[Indydealmaker]

Originally Posted by Carl in Tampa

I do not continue this discussion simply to be argumentative, but because I am very literal-minded and I hate to see misinformation conveyed in a discussion in which I am involved.

1. You have changed your position. Originally you stated the Flag Code was not a law, but was contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). I have previously shown that position was incorrect.

2. Now you quote a source that clearly states that the Flag Code is a law and then you go on to maintain that "if it is unenforceable it is a moot point."

This requires a two-pronged response:

a. If a bill is passed by the House and the Senate and signed by the President, it is by definition a law. Hundreds of laws are passed every year that have no penalty provision. They are, nonetheless, laws.

b. The Supreme Court did not strike down The Flag Code, Title 4, Chapter 1 of the United States Code, but rather Title 18, Chapter 33, Section 700 of the United States Code. That is the law that provides for a penalty for Desecration of the Flag. That is the law that was declared unconstitutional.

3. Accordingly, The Flag Code still stands as a law which, like many other laws, provides guidance without penalty for not following the law.

An example of a law which provides guidance without penalty is the Law Enforcement Officer's Safety act of 2004, Public Law 108-277, which authorizes me, without need of a license, to carry a concealed weapon in every state of the United States "Notwithstanding any other provision of the law of any State or any political subdivision thereof."

I could provide many other examples of laws with no penalty provision.


.

Carl,
When I change my position on something, I admit I am wrong. I apparently did not clearly state my position. When I said it is not a law. You are right. I was not being literal. However, IMO, my point was that a law with no enforcement is for all practical purposes not a law. It is nothing more than a suggestion. That suggestion is normally sufficient for reasonable, law-abiding citizens. However, for those that would ignore the "suggestion" because there is no penalty, we need for the law to be re-written to provide for a penalty.

Also, any attorney will tell you that in this day and age, to take a law literally is to set yourself up for a fall. There are so many interpretations in case law of the written statute that your head will spin. That is why you see so many bad dudes walk after you arrested them.

Black is rarely black. White is always grey. Unfortunately.

[JamesD]

Mine's getting pretty tattered and sun bleached, but I fly it proudly. It was given to me by a guy in uniform who said "On behalf of a grateful nation..."

Originally Posted by kb8tpw

I differ with the comments about the tattered flag. I took one to the American Legion last week for destruction that was in better shape than this one. My current "concern" is for the folks that put the little flags out that drag on the ground. I made some 1x1 sticks to raise mine, painted them red white and blue and they look much better.

Wow someone that gets it....Thank You! Tattered flags should not be flown & any flag should NEVER touch the ground!!!!

[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by Indydealmaker

Carl,
When I change my position on something, I admit I am wrong. I apparently did not clearly state my position. When I said it is not a law. You are right. I was not being literal. However, IMO, my point was that a law with no enforcement is for all practical purposes not a law. It is nothing more than a suggestion. That suggestion is normally sufficient for reasonable, law-abiding citizens. However, for those that would ignore the "suggestion" because there is no penalty, we need for the law to be re-written to provide for a penalty.

Also, any attorney will tell you that in this day and age, to take a law literally is to set yourself up for a fall. There are so many interpretations in case law of the written statute that your head will spin. That is why you see so many bad dudes walk after you arrested them.

Black is rarely black. White is always grey. Unfortunately.

1. When you take the mind set that a law with no enforcement is not a law, you are no longer amenable to being convinced to the contrary. This, despite the fact that I provided you with the title of of a major federal law, affecting virtually all active and most retired law enforcement officers, and the laws of every state in the Union. But the law has no enforcement provision so you do not consider it a law.

2. I take it you were speaking in generalities when you spoke of so many bad dudes walking after I arrested them.

I say this because 97 % of the felons I arrested pled guilty before trial and 100 % of those who went to trial were convicted.

That's pretty black and white to me.

