Audio: Mike Gallagher interviews the vet who cut down the Mexican flag
posted at 10:36 am on October 3, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Many thanks to Mike’s producer for passing this along. Yes, it’s really him. The lingering question: Why’d he go the vigilante route instead of calling the cops?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Why would he call the cops?
lilyjac on October 3, 2007 at 10:48 AM
Yeah, in most cases, vigilantism is wrong. (I still think Bernie Getz was right tho)
I’m suprised no one called authorities during the day when all the hubbub about this was surfacing. But sometimes we act with our hearts, not our minds. This guy was clearly moved to act.
I say more power to him.
JetBoy on October 3, 2007 at 10:50 AM
The cops are hamstrung by political correctness. It’s good to see someone exercise their moral outrage once in a while, whether it’s legal and appropriate or not.
pistolero on October 3, 2007 at 10:50 AM
Sounds like the cops were there, or had at least been called/consulted. Jim the Army Vet said “they didn’t know what to do” or something along those lines. Law enforcement simply wasn’t sure of the best way to enforce the law, and Jim the Vet got tired of waiting.
aero on October 3, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Good question, AP. It would have been interesting to see whether the local cops would have enforced the law and written the flag flyer a ticket.
In reality, though, either the cops wouldn’t even know it is a violation of the law or they would just choose to ignore it.
BTW, welcome back, AP. Hope you’re feeling better.
BacaDog on October 3, 2007 at 10:51 AM
I am proud that he did it. Go Jim Broussard!
I had to brush my teeth 3 times to get the red meaty chunks out…
I think he did what we all wanted to do. Where can I contribute to his near-certain legal fund.
dc84123 on October 3, 2007 at 10:54 AM
Nevada law doesn’t seem to be clear on displaying the flag, but it says something of desecration:
…it also occurs (desecration) whenever someone “publicly or willfully mutilates, tramples upon, or who tears down or willfully and maliciously removes while owned by others , or defames, slanders, or speaks evilly or in a contemptuous manner of or otherwise defaces or defiles any of the flags, or ensign, which are public or private property.”
But even then, there’s no specific penalty….
JetBoy on October 3, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Because it’s illegal to fly any other flag above the American flag.
Well, too bad for Jim the Vet, then. Cutting down people’s property and waving around a Rambo knife makes us look like nuts by association.
Allahpundit on October 3, 2007 at 11:01 AM
Remember the Alamo!!!
ColdBore76 on October 3, 2007 at 11:01 AM
What would the police do? He did what was needed. The looks on the bystanders, priceless.
I wonder what would happen if we went down to Mexico and hoisted the American flag over the Mexican flag. Think anyone would care?
tarpon on October 3, 2007 at 11:04 AM
is it really illegal to fly another flag over the american one? i had no idea…guess i better take down the giant pot flag i have over my stars and stripes…
oh wait, i live in NY, no one gives a sh*t
ernesto on October 3, 2007 at 11:07 AM
Allah, it was not a Rambo knife, it was a military K-Bar knife, so the inflammatory use of such a description of the name is misplaced.. The flag was obviously raised to offend. During this feed, I find Mr. Broussard very lucid, intelligent and mature. As for your contention that he makes us look like nuts,nothing could be farther from the truth. Would you hold this opinion were the flag a Confederate battle flag? Perhaps, you would. Whatever the case, I support what he did.
MNDavenotPC on October 3, 2007 at 11:15 AM
This was not extreme, but thoroughly symbolic of the how far Americans have been pushed to react. The bar owner would have us believe, that it was an innocent mistake, and none of his patrons encouraged him to fly the flag in that manner. Everything doesn’t boil down to image, AP.
captivated_dem on October 3, 2007 at 11:18 AM
Like the cops would have done anything? They wouldn’t even have come out to the scene, get real.
Jim’s patriotism makes me proud to be an American. I’ll contribute to his defense fund if he is prosecuted.
infidel4life on October 3, 2007 at 11:19 AM
Makes us look nuts to who? He doesn’t look like a nut to me. He looks like a nut to the left maybe, or to the illegals maybe. Not my constituency. Go Vet!
