NeVaDa state laws in regards to FLAG BURNING

[SFNathan]

"dont cheapen a miraculous document called the Constitution by equating flag burning with free speech."

The entire event of Burning Man surrounds the burning of a symbol. Burning symbols can be very effective speech. I think you are incorrect that burning a flag cannot be an artistic statement - depending on how the flag is burned. I'm sure there will be lots of variations that you and I haven't thought of in how the flag will be burned.

That's the beauty of art and free speech, my friend. We can't know all of the amazing things that can come from it until we allow others to share their speech and art with us.

You know, I really disliked this theme, but people like you who are trying to tell me how I shouldn't approach speech are really making me feel like maybe this theme is neccessary for this event. And yes, flag burning WILL be a part of this theme, because it's Burning Man. We burn everything there.

[Simon of the Playa]

divide the man, and the playa, into blue, and red, "states"....

altered states, for sure...




or America, and JesusLand....



whatever floats your boat, since Lake Lahontan is being filled in anyway...



but yes, in all seriousness, how cool, fucked up, bizarro comic book land meets the castro would it be if BRC was ground ZERO in a nationwide pre-election debate about WHO WE ARE AS AMERICANS,AND WHERE DO WE WANT TO GO FROM HERE?...

i would SO do an interview katy couric, i for one, still think she's do-able..

in a hot milfy-newscaster way, you know what i'm talking about..i digress, horribly...


but you see what i'm implying......bring on the MAJOR MEDIA....hell, let AL ROKER do the fucking weather....


"live from BRC.....it's DECISION 08'"


insert music and graphics here....

[SFNathan]

hmm... this is starting to sound interesting.

Maybe I can talk my village into having an interactive fire sculpture where people can place their flags on the burning sculpture with a message of what they want America to let go of (it could be sort of like the Temple burn). Like a flag tied with the message of why as a gay man I can't marry my partner, and this is something I personally dream of America changing (like creating REAL freedom and equality for all of us who don't have the same rights in America as the majority), or any other wish you have for America tied to an American flag, and burn it up.

It could be solemn, respectful (as the temple is), and controversial at the same time because it looks at the taboo of flag burning and challenges it with our dreams as Americans.

hmm...

[Toolmaker]

hmm... this is starting to sound interesting.

Maybe I can talk my village into having an interactive fire sculpture where people can place their flags on the burning sculpture with a message of what they want America to let go of (it could be sort of like the Temple burn). Like a flag tied with the message of why as a gay man I can't marry my partner, and this is something I personally dream of America changing (like creating REAL freedom and equality for all of us who don't have the same rights in America as the majority), or any other wish you have for America tied to an American flag, and burn it up.

It could be solemn, respectful (as the temple is), and controversial at the same time because it looks at the taboo of flag burning and challenges it with our dreams as Americans.

hmm...

Nice to see you starting to come around and see some of the potential.

[spectabillis]

... Indeed.. also be wary of other burners. The event is a rather broad cross section of people all over the country...

of course, because being able to walk away or just ignore it is far less important than pushing an opinion on others.

...It's illegal to put stuff on it (merchandise?!)...

http://owenmundy.com/work/corporate_flag/

[Valkyrie]

Yay!

although I have several criticisms of that flag, though. Mostly in the distribution of logos... (Divestiture? what's divestiture - you'd best combine that AT&T and Bell logo now!)

[Toolmaker]

... Indeed.. also be wary of other burners. The event is a rather broad cross section of people all over the country...

of course, because being able to walk away or just ignore it is far less important than pushing an opinion on others.

i can walk away..
i think its important to be able to do..
ignoring is good sometimes too..
but i'm just sayin..
ya know..
other folks..
who knows..
with people settin art on fire being a common occurance these days..
one never knows
ya know?
shit happens..
i'll prolly look the other way..

[BAS]

although I have several criticisms of that flag, though. Mostly in the distribution of logos... (Divestiture? what's divestiture - you'd best combine that AT&T and Bell logo now!)

Didn't that flag have the Enron logo at one time? Just wondering.... (I don't know if its makers update it or not....)



B.

[SFNathan]

"i can walk away..
i think its important to be able to do..
ignoring is good sometimes too..
but i'm just sayin..
ya know..
other folks..
who knows..
with people settin art on fire being a common occurance these days..
one never knows
ya know?
shit happens..
i'll prolly look the other way.."

I appreciate where you are coming from.

Every time someone says something that I find really disrespectful, (like particularly homophobic shit that people say, like 'that's so gay' or whatever), it's good to be able to ignore it, walk away, rather than engage with someone who I think is a total idiot. And I don't think I would set art on fire if I found it to be homophobic, because I respect their right to express themselves even if I find it offensive.

