Dylan Brewer has been charged with a felony for doing a burnout on top of an LGTBQ flag painted on a street. This is no different than burning an American flag, and is protected speech. see Texas v. Johnson , 491 U.S. 397 (1989).
Categories: Cancel CultureLawfare
11 Comments
Dirty Dingus McGee · February 19, 2024 at 11:38 am
Try “defacing” a BLM display and let me know the results.
W Wilson · February 19, 2024 at 4:33 pm
It happened in Martinez,Ca . The african/soros DA went after the couple that did it.
D · February 19, 2024 at 12:17 pm
As wookie-suited Libertarian as I am, I disagree.
If *you* go out and buy a flag, *you* own it. You can do whatever you want with your property–including burn it.
But the road is everyone’s property. We all have an equal 1/~330,000,000th share of that property, and we can do whatever we want with it as long as we aren’t damaging it or preventing others from the free exercise of using it.
The real crime here is if the government either paid for it, or allowed it.
If they paid for it, they should also be paying for intersections painted with Jesus, Baal, Vishnu, etc…or they shouldn’t be paying for *any* of it.
If they simply “allowed it”, they should have no problems with various religious denominations (and non-religious groups) painting whatever the hell they want in crosswalks–including the non-secular group devoted to the burning of rubber tires…
Divemedic · February 19, 2024 at 2:58 pm
Except for the fact, as you allude to, that the LGTBQ flag is a political statement. The government should not be using public funds to pay for one political statement over the other. If they do so, the people are free to counter that message with one of their own, which is what the young man did here by engaging in political speech in opposition to the message being sent by liberals who happen to be in charge of the government coffers.
To do otherwise would then allow local governments to paint messages on roads like “Vote to Repeal the Second Amendment” or even “Vote for Joe Biden” and then make it illegal for you to deface it.
D · February 19, 2024 at 3:17 pm
Hmm..good point. If the government is illegally promoting a religion, belief, etc…then it should be equally legal to protest it.
Pete · February 20, 2024 at 9:02 am
If we all own the road, why are Leftist protesters allowed to block it with impunity? You already know the answer: Because the Left has power so they can do as they please.
Libertarian seems to mean: Does not seek power. Which just means the ones who do seek power are always going to steamroll you.
Divemedic · February 20, 2024 at 9:27 am
Seeking power in order to safeguard liberty seems to be a better choice than disavowing power and seeing yourself get run over by a legislative truck.
Anonymous · February 21, 2024 at 10:45 am
> Libertarian seems to mean: Does not seek power. Which just means the ones who do seek power are always going to steamroll you.
Libertarian does not mean pacifist. How about: libertarian means does not seek power over others, but power for self-defense is perfectly fine. Early Americans shooting the British army on Lexington green for doing gun confiscation is libertarian-approved.
Divemedic · February 21, 2024 at 3:39 pm
The problem, as I have stated before, is that the Libertarian platform is doomed to failure. The reason for this, is that those who would seek power would use it as a weapon. As the saying goes: “The government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on the enthusiastic support of Paul.”
This is the exact reason why this country has failed. How this fundamental flaw is solved is beyond my understanding.
Anonymous · February 27, 2024 at 2:31 am
Your reasoning has a military analysis underneath it, yes? And your analysis says that 99 non-libertarians will always beat 1 libertarian? This last sentence is not a military fact. Imagine all 100 citizens each had nuclear bombs (and aren’t insane). Then 1 libertarian can stalemate the 99 with the threat of mutually assured destruction, at which point we have peace and liberty and justice for all. Having now shown there exists an endpoint on the other side of the interval, we can squeeze that interval smaller, to using less destructive military techniques (which require lesser amounts of sanity). Merely having enough financial crypto to make tax collection and regulation cost more than it yields is probably sufficient. No tax collection means organized crime (government) can’t pay its enforcers. When defense against taxes gets the details worked out, it’s going to spread like crystallizing a supersaturated solution, because nobody wants to be the only chump paying taxes. The amount of whining by envious commies will drastically increase, but for the first time they can be successfully ignored. At that time the 99 will realize their only common interest is having a “government” to bully people they hate with, but they still won’t be able to defend one.
j · February 20, 2024 at 10:07 am
The hypocritical insanity of the liberal/Marxist, left… Over and over.
Comments are closed.