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 11:22 AM
If the cops haven’t aready taken care of this, then taking care of this kind of business shouldn’t require the cops.
Lawrence on October 3, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Right on. Looks like someone who is feed up with all this crap going on in this country. If you disrespect the flag you should be prepared for the consequences.
Wade on October 3, 2007 at 11:27 AM
infidel4life on October 3, 2007 at 11:19 AM
Thank God there are still good Americans out there like Jim. In most instances this would be a non-matter. I can’t imagine the cops doing anything about this even if they were called to the scene.
I too, will contribute to Jim’s defense fund if they try to prosecute him over this matter.
Scorched_Earth on October 3, 2007 at 11:30 AM
Didn’t he answer that question? He said the local cops didn’t know what to do, which certainly implies he talked to some.
Esthier on October 3, 2007 at 11:34 AM
Excuse me? I can offend a flag by speaking evilly of it? That is just plumb silly.
Sue on October 3, 2007 at 11:35 AM
Ramos and Compean come to mind.
fogw on October 3, 2007 at 11:37 AM
Hi. I’m nutty. Nice to meet you.
Sue on October 3, 2007 at 11:38 AM
So, utter contempt for property rights and jingoistic reverence for the flying of one piece of cloth over another piece of cloth–both of which, it should be noted, belong to the owner, who should be able to do with them as he pleases, ridiculous flag ordinances aside–are the new liberty?
Good to know.
re: the point about Confederate flags–
The flying, above the American flag, of any one of the flags commonly associated with the Confederate States of America, whether the Confederate Naval Jack, the Battle Flag of the Confederacy, etc., would also contravene the “flag laws,” if you will.
Here’s a thought: allow people to fly whatever flag they want at whatever position they want, and to do what they please with a flag, which is, after all, a piece of private property, whose use should not be controlled by the government.
tad on October 3, 2007 at 11:41 AM
I won’t argue whether or not it makes us look bad, but this is supposed to be why we have law enforcement in the first place.
If police do not do their jobs and enforce the law, other citizens will once they can no longer take it. The government is supposed to make this a non issue. We don’t really want a bunch of real life Batmans running around.
Esthier on October 3, 2007 at 11:41 AM
Where did this occur?
I definitely support him. Waiting for the PC-Hamstrung-cops to arrive, stand there, and wallow was not the answer.
I just can’t stand it when he says “irregardless”.
_FatOldguY
Fogpig on October 3, 2007 at 11:41 AM
Why?
Because in the times we are living the authorities do more to protect the anti American sentiment of those invading our nation than they do to protect the nation. There will be more and more of this type of action being taken by private citizens defending the Nation.
Viper1 on October 3, 2007 at 11:43 AM
C’mon, AP. It was a relatively harmless bit of vigilantism, and Jim the Vet is prepared to take the consequences for his actions. Yes, the giganto knife is a bit over-the-top, but this guy was no more nuts than the Minutemen who volunteer to protect the borders. It’s not like he threatened the bystanders with the knife or ripped his shirt open to beat his chest and roar like a silverback gorilla.
aero on October 3, 2007 at 11:46 AM
That’s ok with me.
I am already considered a nativist, a bigot, a racist and un-American so what’s one more label.
Way to go this is truly Power to the people.
Mojack420 on October 3, 2007 at 11:48 AM
Don’t forget fascist, homophobic, Christonazi.
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 11:51 AM
I didn’t know it was actually illegal either. All I knew was that respect for our country and those who have served this country (in any capacity) dictated that the American flag fly above all others on US soil. That should be sufficient for any citizen of this country. Making it illegal to do otherwise should be completely unnecessary. Apparently its not.
On another note, my two sons learned the proper way to handle and display the US flag (along with state and other flags) in Cub Scouts. Sadly, its not something that’s deemed necessary to learn in elementary school (or any public school) any more.
taznar on October 3, 2007 at 11:51 AM
I suggest he get an American Freedom Medal!
