mean anything these days. This is what treason really is trea⋅son  -noun 1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign. 2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state. 3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery. Expressing our opinion or using our free speech to criticizeour leaders or the direction of country is not treason. Someone can be completely loyal to everything our country stands for and just protest certain actions or decisions and express their disapproval. This is not reason. Treason is what Timothy McVeigh did. Or what scientists who sell government and state secrets did. If the officer had done this while he was in duty in Iraq for example this could have been perceived as treasonous as well. The reason is that at that time he did represent the united states and all his actions had to represent and project this loyalty especially when face with any potential enemy of the US. But doing this as a veteran in his own home is not treasonous. biflexible Posted at 2:44 am on July 11, 2009 Christ, is that really legally sound? And lol at the comment about the protesting; what do they want him to do? Protest in a darkened, sound proof room? jakelong Posted at 2:32 am on July 11, 2009 Fuck man ppl really should go get a life. What is more important a flag flown in protest or the actual lives and security of ppl?   shadowpool Posted at 12:11 am on July 11, 2009 Disruptive?  Of course it's disruptive.  That's the point.  There's something seriously wrong.  It's long past time to cause disruption.  ILLEGAL?!  LOL.  We don't have laws here. be eazy Posted at 12:11 am on July 11, 2009 Quote: from Bud2400 at 11:59 pm on July 10, 2009 Quote: from be eazy at 11:53 pm on July 10, 2009 I agree with the first amendment defense, especially since he's a veteran, however, one could make the argument saying it's treasonous I'm not for or against it, just saying   Why does his veteran status matter at all? I can perhaps see it giving him credit in his protest, but does that mean he should be allowed to protest where others are not? Is one's right to protest and right to free speech somehow "more" protected if they have served in the armed forces? And I didn't understand the second half of your sentence. Treasonous? For protesting against the US, whether that be the national, state, or city government? Why should that be considered "treasonous"? I'm just saying if one wanted to go so far as to say that's treasonous if the flags upside down, like i said i'm neither for nor against i was just throwing it out there, that's all Bud2400 Posted at 11:59 pm on July 10, 2009 Quote: from be eazy at 11:53 pm on July 10, 2009 I agree with the first amendment defense, especially since he's a veteran, however, one could make the argument saying it's treasonous I'm not for or against it, just saying Why does his veteran status matter at all?  I can perhaps see it giving him credit in his protest, but does that mean he should be allowed to protest where others are not?  Is one's right to protest and right to free speech somehow "more" protected if they have served in the armed forces? And I didn't understand the second half of your sentence.  Treasonous?  For protesting against the US, whether that be the national, state, or city government?  Why should that be considered "treasonous"? be eazy Posted at 11:53 pm on July 10, 2009 I agree with the first amendment defense, especially since he's a veteran, however, one could make the argument saying it's treasonous I'm not for or against it, just saying blitzerdog Posted at 11:48 pm on July 10, 2009 I see what you did with the spin there. Touche. ss454 Posted at 11:47 pm on July 10, 2009 I agree with taking it down. All 13 previous replies displayed.