But sometimes, I've walked up to the artist and said what I thought about their art and it can be really powerful if you confront someone on what you perceive to be disrespectful. If someone is doing something that is in your opinion degrading to America or the flag, why not just ask them where they are coming from. Maybe they could learn something from you that would be worth the discussion. At the very least, you've had a chance to share with them what your take was. And maybe you might hear something from them that makes it seem less disrespectful than it first appeared. It's worth the conversation if you have strong feelings about it.

[Simon of the Playa]

in 2000, i met this programmer named carl.

carl was at his first burn, as a hired gun techie, and just didnt seem to be the typical burner...

i use that term lovingly..

Anyway, he had never even smoked POT before that point, and the most amazing transformation took place over the course of a week as carl went thru a true chrysalis, and emerged as CARL...

CARL was painted aqua blue, naked except for a tutu and makeup, and was dancing in one of pepe's operas.

i dont even know what kind of chemicals he got into, it doesnt matter, what does matter is that carl, i mean CARL changed his life as a result of arriving home, at burning man.

sounds cliched, huh?


it is, because it's true.....The Man changed my life...actually a number of times, directly or indirectly, as everything we do or see or feel changes us somehow.


The Man REALLY changed my life, and each year, i make the pilgrammage
all the way across the fucking country, to thank him, and watch his ass burn.

CARL does too, now....


call it a cult, a movement, a community, an ideal, uchronia, sonic drive thru, whatever you like....

i'll drink that kool-aid, mr. Harvey, and i'll like it....


so, what am i leading up to? This.....Let them in, open the floodgates, and invite the Pinks, and the Cons and the Dems and the asshol oops, i mean republicans, and the Big Media and the Deep South and the MidWest, fuck LETS INVITE THE WORLD...come see how we do it... and then lets SWALLOW THEM WHOLE....

how many times have i heard "media types" or visiting Police, or other paid "auslanders" who say "my god, i have never been to such a well run, well thought out, pleasant and thought provoking event, who woulda thunk it from a bunch of long-hairs"

and then they come back.

again and again....


we should be proud of what we have made in the desert, lets show it off, lets show the rest of the country what radical self reliance and self expression really means....

whatever that may be...


ps....i have an agenda...

i would love to see Meredith Viera in a Rob Zombie Girl get-up, having gone fully native, swinging in the T-Dome with Barbara Walters...


she'd fuck barbara's shit RIGHT up, i tell you...

[Teo del Fuego]

I think you are incorrect that burning a flag cannot be an artistic statement - depending on how the flag is burned.

one can make pissing on a sidewalk into an artistic statement, depending on how one does it...but not all "artistic statements" should be sacrosanct nor should they be equated with the "free speech" given protection under the US Constiution.

But I admit my point is probably a bit too technical for this discussion.

I think the government should not ban or prohibit flag burning, but I think others have a right to pop the burner in the jaw if it is deemed highly offensive.

[Lord Of Ruin]

[quote="Teo del Fuego"]goodness, Im dropping my efforts at civility, but there are so many boneheads on both sides of the issue.

dont cheapen a miraculous document called the Constitution by equating flag burning with free speech. It does nothing to enhance the marketplace of ideas contemplated by reason and by historical analysis surrounding the creation of the Constiution.

Flag burning is spitting off a balcony. Government should not pass laws to prevent you from doing it, but if a WWII vet who hunkered down in disease-laden trenches while his buddies got their boots blown off wants to jack you in the jaw for burning old Glory, that should be just as permitted. It IS "my flag" but what I rally around is the freedom it represents. But freedom comes with responsibilities to yourself and to your fellow citizens to exercise your rights judiciously and with respect for others.

SNIP
[/quote]

This is exactly the point that I feel as I read all the negative reaction to the theme: The flag is a symbol of ALL our points of view; the symbol of having a country that similarly protects all these diverse perspectives. Why would you feel the need to burn the symbol of that protection and freedom?

Sorry to generalize, but to all my left-leaning friends, the flag somehow seems to embody all that is BAD (or that they perceive is bad) about our country. You'll see references to rednecks, the military-industrial complex, our current political leaders.

Do people here really believe that? If they found themselves abroad in an unknown country and someone said..."Tell me about your country? What is it like? What does it stand for?....the pro-flag burners would rattle off a litany like: rednecks, abusive political leaders, corrupt government, etc

That's what rules your life and consciousness?

Sad...just....sad...