Tim Burton on October 3, 2007 at 11:53 AM
I approve wholeheartedly of the behavior of the Veteran. I would probably do likewise.
dogsoldier on October 3, 2007 at 11:56 AM
AP, they think we’re nuts for wanting our borders enforced. The good opinion of the open borders crowd won’t be given to us as long as we oppose, well, open borders. Honestly, I think the police wouldn’t have done anything. Symbolically, I think what Jim did was very important; there are a lot of frustrated people, as you can see above, who applaud what he did, as long as he faces his consequences. The guys in the bar probably had a good laugh when they put the flags up like that..something along the lines of ‘F*** you, gringos’. Jim’s act will hopefully convey that while our government may let illegals get away with murder, the citizens of America are getting very angry and want something done about enforcing the laws of this country. I would hope the government will notice this and act on it before this type incident becomes more common, or worse, escalates. However, knowing our government, they’ll charge him with a hate crime and throw him in jail for 20 years.
austinnelly on October 3, 2007 at 11:57 AM
When did a revered symbol of past and present life sacrifice, turn into just a piece of cloth?
captivated_dem on October 3, 2007 at 11:57 AM
Just the attitude that has us where we are today, few men to stand up for what is right. The Vet did exactly what I would have done. The guy who put up the flags knew exactly what he was doing and showed that his loyalty lies with mexico and those from there who are in the U.S. illegally and thumb their nose at the country they are in. If we had more men like this vet doing what NEEDS to be done, there would not be the problems we are having from $#%&hole countries like Mexico. Mexico has lived next to the big hammer for a long time and still cannot get their act straight, they are not our friend and it is far past time to treat them as what they are and what this guy showed they are…our enemy
jed58 on October 3, 2007 at 12:02 PM
The sounds you hear above are of the great ship of state, the USS America, slowly but inexorably changing course. Get out of the way.
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 12:02 PM
When did the American people cede to the office of government, against whose tyrannical aspirations the Founding Fathers warned us, the power to choose what you or I have to revere and for what reasons and on what basis we have to do so?
Thought-police much?
tad on October 3, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Doh I knew i forgot something better update my business cards.
Mojack420 on October 3, 2007 at 12:08 PM
tad on October 3, 2007 at 11:41 AM
MNDavenotPC on October 3, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Tad, I get your point. But you’re a little off-base. The flag-placement thing is apparently a federal law. If you feel it’s wrong or excessively restrictive, then contact your elected federal officials and work to get the law changed. Until then, the law’s the law, and we “cede” this particular power to the people we elect to office and can vote out of office. It’s not tyranny in action here, tad—it’s democracy. The majority of people apparently approved of laws protecting the nation’s symbols at the time they were passed. I would guess that the majority still support such laws, but I could be wrong. If I am, then I’m sure there will be a massive movement soon to get those laws repealed, yes?
And besides, clearly the “tyrannical” government had no intention whatsoever of enforcing its own law in this case. As usual.
aero on October 3, 2007 at 12:16 PM
Yes. Have heard this since the Vietnam War. But since then, our “rights” have been not only expanded to include every kind of public perversion (Folsom St. Public Sex Fair), but have led us directly to the point of political correctness and moral relativism that we find ourselves in today. Too many people not only don’t know the difference between right and wrong, but don’t get the question. This is the end-point, which we have now reached, of your view of unlimited rights without community standards. I should also point out that this is an example of the community setting/enforcing standards, not the gov’t., (except in a passive way by having unenforced statutes on the books).
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 12:18 PM
If some liberal had cut down a conservative’s flag you guys would be screaming about how unhinged they are. It wasn’t his property. He had no right to do it.
Allahpundit on October 3, 2007 at 12:19 PM
The heck with Rudy McRomney and Fred the fake!
Jim Broussard! for president!
csdeven on October 3, 2007 at 12:24 PM
A conservative would never had done that.
csdeven on October 3, 2007 at 12:25 PM
Yes. Conservatives are right, liberals are wrong. Right and wrong. A new, yet old concept.
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 12:27 PM
Do you have property rights when you refuse to pay taxes? Yes or no?