[Indydealmaker]

Originally Posted by Carl in Tampa

1. When you take the mind set that a law with no enforcement is not a law, you are no longer amenable to being convinced to the contrary. This, despite the fact that I provided you with the title of of a major federal law, affecting virtually all active and most retired law enforcement officers, and the laws of every state in the Union. But the law has no enforcement provision so you do not consider it a law.

2. I take it you were speaking in generalities when you spoke of so many bad dudes walking after I arrested them.

I say this because 97 % of the felons I arrested pled guilty before trial and 100 % of those who went to trial were convicted.

That's pretty black and white to me.

Your track record is quite extraordinary.

[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by Indydealmaker

Your track record is quite extraordinary.

We've sort of hijacked this thread.

Let's go back to the point where you pointed out, correctly, that there is no enforcement mechanism associated with The Flag Code.

Would your point be that the Original Poster was taking it too seriously that the homeowner was flying the flag of another country below the flag of the United States?

A previous poster has already pointed out that the practice does not imply disrespect of the US Flag, but, if anything, of the flag that flies below it. The Flag Code says "International usage forbids the display of the flag of one nation above that of another nation in time of peace." How seriously should a Villages homeowner be concerned about "International usage?"

I'm interested in your view.

[scarecrow1]

Originally Posted by NavyCO

Every so called patriotic villager should read the Code of Federal Regulations (passed by Congress) on how the Flag is to be handled, stored, cared for and most importantly "displayed" as it our source of pride. There are some in The Villages, that neither respect the Flag, nor care about it one put up on pole in their yards. I start off this forum discussion by posting of a FLAG not only improperly display in Hadley, but in such disrepair, it is a disgrace. This so called American is seems more proud of his Heritage than being an American. I suggest all of you that carry a CAMERA to get out and take a picture and post it here, but to also go up to the door of such people and tell them how they are disrespecting the flag, and our country.--a proud Navy VET. The homeowner featured hear considers himself to be a "South African" because under law--of this great land--you CANNOT fly the flag of another nation directly beneath the American Flag. It MUST be on another entirely different pole!

I do believe the Stars Bangle Banner that flew over the fort had bullet holes and cannon holes in as it flew for a couple of days and nights. " and the flag was still there." I fought for my country and that flag and I'll fly it anyway I please. If someone doesn't like the way I fly my flag you can go ------. P.S. I do believe its a free country and to heck with educate.

[CFrance]

Originally Posted by scarecrow1

I do believe the Stars Bangle Banner that flew over the fort had bullet holes and cannon holes in as it flew fore a couple of days and nights. " and the flag was still there." I fought for my country and that flag and I'll fly it anyway I please. If someone doesn't like the way I fly my flag you can go ------. P.S. I do believe its a free country and to heck with educate.

Star Spangled Banner flew for a couple of days and nights.

Sorry, the editor in me could not hold back, especially since the threat in the post didn't make me happy.

[BobnBev]

Originally Posted by Carl in Tampa

Too many hoops?

1. Carry photo ID that shows you are a qualified retired LEO.
2. Qualify with your firearm once a year.
3. Carry the range qualification certification with you.

Having done these things your only limitations have to do with pretty much the same exclusions that are included in your FL CCW license, and you are legal in states that don't recognize the FL CCW, like California, New York and the District of Columbia.

However, like you, I also have a FL CCW license. I got one right after they passed the enabling law.

Florida has reciprocity agreements with over 30 states regarding recognition of our CCW licenses.

#2-----
When LEOSA first came out, CT would only certify your range qualification, if you used the State Police range. That was done by appointment only. You miss the appointment, TS for that year. I think that has changed now, but
I wouldn't go back to CT just to qualify. Going thru NY and NJ, the gun is locked in my gun box, in the trunk. I make it a point to NOT get stopped-lol

[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by BobnBev

#2-----
When LEOSA first came out, CT would only certify your range qualification, if you used the State Police range. That was done by appointment only. You miss the appointment, TS for that year. I think that has changed now, but
I wouldn't go back to CT just to qualify. Going thru NY and NJ, the gun is locked in my gun box, in the trunk. I make it a point to NOT get stopped-lol

Are you now a resident of Florida? LEOSA requires that your annual qualification be done to the standard of police officers in the state of your residence.