LoR

[Plastic G'zus]

Yes! One day the World will Burn!

[Valkyrie]

Yeah. Sometimes I think that a lot of folks who are bitter about the political state of affairs right now have lost influence over because they have lost the ability to dream. I hear so much talk about the "American" part of the theme, but almost no discussion on the second part. Y'know, the American Dream.

[Simon of the Playa]

Kant we all get Along?......Maybe some Chips, and DPS (dept.Playaland Security)

next year, make sure you visit Kamp Kroll, in Playaland Security Village, and have one of our free "Really Fun Internal Devices" inserted into your right tricep....


it wont hurt as much as the Cattle Prod!

this will enable you and your PlayaPals to keep track of each other via satellite or google earth...Never Lose yourself AGAIN!

as well as make sure that no one strays past the fence, or tries to say, light something on fire they shouldnt.

the "Really Fun Internal Devices" are included in the price of your ticket, and is part of a new Mandatory Volunteerism.


thank you, and remember, if it's mexican, it ain't american, and you are allowed to shoot it.

have a nice american day.

[ravenluv]

Yeah. Sometimes I think that a lot of folks who are bitter about the political state of affairs right now have lost influence over because they have lost the ability to dream. I hear so much talk about the "American" part of the theme, but almost no discussion on the second part. Y'know, the American Dream.

good point!

however, if the dream part is supposed to be the important part, why attach the word 'american' to it? i believe they're trying to get us to focus on a specific kind of dream.

[barnz]

however, if the dream part is supposed to be the important part, why attach the word 'american' to it? i believe they're trying to get us to focus on a specific kind of dream.

But who is "They?" Sure, the BMORG is a 'they' that established this theme...but The American Dream is an idea that WE, the people of the world, have developed together. Maybe we're not all uniformly happy about it. Maybe we don't all have the exact same vision of what 'it' even means. But The American Dream is a living idea that WE have created.

So let's all hoist our own personal mirror up to this idea and share what it looks like.

































Or, we could just do more stuff with monkeys....

[Simon of the Playa]

oh sure, piss off the creationistas AND the PetaPeople all at the same time...


"oh dear god, help us, and dont send down jesus, this is not a place for kids"

[barnz]

oh sure, piss off the creationistas AND the PetaPeople all at the same time...

Equal Opportunity Pissing Off, step right up!

(hmm. Should that be Off-Pissing? Participle-Dangling, anyone?)

[Valkyrie]

Oh, it's grammatically OK. One could argue that "off" could be a modifier telling you where to "piss", not a preposition, as in the popular English instruction "Oh, piss off!". If it were used as a preposition as one would deduce from strict usage, for example to say "piss off the bridge" it would have a totally different meaning. Of course, in this instance, the colloquial phrase "piss off" is verbified, meaning that the two words together form a single verb, and each of the words used separately has intrinsically different meanings (as illustrated by the sentence "It's better to be pissed off than pissed on.") So "To piss off the religious right." implies that you're not actually standing on the religious right and pissing, as you were with the bridge, but rather doing the verb "pissing off" to the religious right, making them the object of the sentence rather than the object of the preposition.

I'm glad I could clear that all up for you.

[dr.placebo]

Is this the image of an American flag?

[barnz]

Oh, it's grammatically OK. ...

heh-heh- heh-heh-heh. "Verbified." heh-heh- heh-heh-heh.

[Simon of the Playa]

Valkyrie..."It's better to be pissed off than pissed on."


unless you are two consensual adults and you're into it...


"Mike Hunt, Hurt? What?"

[Simon of the Playa]

Valrykie..."It's better to be pissed off than pissed on."


unless you are two consensual adults and you're into it...

[SFNathan]

“I think the government should not ban or prohibit flag burning, but I think others have a right to pop the burner in the jaw if it is deemed highly offensive.â€

[Teo del Fuego]

It’s curious that you profess to have great respect for the principles of the Constitution, but are willing to completely disregard those principles by saying someone deserves to have their face beaten in for exercising speech.

See, when I said my point was too technical for this discussion I was being polite. I was trying to say that my argument was a bit too intelligent for you.

Intellectually, you seem a wee bit lazy. I didnt say "beat someone's face in." This has nothing to do with attacking people for their sexual orientation. I said "pop someone's jaw." I contemplate a good ole fashioned punch in the jaw. You evoke imagery of savagry and pure hate.