A term like ‘jingoistic’ is used when an author doesn’t believe in respect for his nation and those who fought to keep her free.
Well, Tad, your “thought” violates U.S. law and as a symbol of our nation it IS controlled by U.S. laws. See link below…
http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/title4/chapter1_.html
Don’t like the law, go ahead and try and change it. Good luck with all of that…
eanax on October 3, 2007 at 12:29 PM
That’s probably true–I admit to having a double-standard here. I would have a very different reaction to a liberal cutting down a conservative’s flag because the motivations would be exactly the opposite of Jim’s motivations, and I would find those motivations offensive and harmful to our society. The action itself is the same, though, and it is inconsistent for a self-proclaimed supporter of the rule of law to want prosecution of one and not the other.
It’s also true that the flag was not his property and he had no right to take it. But he’s calmly and reasonably prepared to take the consequences for his actions should the owner of the flag choose to press charges. Just like a protester at a political rally, he was willing to risk getting arrested for his actions—a type of civil disobedience, I suppose you could call it. I actually think he should be punished for the theft because I am a supporter of the rule of law. But I also support his intentions and the symbolic impact of what he did.
aero on October 3, 2007 at 12:34 PM
The libs have been able to re-define seeing right and wrong as involving a double-standard, and therefore inadmissable. I think there is only one standard here. You can’t fly another nation’s flag over ours. That’s the standard, and it applies to all.
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 12:39 PM
And there are individuals who don’t. Your point?
View it as you wish, but don’t force others to share your point of view.
Does there really need to be a law dictating the private use of a private piece of property?
Were this nation’s founders, upon whose beliefs the ideological underpinnings of this nation rests, more interested in mere symbols or, more likely, in the actual freedoms–to be free of the contraints of government, to be allowed live as one so chooses, to have the right to one’s private property and the fruit of one’s labor–that imbue those very symbols with their meaning?
If, as you seem to contend, the founders belived that the mere piece of cloth we call the American flag, whose original version, that of the thirteen stars, was adopted on the 14th of June 1777, was to be revered, why did those same men fail to delineate any guidelines of official flag use, or proscriptions against the descretion of the flag?
The United States Flag Code was devised only in 1923, not becoming public law until the 22nd of December 1942.
Do your beliefs accord with those of the Founding Fathers, or, as appears to be more likely, with the relatively recent innovations of a bunch of flag “activists” who want the flag to be a “living, breathing” symbol whose meaning changes over time?
tad on October 3, 2007 at 12:42 PM
This is our NATION’s flag, AP, not some “conservative’s flag”.
You DO NOT display another nation’s flag above our nation’s flag (anywhere) and especially not on a PUBLIC street in front of a business that is open to the PUBLIC in a nation that gives immigrants the opportunity to realize their dreams because of the sacrifice of those who fought to make and keep her free.
I don’t think that’s too much to ask, do you?
eanax on October 3, 2007 at 12:43 PM
I didn’t know the American flag was conservative or liberal, I have seen retarded moonbats disgrace my nations flag more times then not. This is not about conservative liberal its about my nation being undercut by illegals from another nation and their supporters who think they can do what ever they want . News flash ya can’t and there are consequences for your actions.
what the bar owner got back the flag that means the most to him .
Mojack420 on October 3, 2007 at 12:45 PM
Easy to say that when you have left blood on the enemy’s soil to protect that flag.
Wade on October 3, 2007 at 12:46 PM
Knives, other than those used specifically for eating vegan food, are dangerous instruments of the patriarch, should be banned, and are not owned by good liberals. A good liberal would sue.
Let’s get real: Liberals would not cut down a conservative’s flag because of fear. It’s no different than why people refuse to criticize militant Islam.
Jason, Gallagher’s producer, hits another homerun. Thanks for the audio.
ScottMcC on October 3, 2007 at 12:47 PM
No…..the mexican had no right to display the flags the way he did.You seem to be hung up on this “private property” kick.It was a public display AND an illegal one at that.