My former agency, the Sheriff's Office in Tampa, offers pistol qualification opportunity to retired officers once a month at no charge. You have to provide your own weapon and ammunition. They take the position that if you want to carry your choice of revolver or semi-automatic then you must qualify with both. You can do both on the same visit.

The course of fire is only about 40 rounds, all from a standing position, and the longest distance is 15 yards. (The closest is 2 yards, with your pistol already drawn and held at low ready.) One of the officers who developed the course sent me an e-mail right after it was adopted and said, "Carl, a man in a wheelchair could qualify on this course."

In addition to your pistol and ammo, you should have eye and ear protection.

If you decide you might want to qualify at some future time, let me know and I'll give you the details about the location, dates and times (First Fridays of the month, very early) and telephone numbers to make contact with the Range Officer to let them know you are coming.

They used to mail you your range card but I think they now issue the range qualification certification on the spot after qualifying.

I could probably also check with some of my retired friends and find other places where you could qualify, but the places may require a fee for the service.

[Indydealmaker]

Originally Posted by Carl in Tampa

We've sort of hijacked this thread.

Let's go back to the point where you pointed out, correctly, that there is no enforcement mechanism associated with The Flag Code.

Would your point be that the Original Poster was taking it too seriously that the homeowner was flying the flag of another country below the flag of the United States?

A previous poster has already pointed out that the practice does not imply disrespect of the US Flag, but, if anything, of the flag that flies below it. The Flag Code says "International usage forbids the display of the flag of one nation above that of another nation in time of peace." How seriously should a Villages homeowner be concerned about "International usage?"

I'm interested in your view.

I agree that the Code should be honored when flying our flag. However, I think that the OP may have over-reacted in lieu of polite communication with the homeowner in question. I may have overlooked the post that discussed the OP trying to educate the homeowner without success.

I doubt that the homeowner was deliberately showing disrespect. Most likely, it was a lack of knowledge or a difference of interpretation. As you pointed out, the Flag Code refers to "international usage". It would seem that in this instance, there is room for the benefit of the doubt. A more overt display would have been to fly his flag instead of the U.S. flag.

[mrfixit]

...been gone a while...
... got back and read this thread which is expressing a genuine dislike of those displaying a torn flag.

...noticed a couple of 2 inch rips and frayed edge on the lighted flag.

Certainly would not want to be called out and have address published...
You have won me over...having NO FLAG is better than displaying a torn flag...
...as of 1900 hrs 25-May-2014.
... have taken down the U.S. Flag and removed the Pole in its entirety.

No more torn or tattered flags to be displayed...
...sorry if anyone was offended by the torn Flag.

The US Flag presented...
..."on behalf of a grateful Nation" is a story for another day.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Well, now that it's Memorial Day, I think that someone ought to drive around the Villages and write down the addresses of all of those unpatriotic residents that stick those little stick flags on their front lawns. I've noticed that sone of them touch the ground a bit.
Unpatriotic behavior like that needs to be dealt with.

(For those that don't know me, this is what is known as sarcasm)

[scarecrow1]

Originally Posted by CFrance

Star Spangled Banner flew for a couple of days and nights.

Sorry, the editor in me could not hold back, especially since the threat in the post didn't make me happy.

Sorry for my misspelled word as I was writing with my phone and without my glasses.

[PammyJ]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

Well, now that it's Memorial, I think that someone ought to drive around the Villages and write down the addresses of all of those unpatriotic residents that stick those little stick flags on their front lawns. I've noticed that sone of them touch the ground a bit.
Unpatriotic behavior like that needs to be dealt with.

(For those that don't know me, this is what is known as sarcasm)

Lol!