But more importantly, the whole thrust of my argument concerned what is "speech." You think being mute, transmitting no ideas whatsoever, but igniting a piece of cloth in hope of pissing off a whole lot of people is "speech." I disagree. It's petty protest by people too stupid to formulate arguments and support it with structured logic. I suppose you think it is speech to take a dump on the steps of the State Capitol. Perhaps that too should be protected by the US Constitution if we just streeeetch it enough from its original meaning to suit whatever agenda we find fashionable right now. Hey, its only the US Constitution...just another form of silly putty.

But as long as you are burning your flag, not someone elses flag, have at it. The governemnt shouldn't try to pass a law to protect a piece of cloth. But as long as you are doing it for the purpose of provoke a strong reaction out of someone, I think you should be man enough, or whatever, to receive another pointless, stupid, hurtful display of protest "speech" from your neighbor on your chin.

I think you just want the freedom to willy nilly agitate people while advancing absolutely nothing in terms of public debate about ideas, and do it with complete impunity by cheapening the US Constitution.

Whether you can burn a flag or have immunity from a sore jaw should not involve a discussion of the Constiitution...

[Teo del Fuego]

I repent. Im sorry Nathan for insulting you. I just finished watching Ken Burn's documentary on WWII (which actually seemede to last a little longer than the war itself) and am probably emotionally jacked up by what I see as a stark contrast between the citizenry of 50 years ago and what I see as self-absorbed me-me individuals who have little to contribute to the grand old experiement known as America. Burn your flag. Its not illegal. I'll try to ignore you, but if my gut and heart wins out, I'll punch you in the jaw and will be man enough to accept the consequencxes. Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.

This whole discussion is a real good reason why the new theme is a train wreck waiting to happen. But its Larry Harvey's Burn, its not ours. The last two themes have hurt Burning Man, this years only slightly by reducing the community feeling around the Man base. Next year's theme has the potential to engender a lot of physical conflict and garner a lot of negative publicity, but hell, maybe Larry is trying to run this experiment into the ground. He's God, he can do what he wants with his Burn.

returns to shuffling papers....

[blyslv]

The court rejected "the view that an apparently limitless variety of conduct can be labeled 'speech' whenever the person engaging in the conduct intends thereby to express an idea", but acknowledged that conduct may be "sufficiently imbued with elements of communication to fall within the scope of the First and Fourteenth Amendments". In deciding whether particular conduct possesses sufficient communicative elements to bring the First Amendment into play, the court asked whether "an intent to convey a particularized message was present, and [whether] the likelihood was great that the message would be understood by those who viewed it."

The court found that, "Under the circumstances, Johnson's burning of the flag constituted expressive conduct, permitting him to invoke the First Amendment... Occurring as it did at the end of a demonstration coinciding with the Republican National Convention, the expressive, overtly political nature of the conduct was both intentional and overwhelmingly apparent." The court concluded that, while "the government generally has a freer hand in restricting expressive conduct than it has in restricting the written or spoken word," it may not "proscribe particular conduct because it has expressive elements."

From the wiki article on Texas v. Johnson

Teo, to what extent would you imbue "popping someone in the jaw" with communicative intent? AFAIK it's a felony in most jurisdictions, but maybe your razor sharp legal mind could shed some light on this Oh So Difficult and arcane and subtle distinction.

[CapSmashy]

A pop in the jaw is simple assault/disorderly conduct. Ticket and a minor fine in 90% of the cases. Unless you're drunk. Then they can tag on public intox and take you in for the night.

To kick it up to felony level, you'd have to introduce a level of physical savagery consisting of multiple, purposeful blows or introduce a weapon into the mix.

And speaking for myself going on Teo's words, a pop in the jaw is every bit as communicative as burning a flag. Neither will do anything to advance a message in a positive manner.

[blyslv]

A pop in the jaw is simple assault/disorderly conduct. Ticket and a minor fine in 90% of the cases. Unless you're drunk. Then they can tag on public intox and take you in for the night.

To kick it up to felony level, you'd have to introduce a level of physical savagery consisting of multiple, purposeful blows or introduce a weapon into the mix.

And speaking for myself going on Teo's words, a pop in the jaw is every bit as communicative as burning a flag. Neither will do anything to advance a message in a positive manner.

thanks for the clarification. Maybe if you broke a jaw, it could get bumped up.

In any event, I was responding to Teo del Fuego's attitude of superiority simply because he practices law. I mean big whoop.

"Advancing a message in a positive manner" There's nothing wrong with that. The real challenge with flag burning as an art project is making it interesting and compelling. I think that would be difficult. I also think it would be MORE difficult to make popping someone in the jaw an interesting and compelling art project.

In any event Teo misstated the law with respect to flag burning, and he did so in a way that was rude and belittling.