As for liberals cutting down conservative flags, well you must not remember how upset the libs got when America went into patriotic over-drive after 9/11 and flags flew from just about every house in America. Or how about the stink they made when some Fox news people started wearing American flag pins on their lapels?
This American vet did not break the law, he enforced it. There are still quite a few Americans that see the flag as a lot more than a piece of cloth with pretty stars and stripes. It is not about the cloth, it is about the country and all she stands for. Little by little her uniqueness is being torn away.
What strikes me is that even one American would find fault with what this vet did. More striking is that only one American showed up to take the mexican flag down.
I’m sure you libertarians will rejoice when this guy is hauled before a judge. Won’t that be great?!?
Talon on October 3, 2007 at 12:50 PM
I agree. But Jim the Vet was not vested with the authority to enforce that standard, so he broke the law too. His patriotic motivation for doing it mitigates the situation somewhat, and I’m glad he made the choice he did, but he did break the law and will have to pay a price if the flag’s owner chooses to press charges.
The double-standard applies in my opinion because I would indeed be livid about the exact same act (cutting down another person’s flag on private property and taking it) if done by a liberal anti-American war protester or someone similar. I would want that person prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, while I’m perfectly willing to forgive Jim Broussard for the same act. They would have broken the same law in the exact same way. The only difference is motivation. I would similarly be less likely to want to punish a woman for killing an abusive husband in self-defense than I would want to punish a woman who killed her husband for his life insurance payout. Yes, there’s a difference. But technically, killing is killing and theft is theft. It is a double standard to apply different punishments based on the perpetrator’s motivation. I’m not saying it’s wrong to apply different punishments, just that it is a double standard–two standards applied to the same crime. I’ll own up to having a double standard in this case because I believe it is justifiable.
aero on October 3, 2007 at 12:52 PM
So in this case you are saying a “conservative” cut down and saved his flag, the American flag, and left the flag of a “liberal”, the mexican flag, there on the ground….I already knew that.
jed58 on October 3, 2007 at 12:56 PM
As a Veteran, I agree with what he did. Although I think had it been me, I would have just removed the Mexican flag and hoisted the stars and strips back up.
That’s what I would like to think I would do. Had I really been there, who knows!
Masscon on October 3, 2007 at 1:00 PM
LOL! Sarcasm, right?
Like calling the cops has worked in the past? Funny.
We need ALL AMERICANS to go vigilante in ripping these flags off the poles. It’s absolutely shocking that ANY of these incidents go more than 60 seconds with no response from American citizens.
Gregor on October 3, 2007 at 1:00 PM
A vigilante is one who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into one’s own hands. When law enforcement refuses to act and you are thereby forced to act, in this case to stop a crime with the U.S. flag, you are not a vigilante but a citizen acting in the right. Much like a citizens arrest
jed58 on October 3, 2007 at 1:02 PM
Could the local police enforce federal law? It is federal law that dictates that the American flag shall fly above all other flags.
Then again, maybe there is a local law mirroring the federal statutes.
In any event, he should have first called the police to file a complaint. Only after exhausting the usual means, should he have then decided to cut it down. As much as I agree with the sentiment this man felt at his disgust over a Mexican flag flying over our flag, I think we shouldn’t break the law to enforce the law.
Weebork on October 3, 2007 at 1:02 PM
First, they’d have to be trespassing to get to my Aegis-class sized American Flag.
Second, you’d never catch me flying another flag above the American flag.
…..
Did my roomate in college have no right to break the window of a parked car on a sunny 98 degree day to save the crying baby the mom left behind? Probably not. Was it the right thing to do? Most definitely.
desertdweller on October 3, 2007 at 1:03 PM
I’d really like to see some “liberal” reaction to this guy and what he did. AP seems to think that it’s somehow a bad thing that ol’ Jim here might come to represent the right, or conservatives. Maybe he looks too “back-woodsy” or “redneck”?
Does anyone know if the Left has made any comments on this?
JetBoy on October 3, 2007 at 1:04 PM
PLEASE! Give me a friggin break! That sounds so much like something Tim Robbins would say it’s pathetic.
