Freedom of speech over rides Stolen Valor act ...Are you kidding me?????.....

A federal law making it a crime to lie about receiving the Medal of Honor or other military decorations violates freedom of speech, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

http://www.firstamendmentcoalition.o...onor-no-crime/

To lie about serving you country and brag you got an award as well... really really boils my blood and burns my biscuits..If you want the HONOR then get off your lazy ass and earn it..This is so much different the getting a medal for track and field or arts and crafts and to lie and say you are a Medal of Honor recipient is beyond wrong to me

Can someone PLEASE explain to me how or why this is even close to right?
I am all for freedom of speech and freedom of thought and I understand that lying unless under oath or to law enforcers is not a crime but I strongly believe this should fall under those exceptions as well....


Thoughts anyone.....

Kinda sucks, don't it?

Spacemtn
AustinModStaff

It's the ninth circuit, they're not like a real court of appeals...

It's the ninth circuit, they're not like a real court of appeals... Originally Posted by governmentguru

Some of the decisions that come out of there are just crazy and lack common sense, let alone consitutional interpretation.

This is a direct slap in the face to those that have served and earned the right to wear those awards.

Not to mention that most of these men, unlike the gentleman busted, use this information to lure women in under false pretense.

I'll play devil's advocate. While it is dispicable, who REALLY gets hurt here. There is no victim. Should we also jail those who lie to girl in bars in an attempt to get laid. How about guys who lie to their wife when they ask "Does my ass look fat in these pants?" Lying isn't a crime. Unless its during an official investigation and you're under oath. The prohibition against lying has its roots in the Ten Commandments. You could argue that a law against lying would violate the tenet of separation of church and state.

Shouldn't the government have better things to do than getting involved in a he said/she said when there really is no victim

It's the right ruling. Barring speech that is likely to cause immediate harm (the classic yelling fire in a crowded building test), all speech is free. While someone may say things that "boil your blood", it is just as likely you are going to say things that boil someone elses blood... that is the essence of free speech.

People get really caught up in free speech when it offends them, but have no problem with it when it works to their advantage.

There are times when its illegal to lie and say you’re one thing when you’re not. I thought freedom of speech came with laws regulating incitement, sedition, defamation, slander and libel, blasphemy, the expression of racial hatred, and conspiracy

People can be verbally and legally crucified for things like "racial hate speech", you can't call someone and harass someone. You can’t impersonate another person. You can’t say, “I’m a police officer” to get information, or any other things of that nature . None of that speech technically "harms" anyone either, but its not accepted. So why the double standard on this???

It's a slippery slope.

You outlaw lying about having a Medal of Honor because it's disrespectful to those who rightly earned one.

Then maybe you ban lying about a dead soldier because it's disrespectful.

Maybe you make it illegal to lie about the actions of a living soldier. Sound good until you realize that William Calley, for instance, WAS a babykiller. Suppose someone comes out with the charge that he was a babykiller. They could charge you with a crime for lying about you and throw you in jail until you can prove it.

Then how about making it a crime to lie about the commander in chief? Is he a member of the armed forces? Do you jail someone for claiming Obama wasn't born in the US? How about claiming Nixon conspired to bug the Watergate hotel? Or to accuse Clinton of getting a blowjob from an intern?

Maybe throw in lying about members of congress or other government officials?

How about lying about the police? Shall we make that illegal? Do we want to let them arrest you for lying about police any time you complain about what the cops do? They're already prosecuting people for videotaping the police when they abuse someone.

If you don't have a legal right to lie, you don't have a legal right to tell the truth, either.

By the way, I don't agree with the "hate speech" laws either. It's entirely too easy to define anything you don't agree with as "hate speech." If we had had hate speech laws in the 1960's, you can bet they would have used them against civil rights activists in the Mississippi. You could easily label the birthers as racists. They've already classified people who want to stop illegal immigration as racist hate mongers.

This is what makes our freedoms so precious. While it makes our blood boil when asshats like this do these things that disrespect our Heros, those are the very freedoms that those Heros fought and in many cases gave their lives to preserve.

Spacemtn
AustinModStaff

I thought freedom of speech came with laws regulating incitement, sedition, defamation, slander and libel, blasphemy, the expression of racial hatred, and conspiracy Originally Posted by VictoriaLyn

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Read that again. Write it down and send it to all of your congress critters.

"Congress shall make no law...".

So technically any laws in your list are unconstitutional. In the past, the courts used the acid test of did the speech cause harm to justify ignoring the Constitution. Unfortunately that slippery slope (perfect phrase GG) has allowed an ever increasing list of unconstitutional laws. The current "trend" is to outlaw any speech that might harm, challenge, or inconvenience the gang in power. Note that this is a bipartisan "trend".

Currently, IMO, the right to freedom of speech is in critical condition, on life support, and expected to become a memory any time now.

We really are at the point of "use it or lose it".

"Congress shall make no law...".

Has anyone noticed our freedoms slowly swinking? By 2012 we will have even fewer.

Well put rCoder.

There was a Penn and Teller Bullshit episode about College's where they discussed this. People are up in arms when something offends them and it should be banned speech. There is no right to avoid being offended by someone else's free speech.

If you don't like what someone else is saying... walk away, change the channel, or change the page. Or better yet, listen for a little bit to see if there is anything insightful. It's always good to listen to opposing views.

If you don't like what someone else is saying... walk away, change the channel, or change the page. Or better yet, listen for a little bit to see if there is anything insightful. It's always good to listen to opposing views. Originally Posted by AustinBusinessTraveler

Dont get me wrong I truly believe in the above statement...It has been instilled into my little ones...

I was frustrated when I made my original post which is less about free speech but more of the fact that it is ok to disrespect those who put their lives on the line ...They already get crapped on enough and to me what the man did was a huge slap in the face and a kick in the balls.
If one is caught passing themselves off as a police officer you get in big trouble I just think it should be the same when it comes to our soldiers

Fortunately for liberty, the Ninth Circuit is more often than not reversed on appeal to the Supremes....at least before Elena and Sonia took their perches there.

The dedicated valor thieves will anyway wish they had been merely prosecuted after an ad hoc committee of SEALs or Rangers or Recon Marines, etc., help them get their minds right. After all, the correctives administered to faux SEALs by the real ones are really, when all is said and done, a form of protected speech. If not, it should be.

I'm not allowed to wear my dress blues (as if I could button them) since I never saw the elephant. But I wonder if some gyrene corrections committee would let me join them on unofficial patrol. In civvies.

You're reading the statute wrong. It's not illegal to say you are a cop, a nurse, a doctor, whatever... it IS illegal to impersonate one in the course of the duties.

In other words as long as their is no reason of imminent harm (i.e. a guy just trying to get laid by saying he's a doctor / cop and won the MOH to get laid), you can say whatever you want. Impersonating a cop in the line of duty is a crime. Impersonating a Dr in the course of their duties is a crime. Why? There becomes a risk of imminent harm.