Let’s all not defend ourselves because the world will think bad of us. BOO HOO!
Gag!
Gregor on October 3, 2007 at 1:04 PM
No, Mr. Broussard did break the law. He essentially stole someone else’s property by taking the flag and refusing to give it back without a fight. He didn’t correct the placement of the flags or haul the bar owner down to the police station to demand his arrest. What he did was more of an act of civil disobedience, not a citizen’s arrest.
aero on October 3, 2007 at 1:07 PM
Are we primarily talking about removing someone else’s flag, in which case the “double-standard” idea might apply. Or, are we talking about the way in which the flags were displayed? If the Am. flag was flying on the top, there would have been no issue, and no double-standard to worry about. Am I missing something here?
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 1:08 PM
It’s our friggin COUNTRY! What’s wrong with you? The Mexican flag has absolutely ZERO business flying on U.S. soil.
Gregor on October 3, 2007 at 1:10 PM
Yeah, I think we’re talking about two different things. I’m talking about the act of removing another person’s flag, and you’re talking about the flags’ placement, right? I think we actually agree on the main points.
aero on October 3, 2007 at 1:12 PM
A Great Democrat talks about soldiers and the Flag!
Wade on October 3, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Here are some other gems from the United States flag code, whose rules include, among other things, the following bits of flag minutia, of which protectors of flag freedom should be aware:
-The flag should not be used as “wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery”,[1] or for covering a speaker’s desk, draping a platform, or for any decoration in general (exception for coffins). Bunting of blue, white and red stripes is available for these purposes. The blue stripe of the bunting should be on the top.
-The flag should never be used for any advertising purpose. It should not be embroidered, printed, or otherwise impressed on such articles as cushions, handkerchiefs, napkins, boxes, or anything intended to be discarded after temporary use. Advertising signs should not be attached to the staff or halyard.
-The flag should never have placed on it, or attached to it, any mark, insignia, letter, word, number, figure, or drawing of any kind.
-The flag should not be draped over the hood, top, sides, or back of a vehicle, railroad train, or boat.
-It should be illuminated if displayed at night.
So, to recap, if you’ve ever worn a piece of clothing with a flag on it; bought anything with a flag on it or with a word near it; written a word beside the flag; put a flag on your car; or flown an unilluminated flag at night; this nation’s amazing flag laws have suffered an egregious violation courtesy of your actions, which should, of course, result in your being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
It’s on the books, right?
tad on October 3, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Sometimes I have a hard time trying to figure Hot Air out.
Some months ago, I got into it with Bryan, who seems to support smoking pot. Now, you seem to believe that it’s ok to flagrantly disrespect the Flag of the United States of America.
You’ve clicked onto Zombietime. We aren’t screaming about what “they” do. We know they are unhinged. We know they Spit on the very freedom that I, as a United States Marine, defend for them.
Frankly, it is agains the Law to do what that bar did.
Mazztek on October 3, 2007 at 1:16 PM
Sure they can they do it all the time especially in Californian when local police agency’s aid the DEA with raids on medical MJ clubs. This is in effect enforcing federal drug laws over the state law.
And I am sick and tired of local police agencies and the idiots who pander to these illegal and illegal supporting tools saying “It’s not our job to enforce fed laws.”
And where is this ever present Mexican machismo you see at the pro illegal rallies?? This Man said it pretty clear for all to hear {maybe not understand if you don’t speak English }” You want this flag back your going to have to fight me for it “. And yet not one had the stones to take him up on it.
Mojack420 on October 3, 2007 at 1:17 PM
It can fly on U.S. soil just like any other flag can as long as its beneath the American flag. And if it’s not, then call the cops and have them write whoever’s flying it above a ticket.
Allahpundit on October 3, 2007 at 1:17 PM
And the more that we are threatened, and the more that we are at risk, and the more difficult the nation’s situation becomes, the more we will enforce the laws. Yes, it’s part of fighting back. The luxury of not having to defend our freedom for most Americans is a thing of the past. Yes, things have changed.
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 1:18 PM
Let’s try this again because apparently I need to explain it seven or eight times so that people understand. Two separate questions:
1. Should the Mexican flag be flown above the American flag?
2. Should private citizens take it upon themselves to forcibly remove others’ property?
Answers: 1. No. 2. No.
Allahpundit on October 3, 2007 at 1:19 PM
Again, tad, if you don’t like the flag laws, take it up with your elected federal officials, not us. Most of us here generally support these rules, which are simply meant to preserve respect for the flag as one of the primary symbols of our country and all it stands for, and most of us probably try to the best of our ability to honor them. You’re barking up the wrong tree here.
aero on October 3, 2007 at 1:21 PM
If somebody insults your wife, do you punch him in the face or call the cops?
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 1:21 PM
Punch him in the face and expect to be sued and/or sent to jail for assault. If you’re willing to do the time, do the crime. But don’t pretend it’s not a crime.
Allahpundit on October 3, 2007 at 1:22 PM
A vigilante is someone who takes the law into their own hands. A big chunk of the Hispanic community is breaking the law every which way but up, and a sizable chunk of those lawbreakers intend to take America for Mexico. We could call them vigilantes too – vigilantes for Mexican Law to supercede American Law.
Meanwhile, politicians want the invasion to succeed so they are not enforcing the law either. The police answer to the politicos or get fired.
The use of the American flag by these enemies of America is not accidental, but a challenge. It is a declaration that they have supplanted America with Mexico. This vet knows clearly what is going on.
Watching this vet made me proud because he chose to fight for his country.
This is not just a guy decided he was better than the local cops. This was a man, a real man, who decided he would not let stand this declaration of the end of America for one minute.
There is a breaking point and that breaking point is the declaration of the end of our nation. If at that point citizens are supposed to sit back and accept the end, it is over anyway.
That vet will not let America die, God Bless him for eternity!
entagor on October 3, 2007 at 1:23 PM
No, Mr. Broussard did break the law. He essentially stole someone else’s property by taking the flag and refusing to give it back without a fight. He didn’t correct the placement of the flags or haul the bar owner down to the police station to demand his arrest. What he did was more of an act of civil disobedience, not a citizen’s arrest.
jed58 on October 3, 2007 at 1:24 PM
The “hauling before the judge,” as you put it, would last for a duration of about five minutes, during which the judge, having heard the facts of the “case,” would order Mr. Defender of Flag Freedom either to purchase a new flag, to be given to individual whose property he ruined, or to reimburse said individual for an amount commensurate with the cost of the destroyed property, i.e., Mexican flag.
And, yes, the enforcment of the rights of private property owners is an occasion for exultation.
tad on October 3, 2007 at 1:25 PM
Well if you are going to take the law into your own hands (since the local Government WILL NOT)there is NO BETTER tool for the job then a KABAR.
If the PEOPLE (Americans) do not start taking responsibility for what is going on inside this country and continue to rely on local and federal authorities to take care of things, then this country will be LOST.
They should just be glad it wasn’t my grandfather that came upon that, the whole bar would be in the hospital.
One Country
One Flag
One God
americaslaststand on October 3, 2007 at 1:25 PM
Who knows? Maybe he’ll be a man too and fight back. And the winner, wins.
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 1:25 PM
Ah, the U.S. Code in question is…
TITLE 4 – FLAG AND SEAL, SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATES
CHAPTER 1 – THE FLAG
Sec. 7. Position and manner of display
“(c) No other flag or pennant should be placed above or, if on the same level, to the right of the flag of the United States of America, except during church services conducted by naval chaplains at sea, when the church pennant may be flown above the flag during church services for the personnel of the Navy. No person shall display the flag of the United Nations or any other national or international flag equal, above, or in a position of superior prominence or honor to, or in place of, the flag of the United States at any place within the United States or any Territory or possession thereof: Provided, That nothing in this section shall make unlawful the continuance of the practice heretofore followed of displaying the flag of the United Nations in a position of superior prominence or honor, and other national flags in positions of equal prominence or honor, with that of the flag of the United States at the headquarters of the United Nations.”
eanax on October 3, 2007 at 1:27 PM
Maybe, or maybe you both go to jail.
Allahpundit on October 3, 2007 at 1:28 PM
Indeed.
aero on October 3, 2007 at 1:29 PM
This is my first law.
I do not advocate overthrowing the Government. I advocate preserving it from others who would overthrow it.
Abraham Lincoln could be called a ‘vigilante’ for some steps he took to preserve the Union.
He is also my hero
entagor on October 3, 2007 at 1:29 PM
GOD BLESS HIM…how about the look on the mex’s face…priceless…and had his hands in his pockets…love it…
areseaoh on October 3, 2007 at 1:29 PM
Video here
Wade on October 3, 2007 at 1:30 PM
1773
It was now early evening and a group of about 200 men disguised as Indians assembled on a near-by hill. Whopping war chants, the crowd marched two-by-two to the wharf, descended upon the three ships and dumped their offending cargos of tea into the harbor waters.
What they did was not legal but it was a loud and clear message. A message so powerful it has been engrained in the founding of our great nation, The same Nation this bar owner and pos disgraced with his act.
Mojack420 on October 3, 2007 at 1:32 PM
The horror!
Thank goodness that the government, when faced with the specter of individuals making choices to put substances into their own bodies, chose to institute prohibition, which, as history has shown, sure did work just dandy for combating the demon rum.
tad on October 3, 2007 at 1:32 PM
I agree. Broussard knows he broke the law—he admits it and calmly accepts that he may face consequences for it. That’s one of the reasons I respect what he did. I regard it as an act of civil disobedience. Because of his willingness to accept personal responsibility for his actions, I really don’t regard him as a nutcase, huge knife notwithstanding.
aero on October 3, 2007 at 1:35 PM
Cheers to Jim the Vet! I have had it with unappreciative scumbags that sneak into this country and then want to show reverence to sh*t hole they came from! They love that Mexican flag so damn much, they should go back to El Stinkhole Grande and fly that rag down there! These illegal, seditious bast**ds keep pushing and pushing, eventually we are going to have enough and all hell is gonna bust loose. I think we may be seeing the first little dribble of all hell breaking free. Where can I donate for the Vet’s defense fund?
clawjockey on October 3, 2007 at 1:37 PM
All right then, make up a list of laws that people should be allowed to ignore just because they feel passionately about them. The left will happily join you in that game.
Allahpundit on October 3, 2007 at 1:38 PM
“Why’d he go the vigilante route instead of calling the cops?”
Sorry for being so ‘intolerant’ but that’s a stoopid question.
The cops are told to ’stand down’ in these cases and in this case, the local authorities ‘didn’t know what to do about it’.
Again, if you want to see our gov’t, (law enforcement, border patrol, etc), bending over backwards to accommodate illegal aliens, just spend some time in Southern California.
God bless you Jim and consider yourself covered.
Christine on October 3, 2007 at 1:39 PM
The marine who said that protects your right to say the childish things you say. Childish because we all could play your part. But you have said nothing in all your comments about how you would protect this country in the face of an onslaught of illegals from Mexico and the imposition of that alien culture, as well as the threats from Islamic terrorism.
Your philosophy is all about defending me from my gov’t. I’m not afraid of the gov’t; I’m afraid of the gov’t not acting, and afraid of people like you who haven’t woken up yet to the threat.
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 1:39 PM
2. Should private citizens take it upon themselves to forcibly remove others’ property?
Again with the “property” thing! Sheesh.
Rope and a piece of cloth – $20
American flag – priceless
Answer to #2 : Should we?No.Will we?Yes
captivated_dem on October 3, 2007 at 1:40 PM
I give the guy props for cutting down the flag. But he loses 50 points for using the made up word “irregardless”. Big on balls – short on brains.
NeoConSnakePlissken on October 3, 2007 at 1:41 PM
This is not about the left, or what they do, or will do, or what they will think about what “we” do. This is about what the right is doing. Leftist criticisms responded to after the war(s).
JiangxiDad on October 3, 2007 at 1:43 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »