Interesting where they are now...

[wolf_chatter]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ap-abdul-raufstillplaying

[Stuck in Seattle]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ap-abdul-raufstillplaying
Japan's a good place for him. He's entitled to act on his convictions, fans are entitled to act on theirs.

[wolf_chatter]

Japan's a good place for him. He's entitled to act on his convictions, fans are entitled to act on theirs.

just to bad the people are ignorant and have their heads buried up their asses. I have been in court 1 time in my life (a fix it ticket I refused to pay) and I refused to stand when the judge came in and he brought it up when it was my turn and I explained why I wouldn't stand and he said OK and moved on and delivered a fair judgement. To bad the majority of morons in this country couldn't do the same. Disagree with what he does but realize he has the right and leave it at that. Patriotism shouldn't mean destroying others for the refusal to believe the way you believe about your flag or country or national anthem.

I couldn't care less if someone burns the flag or flies a mexican flag over a US flag. I don't see why a colored piece of cloth are a silly song makes people so damn angry and short sided.

[Slapdad]

just to bad the people are ignorant and have their heads buried up their asses. I have been in court 1 time in my life (a fix it ticket I refused to pay) and I refused to stand when the judge came in and he brought it up when it was my turn and I explained why I wouldn't stand and he said OK and moved on and delivered a fair judgement. To bad the majority of morons in this country couldn't do the same. Disagree with what he does but realize he has the right and leave it at that. Patriotism shouldn't mean destroying others for the refusal to believe the way you believe about your flag or country or national anthem.

I couldn't care less if someone burns the flag or flies a mexican flag over a US flag. I don't see why a colored piece of cloth are a silly song makes people so damn angry and short sided.

So why didn't you stand when the judge came in? I think everyone understood he had a right to do what he did.....just as the fans had a right to boo him about it.

[Packfan11]

just to bad the people are ignorant and have their heads buried up their asses. I have been in court 1 time in my life (a fix it ticket I refused to pay) and I refused to stand when the judge came in and he brought it up when it was my turn and I explained why I wouldn't stand and he said OK and moved on and delivered a fair judgement. To bad the majority of morons in this country couldn't do the same. Disagree with what he does but realize he has the right and leave it at that. Patriotism shouldn't mean destroying others for the refusal to believe the way you believe about your flag or country or national anthem.

I couldn't care less if someone burns the flag or flies a mexican flag over a US flag. I don't see why a colored piece of cloth are a silly song makes people so damn angry and short sided.

The same protections that afford him the right to be unpatriotic, protect me in my right to criticize him for his actions. The same goes for you and your disinterest in protecting our American flag and its symbolism and the people who died to see it where it belongs. I have no problem with that. What I do have problem is a graduate of our Journalism School actually posted something with this many grammatical errors and typos....... :eek:

[wolf_chatter]

So why didn't you stand when the judge came in? I think everyone understood he had a right to do what he did.....just as the fans had a right to boo him about it.

I refuse to stand for any man I do not know. For all I know he is a drunk that beats his wife. I don't believe that because you are judge that people should have to stand when you enter a room is all last I checked we are all created equal. I wouldn't stand for President I didn't care for either.

[wolf_chatter]

The same protections that afford him the right to be unpatriotic, protect me in my right to criticize him for his actions. The same goes for you and your disinterest in protecting our American flag and its symbolism and the people who died to see it where it belongs. I have no problem with that. What I do have problem is a graduate of our Journalism School actually posted something with this many grammatical errors and typos....... :eek:

what I think is wrong is the whussies that bowed down to public pressure and hung him out to dry (owners) He clearly had the talent but was more-or-less black balled due to his stance. I think its funny how everyone says the flag is the enduring symbol of freedom but that only extends to the people that believe exactly as we believe.

As far as the typos and other errors, last I checked I don't recieve a check from S&B so why the hell do I care as long as you get the point.

[Packfan11]

what I think is wrong is the whussies that bowed down to public pressure and hung him out to dry (owners) He clearly had the talent but was more-or-less black balled due to his stance. I think its funny how everyone says the flag is the enduring symbol of freedom but that only extends to the people that believe exactly as we believe.

As far as the typos and other errors, last I checked I don't recieve a check from S&B so why the hell do I care as long as you get the point.

That's wierd. I've seen you stand and put your hand over your heart at basketball games. What's changed in you????

[wolf_chatter]

That's wierd. I've seen you stand and put your hand over your heart at basketball games. What's changed in you????

what i said was I think its sad the people risk losing everything for something as trivial as standing for an anthem or flying a different flag.

I choose to do it because I don't think there is anything wrong with being proud of your country. I love the USA and truly think it is the greatest country on the planet but we have some issues and I don't mind pointing them out.

What I also don't mind one bit is another American excercising their right to not stand for the national anthem. How does it effect my life? How does it cause pain or suffering? It doesn't so why get mad?

[wolfin1]

I have mixed feelings about ritual and other social conventions of the sort. Many (if not most) are forms of social control. Standing and putting your hand over your heart for the Pledge of allegiance or playing the national anthem is something that should be done but (I'm patriotic) but I understand why someone wouldn't (as a form of political or other belief protest). Bowing your head in prayer during an invocation for a non-religious yet formal event (something I won't do). I would stand for a Judge though, its a common courtesy for the position not the realtative worth of the person holding it.

[wolf_chatter]

I have mixed feelings about ritual and other social conventions of the sort. Many (if not most) are forms of social control. Standing and putting your hand over your heart for the Pledge of allegiance or playing the national anthem is something that should be done but (I'm patriotic) but I understand why someone wouldn't (as a form of political or other belief protest). Bowing your head in prayer during an invocation for a non-religious yet formal event (something I won't do). I would stand for a Judge though, its a common courtesy for the position not the realtative worth of the person holding it.

But I leave the Under God part out just like it was originally written. I will however not bow my head during a prayer.

[wolfin1]

But I leave the Under God part out just like it was originally written. I will however not bow my head during a prayer.

Kind of funny, I always look around to see how doesn't and give them a nod if they choose to make eye contact.

[Stuck in Seattle]

what I think is wrong is the whussies that bowed down to public pressure and hung him out to dry (owners) He clearly had the talent but was more-or-less black balled due to his stance. I think its funny how everyone says the flag is the enduring symbol of freedom but that only extends to the people that believe exactly as we believe.

As far as the typos and other errors, last I checked I don't recieve a check from S&B so why the hell do I care as long as you get the point.
They aren't whussies. They are business men and he made himself a business liability. With freedom comes responsibility for you actions and consequences for the same. As PF 11 wrote, you admire his freedom and loathe that of the fan and the employer. He made a choice and he seems happy with it. The fans made theirs and are quite happy with it as well.

I stand for judges and I would stand for a president I don't support. If I was not supportive of some government policies, I might speak up about it. But I wouldn't stop standing for the pledge or refuse to stand for the anthem. We are one people. With all the flaws and disagreements about a variety of things, we should unite behind those things that bind us. Respect the institutions that serve and protect us. And if you can't accept that your free to do so. And if that comes with a cost that's the price of freedom and having choices. There have been plenty of countries that would have had him shot or imprisoned. He suffered no official sanction here in the country he loathes.

[wolfin1]

"As in geology, so in social institutions, we may discover the causes of all past changes in the present invariable order of society. "

Henry David Thoreau

[Stuck in Seattle]

"As in geology, so in social institutions, we may discover the causes of all past changes in the present invariable order of society. "

Henry David Thoreau
he also said:

"'That government is best which governs not at all;' and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have."

He was an anarchist thus a moron. He definitely was right in some of his political stands, and I've got no problem with civil disobedience as long as it's on point.

Civil disobedience is standing up to authority with a purpose. What did the basketball player accomplish? Nothing. Who did he stand up to? Nobody. He should have gone and protested where it did some good.

[wolfin1]

he also said:

"'That government is best which governs not at all;' and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have."

He was an anarchist thus a moron. He definitely was right in some of his political stands, and I've got no problem with civil disobedience as long as it's on point.

Civil disobedience is standing up to authority with a purpose. What did the basketball player accomplish? Nothing. Who did he stand up to? Nobody. He should have gone and protested where it did some good.

How telling, you say Thoreau was a moron but you agree with him. ;-p Any how, I've been on, in my own abstract way, an history of America intellectual kick...reading a lot on the early Pragmatist and American Behaviorism. I should probably pick up golf.

[wolf_chatter]

he also said:

"'That government is best which governs not at all;' and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have."

He was an anarchist thus a moron. He definitely was right in some of his political stands, and I've got no problem with civil disobedience as long as it's on point.

Civil disobedience is standing up to authority with a purpose. What did the basketball player accomplish? Nothing. Who did he stand up to? Nobody. He should have gone and protested where it did some good.

civil disobedience nor from what I have ever gleened from any interview more than a personal religious statement. He doesn't hate the USA his religion bars him from worshiping another before his God and according to Islam I guess singing the national anthem or saluting the flag would do just that... so what you are saying is it was ok for people to crap on the guy for standing up for his religious beliefs?

I am an atheist and I have no religious / moral grounds given to me by my bible to not salute the flag, say the POA or sing the national anthem, any refusal on my part is most likely political... his however wasn't it was religiously based, therefore all you ignoramuses missed the boat in treating this guy like crap.

[Packfan11]

civil disobedience nor from what I have ever gleened from any interview more than a personal religious statement. He doesn't hate the USA his religion bars him from worshiping another before his God and according to Islam I guess singing the national anthem or saluting the flag would do just that... so what you are saying is it was ok for people to crap on the guy for standing up for his religious beliefs?

I am an atheist and I have no religious / moral grounds given to me by my bible to not salute the flag, say the POA or sing the national anthem, any refusal on my part is most likely political... his however wasn't it was religiously based, therefore all you ignoramuses missed the boat in treating this guy like crap.


INCORRECT:

"National anthem controversy
Abdul-Rauf is perhaps best known for the controversy created when he refused to stand for "The Star-Spangled Banner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Star-Spangled_Banner)" before games[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Abdul-Rauf#cite_note-1), stating that the flag was a symbol of oppression and that the United States had a long history of tyranny. He said that standing to the national anthem would therefore conflict with his Islamic beliefs."

This was taken directly from Wikipedia. It was both his religious belief and equally a political statement. He interpreted his Islamic beliefs differently than any other Muslim that's played/is playing in the NBA. Abdul-Jabbar, Abdur-Rahim, Olajuwon, etc. all stood for the national anthem.

[wolf_chatter]

INCORRECT:

"National anthem controversy
Abdul-Rauf is perhaps best known for the controversy created when he refused to stand for "The Star-Spangled Banner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Star-Spangled_Banner)" before games[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Abdul-Rauf#cite_note-1), stating that the flag was a symbol of oppression and that the United States had a long history of tyranny. He said that standing to the national anthem would therefore conflict with his Islamic beliefs."

This was taken directly from Wikipedia. It was both his religious belief and equally a political statement. He interpreted his Islamic beliefs differently than any other Muslim that's played/is playing in the NBA. Abdul-Jabbar, Abdur-Rahim, Olajuwon, etc. all stood for the national anthem.

Still doesn't dismiss the fact that his interpretation of his religion forbids him from doing what he got in trouble for... plus lets be honest we have had issues in the past and its ok to be called out on them. The US has done some seriously shady stuff in the past and just because it was in the past doesn't mean its excusable and should just be forgotten or glosses over. I just don't understand why anyone else cares what another citizen does or doesn't do.

A true patriot in my book doesn't force others to bend to their will either through force or intimidation... both were used in this case. Its disgusting and Un-American but the teeming masses of idiots responsible for the way he was treated are to ignorant to understand that by doing what they did they crapped on the very anthem / flag they so dearly love.

[Slapdad]

what i said was I think its sad the people risk losing everything for something as trivial as standing for an anthem or flying a different flag.

I choose to do it because I don't think there is anything wrong with being proud of your country. I love the USA and truly think it is the greatest country on the planet but we have some issues and I don't mind pointing them out.

What I also don't mind one bit is another American excercising their right to not stand for the national anthem. How does it effect my life? How does it cause pain or suffering? It doesn't so why get mad?

If it is so trivial, then why not stand for the national anthem? It obviously wasn't trivial to him.....nor was it trivial to those that it offended. If you're going to take a stand on something, don't be surprised when it draws a reaction.

As far as not standing when the judge comes in.....if that's what you feel you have to do, then that is up to you. We are all created equal....but it's what we do after being created that determines whether or not we rise to the a level of respect. You don't have to know someone personally to respect what they've done professionally.

[wolf_chatter]

If it is so trivial, then why not stand for the national anthem? It obviously wasn't trivial to him.....nor was it trivial to those that it offended. If you're going to take a stand on something, don't be surprised when it draws a reaction.

As far as not standing when the judge comes in.....if that's what you feel you have to do, then that is up to you. We are all created equal....but it's what we do after being created that determines whether or not we rise to the a level of respect. You don't have to know someone personally to respect what they've done professionally.

You think the criminals being tried respect the judge? Or the lawyers for that fact. Its a hollow gesture in my book. So I don't do it. If I knew the judge and respected him or her then maybe I would but I doubt it. Picked it up from my dad and grandpa I guess since they were the ones that told me i didn't have to do it.

[Slapdad]

You think the criminals being tried respect the judge? Or the lawyers for that fact. Its a hollow gesture in my book. So I don't do it. If I knew the judge and respected him or her then maybe I would but I doubt it. Picked it up from my dad and grandpa I guess since they were the ones that told me i didn't have to do it.

Maybe the criminals being tried do have respect for the judge...I don't know that they do.....and you can't be sure that they don't. Having committed a crime does not preclude you from respecting someone. I'm sure that there were criminals in there that didn't respect the judge, but honestly, I have very little interest in validating my beliefs by lumping my beliefs in with the beliefs of criminals. You picked it up from your dad and your grandpa? So, it was their idea? THAT is a hollow gesture. From your responses on the Tiger Woods thread, I see that you have no problem respecting him, in a professional capacity, regardless of what he DID do in his personal life, yet you refuse to respect a judge in a professional capacity because you can't be sure that hasn't done bad things in his/her personal life???? I think you just like playing the role of contrarian and love getting a response.

[wolf_chatter]

Maybe the criminals being tried do have respect for the judge...I don't know that they do.....and you can't be sure that they don't. Having committed a crime does not preclude you from respecting someone. I'm sure that there were criminals in there that didn't respect the judge, but honestly, I have very little interest in validating my beliefs by lumping my beliefs in with the beliefs of criminals. You picked it up from your dad and your grandpa? So, it was their idea? THAT is a hollow gesture. From your responses on the Tiger Woods thread, I see that you have no problem respecting him, in a professional capacity, regardless of what he DID do in his personal life, yet you refuse to respect a judge in a professional capacity because you can't be sure that hasn't done bad things in his/her personal life???? I think you just like playing the role of contrarian and love getting a response.

knowing something about them so therefore I do not stand. I wouldn't clap for Tiger either nor would I go out of my way to meet him. Clearly he isn't a great guy but he is by far the best golfer in the world.

As far as picking up the idea from my dad who served 4 years in the Navy during Vietnam and my Grandpa who served almost 5 years in the Army in WWII yes thats exactly who I picked it up from. My dad and grandad where died in the wool, hardcore liberal, union, democrat, atheists and above all where very strict constitutionalist, they believed that flag burning, while not their choice, was protected by the right to free speech.

They believed that a person should not have to stand for another because they are asked to and the reason it came up was my granpa was in a very long and bitter lawsuit against a builder in Missoula, that damn near got him killed in a fire, due to faulty wiring. We went to court a couple times and each time my grandpa and dad refused to stand and they explained why to me and my brother and sister. They never told us not to but they gave us their reason for not doing so which I happen to agree with.

My family argued politics all the time, usually at an extremely highe decible level but that is where I get my beliefs from. I guess that is hollow.

So i guess you don't have any of the same political leanings your parents did? never picked up any political, religious ideas from them? Pretty amazing... because you would be the first person I ever met that didn't.

[Slapdad]

knowing something about them so therefore I do not stand. I wouldn't clap for Tiger either nor would I go out of my way to meet him. Clearly he isn't a great guy but he is by far the best golfer in the world.

As far as picking up the idea from my dad who served 4 years in the Navy during Vietnam and my Grandpa who served almost 5 years in the Army in WWII yes thats exactly who I picked it up from. My dad and grandad where died in the wool, hardcore liberal, union, democrat, atheists and above all where very strict constitutionalist, they believed that flag burning, while not their choice, was protected by the right to free speech.

They believed that a person should not have to stand for another because they are asked to and the reason it came up was my granpa was in a very long and bitter lawsuit against a builder in Missoula, that damn near got him killed in a fire, due to faulty wiring. We went to court a couple times and each time my grandpa and dad refused to stand and they explained why to me and my brother and sister. They never told us not to but they gave us their reason for not doing so which I happen to agree with.

My family argued politics all the time, usually at an extremely highe decible level but that is where I get my beliefs from. I guess that is hollow.

So i guess you don't have any of the same political leanings your parents did? never picked up any political, religious ideas from them? Pretty amazing... because you would be the first person I ever met that didn't.

Of course I picked up some political and religious ideas from my parents.....I never suggested otherwise. I'm talking about a single action that you, as an adult, got the idea to do to show disrespect (it's more than failing to show respect) to a judge while implying that those who do show respect are making a hollow gesture. If you don't see the irony in that, then perhaps we should agree to disagree. If your dad and uncle were in the military, then they undoubtedly HAD to, at some point, show respect for a superior officer who was anything but a nice person. Showing respect does not require a person to know every detail the other. All you accomplished was to, in effect, demand the judge respect your position while you refused to show respect to him.

[Stuck in Seattle]

What has made so many people think that freedom comes without responsibility? It's quite simple.


You have the freedom to act...as does everyone else.
If you act in a way others find offensive, or that violate law or tradition then consequences ensue.
The fact that you don't like those consequences should make you consider your actions. But it's no violation of your rights for others oppose you when they disagree with your behavior.

Responsibility for ones actions and the consequences is part of being an adult. Demanding the freedom to act without assuming responsibility for those actions is the behavior of a child. He's not a child as he assumes responsibility. But it was a waste as he could have been more effective by demonstrating more effectively. Though even that would have made little difference. Most of us support our nation.

[wolf_chatter]

Of course I picked up some political and religious ideas from my parents.....I never suggested otherwise. I'm talking about a single action that you, as an adult, got the idea to do to show disrespect (it's more than failing to show respect) to a judge while implying that those who do show respect are making a hollow gesture. If you don't see the irony in that, then perhaps we should agree to disagree. If your dad and uncle were in the military, then they undoubtedly HAD to, at some point, show respect for a superior officer who was anything but a nice person. Showing respect does not require a person to know every detail the other. All you accomplished was to, in effect, demand the judge respect your position while you refused to show respect to him.

Are you kidding me? I didn't ask him to respect ME I asked him to respect the Constitution of the United States that indicates I have the right to refuse to stand. He wasn't angry and he ruled in my favor after that I respected the hell out of the guy. Some judges ego's may have gotten in the way of ruling in my favor. And for the last time it has nothing to do with respect or disrespect of the person what it has to do with is I find it intolerable, as an American, to have to stand for another person "out of forced respect" Is it really that hard to grasp? Also it was my dad and my Grandpa, although my uncle served in Nam as well.

As far as my dad and grandpa showing respect in the Navy / Army they CHOSE to join and with making the choice they understood they might have to do certain things they didn't really care to do. Not the same. I didn't choose for the bailiff to say "All Rise" that's pomp and circumstance (tradition if you like) from eons ago.

Thats why I never considered a life in the Armed forces.

[wolf_chatter]

What has made so many people think that freedom comes without responsibility? It's quite simple.


You have the freedom to act...as does everyone else.
If you act in a way others find offensive, or that violate law or tradition then consequences ensue.
The fact that you don't like those consequences should make you consider your actions. But it's no violation of your rights for others oppose you when they disagree with your behavior.

Responsibility for ones actions and the consequences is part of being an adult. Demanding the freedom to act without assuming responsibility for those actions is the behavior of a child. He's not a child as he assumes responsibility. But it was a waste as he could have been more effective by demonstrating more effectively. Though even that would have made little difference. Most of us support our nation.

All I have said is in the world of things big and small it is a small issue and it is sad idiots make it a bigger deal than it needed to be. Like the death threats and the other fun stuff he got to face for what he did. He didn't murder anyone, rape anyone, kidnap anyone, he didn't rob a bank, beat a kid, steal a car, plant a bomb... all he did was excercise his right to not have to stand for the anthem and people acted like he had just murdered a bus load of school children.

I am saying the crime doesn't fit the punishment. Seriously? You have nothing else to worry about other than some dude playing basketball decidid to sit out the anthem?

Why don't people cry out for the real injustices in the world and leave the penny-anti crap alone?

[Slapdad]

Are you kidding me? I didn't ask him to respect ME I asked him to respect the Constitution of the United States that indicates I have the right to refuse to stand. He wasn't angry and he ruled in my favor after that I respected the hell out of the guy. Some judges ego's may have gotten in the way of ruling in my favor. And for the last time it has nothing to do with respect or disrespect of the person what it has to do with is I find it intolerable, as an American, to have to stand for another person "out of forced respect" Is it really that hard to grasp? Also it was my dad and my Grandpa, although my uncle served in Nam as well.

As far as my dad and grandpa showing respect in the Navy / Army they CHOSE to join and with making the choice they understood they might have to do certain things they didn't really care to do. Not the same. I didn't choose for the bailiff to say "All Rise" that's pomp and circumstance (tradition if you like) from eons ago.

Thats why I never considered a life in the Armed forces.

It's not hard to grasp at all.....what you perceive as forced respect is really common courtesy and respect for the American judicial system. I understand.....you do it to be contrary....to make a point. I'll agree that some judges may have an ego that would get in the way of ruling in your favor......just as some people's ego keep them from standing when the judge enters the courtroom. You're very lucky the judge was cool about it, as not standing could cause you to be in contempt of court. Why would you even risk it? What point do you make if you're fined and/or in jail? And for what? Ego.

[Packfan11]

the more this word comes to mind:




Anarchy (from Greek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language): ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, "without ruler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon#Ancient_Greece)") may refer to any of the following:

"No rulership or enforced authority."[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-0)
"Absence of government; a state of lawlessness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinomianism) due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder."[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-1)
"A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty) (without the implication of disorder)."[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-2)
"Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere."[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-3)
"Act[ing] without waiting for instructions or official permission... The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this." [5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-4)



And to answer your question Chatter - it's the law. Sure - no one enforces it though:



TITLE 36 (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/36/usc_sup_01_36.html) > Subtitle I (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/36/usc_sup_01_36_06_I.html) > Part A (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/36/usc_sup_01_36_06_I_08_A.html) > CHAPTER 3 (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/36/usc_sup_01_36_06_I_08_A_10_3.html) > § 301
Prev | Next (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/36/usc_sec_36_00000302----000-.html)

§ 301. National anthem


(a) Designation.— The composition consisting of the words and music known as the Star-Spangled Banner is the national anthem.
(b) Conduct During Playing.— During a rendition of the national anthem— (1) when the flag is displayed— (A) individuals in uniform should give the military salute at the first note of the anthem and maintain that position until the last note;
(B) members of the Armed Forces and veterans who are present but not in uniform may render the military salute in the manner provided for individuals in uniform; and
(C) all other persons present should face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over the heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart; and


(2) when the flag is not displayed, all present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed.

[wolf_chatter]

It's not hard to grasp at all.....what you perceive as forced respect is really common courtesy and respect for the American judicial system. I understand.....you do it to be contrary....to make a point. I'll agree that some judges may have an ego that would get in the way of ruling in your favor......just as some people's ego keep them from standing when the judge enters the courtroom. You're very lucky the judge was cool about it, as not standing could cause you to be in contempt of court. Why would you even risk it? What point do you make if you're fined and/or in jail? And for what? Ego.

in the wall you make some mighty large assumptions. It isn't out of ego nor disrepect for the American Judicial system.. what it comes down to is we are all equal and by forcing someone to stand for another person, whether by law or by peer pressure (see standing for anthem, saluting the flag et al...) is plain wrong in my book and I refuse to do it, not because I am above standing in the presence of someone, but because that person isn't better than you or I based soley on the job he happens to have. It is not common courtesy to stand when someone comes into the room, other than a Judge and a President I can't seem to remember ever being asked to stand against my will. It is an old antiquated tradition and I feel it unecessary.

My question is now is.. are you a judge? You seem personally offended by me excercising my right to do as I wish in a courtroom.

[wolf_chatter]

the more this word comes to mind:




Anarchy (from Greek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language): ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, "without ruler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon#Ancient_Greece)") may refer to any of the following:

"No rulership or enforced authority."[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-0)
"Absence of government; a state of lawlessness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinomianism) due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder."[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-1)
"A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty) (without the implication of disorder)."[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-2)
"Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere."[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-3)
"Act[ing] without waiting for instructions or official permission... The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this." [5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-4)



And to answer your question Chatter - it's the law. Sure - no one enforces it though:



TITLE 36 (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/36/usc_sup_01_36.html) > Subtitle I (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/36/usc_sup_01_36_06_I.html) > Part A (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/36/usc_sup_01_36_06_I_08_A.html) > CHAPTER 3 (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/36/usc_sup_01_36_06_I_08_A_10_3.html) > § 301
Prev | Next (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/36/usc_sec_36_00000302----000-.html)

§ 301. National anthem


(a) Designation.— The composition consisting of the words and music known as the Star-Spangled Banner is the national anthem.
(b) Conduct During Playing.— During a rendition of the national anthem— (1) when the flag is displayed— (A) individuals in uniform should give the military salute at the first note of the anthem and maintain that position until the last note;
(B) members of the Armed Forces and veterans who are present but not in uniform may render the military salute in the manner provided for individuals in uniform; and
(C) all other persons present should face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over the heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart; and


(2) when the flag is not displayed, all present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed.

If it were law it would be Unconstitutional.

[wolf_chatter]

[QUOTE=Packfan11;19647]the more this word comes to mind:




Anarchy (from Greek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language): ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, "without ruler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon#Ancient_Greece)") may refer to any of the following:

"No rulership or enforced authority."[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-0)
"Absence of government; a state of lawlessness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinomianism) due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder."[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-1)
"A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty) (without the implication of disorder)."[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-2)
"Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere."[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-3)
"Act[ing] without waiting for instructions or official permission... The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this." [5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-4)



What I am is big on personal freedom to choose without interference from the retarded, undereducated and ignorant in this country. If what I do doesn't harm you in anyway why do you have to have an opinion on it? This country is a bunch of busy-body, Mrs. Kravitz's with nothing other to worry about than what their neighbor is doing.

How does it affect your life if I don't stand for a judge? It doesn't so STFU.
How does it affect you life if I marry a man? It doesn't so STFU.
How does it affect your life if I refuse to stand or sing the anthem or the POA? It doesn't so STFU.
How does it affect your life if I don't believe in the same God you do? It doesn't. so you know what to do.

If what I do doesn't alter, affect, hinder, injure or otherwise destroy your life. Why do you feel the need to tell me how you feel about it? People try to inpinge on our personal, constitutionaly guaranteed rights all the time.

Leave me alone and I will leave you alone. But people on both sides just can't do that... I like to argue but at the end of the day know this, I really honestly do not care what you think, and I hope you feel the same way about my opinion...that's your right and that I do RESPECT.

[Packfan11]

If it were law it would be Unconstitutional.


Well, it is a Federal law:

From the U.S. Code Online via GPO Access[www.gpoaccess.gov] (http://www.gpoaccess.gov])[Laws in effect as of January 3, 2007][CITE: 4USC9][Page 9] TITLE 4--FLAG AND SEAL, SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATES CHAPTER 1--THE FLAG Sec. 9. Conduct during hoisting, lowering or passing of flag During the ceremony of hoisting or lowering the flag or when the flag is passing in a parade or in review, all persons present except those in uniform should face the flag and stand at attention with the right hand over the heart. Those present in uniform should render the military salute. When not in uniform, men should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Aliens should stand at attention. The salute to the flag in a moving column should be rendered at the moment the flag passes.(Added Pub. L. 105-225, Sec. 2(a), Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1498.) Historical and Revision Notes---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Section Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large)----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9..................................... 36:177. June 22, 1942, ch. 435, Sec. 5, 56 Stat. 380; Dec. 22, 1942, ch. 806, Sec. 5, 56 Stat. 1077; July 7, 1976, Pub. L. 94-344, (17), 90 Stat. 812.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A service of the U.S. Government Printing Office.
Last updated: >December 23, 2008
Page Name: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/uscode/browse.html

[Slapdad]

If it were law it would be Unconstitutional.

And in what way would that be unconstitutional?

[Slapdad]

[QUOTE=Packfan11;19647]the more this word comes to mind:




Anarchy (from Greek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language): ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, "without ruler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon#Ancient_Greece)") may refer to any of the following:

"No rulership or enforced authority."[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-0)
"Absence of government; a state of lawlessness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinomianism) due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder."[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-1)
"A social state in which there is no governing person or group of people, but each individual has absolute liberty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty) (without the implication of disorder)."[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-2)
"Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere."[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-3)
"Act[ing] without waiting for instructions or official permission... The root of anarchism is the single impulse to do it yourself: everything else follows from this." [5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy#cite_note-4)



What I am is big on personal freedom to choose without interference from the retarded, undereducated and ignorant in this country. If what I do doesn't harm you in anyway why do you have to have an opinion on it? This country is a bunch of busy-body, Mrs. Kravitz's with nothing other to worry about than what their neighbor is doing.

How does it affect your life if I don't stand for a judge? It doesn't so STFU.
How does it affect you life if I marry a man? It doesn't so STFU.
How does it affect your life if I refuse to stand or sing the anthem or the POA? It doesn't so STFU.
How does it affect your life if I don't believe in the same God you do? It doesn't. so you know what to do.

If what I do doesn't alter, affect, hinder, injure or otherwise destroy your life. Why do you feel the need to tell me how you feel about it? People try to inpinge on our personal, constitutionaly guaranteed rights all the time.

Leave me alone and I will leave you alone. But people on both sides just can't do that... I like to argue but at the end of the day know this, I really honestly do not care what you think, and I hope you feel the same way about my opinion...that's your right and that I do RESPECT.

How does it affect your life to be required to stand when a judge enters the room? Does it affect, alter, hinder, injure or otherwise destroy your life? The constitution guarantees us certain rights, but I don't recall the right to do whatever we want to be among them. It's funny that you you say that just because someone is a judge, that doesn't mean that he is better than you, yet you turn around and say that you have the right "to choose without interference from the retarded, undereducated and ignorant in this country". So anyone in a position of respect and/or authority is no better than you, but anyone who might try to interfere with your perceived freedoms is beneath you?? Interesting. I'm not personally offended by your view of judges.....I'm not a judge (though two friends of our family are judges), but I don't feel that being asked to stand when a judge enters a courtroom is an infringement on my rights.

[Nevadan]

he also said:

"'That government is best which governs not at all;' and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have."

He was an anarchist thus a moron. He definitely was right in some of his political stands, and I've got no problem with civil disobedience as long as it's on point.

Civil disobedience is standing up to authority with a purpose. What did the basketball player accomplish? Nothing. Who did he stand up to? Nobody. He should have gone and protested where it did some good.

Oh, I don't know...many years after the fact, he and his actions are the fodder for this thread, which is good, solid critical discourse.

[Stuck in Seattle]

Oh, I don't know...many years after the fact, he and his actions are the fodder for this thread, which is good, solid critical discourse.
Yeah a bunch of bored guys that want news about the Pack have nothing else to talk about so we've used his idiocy as an interesting jumping off point for a discussion. But nobody really cares about him but 'Chatter. That says a lot.:D

[battle.borne]

Are you kidding me? I didn't ask him to respect ME I asked him to respect the Constitution of the United States that indicates I have the right to refuse to stand. He wasn't angry and he ruled in my favor after that I respected the hell out of the guy. Some judges ego's may have gotten in the way of ruling in my favor. And for the last time it has nothing to do with respect or disrespect of the person what it has to do with is I find it intolerable, as an American, to have to stand for another person "out of forced respect" Is it really that hard to grasp? Also it was my dad and my Grandpa, although my uncle served in Nam as well.

As far as my dad and grandpa showing respect in the Navy / Army they CHOSE to join and with making the choice they understood they might have to do certain things they didn't really care to do. Not the same. I didn't choose for the bailiff to say "All Rise" that's pomp and circumstance (tradition if you like) from eons ago.

Thats why I never considered a life in the Armed forces.

This conversation is lunacy! Are you really defending your right NOT to stand when a judge enters the room? WOW! You obviously have no respect for our system of justice, because it's not about respecting the judge as a person, it's about respecting the position he holds. You should have been thrown in jail for contempt.

I wonder how you'll react when your kids tell you they disobeyed your orders because they didn't respect you, and that you have to earn their respect! That'll be a comedic filled day for the rest of us....:D

[wolf_chatter]

Well, it is a Federal law:

From the U.S. Code Online via GPO Access[www.gpoaccess.gov] (http://www.gpoaccess.gov])[Laws in effect as of January 3, 2007][CITE: 4USC9][Page 9] TITLE 4--FLAG AND SEAL, SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATES CHAPTER 1--THE FLAG Sec. 9. Conduct during hoisting, lowering or passing of flag During the ceremony of hoisting or lowering the flag or when the flag is passing in a parade or in review, all persons present except those in uniform should face the flag and stand at attention with the right hand over the heart. Those present in uniform should render the military salute. When not in uniform, men should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Aliens should stand at attention. The salute to the flag in a moving column should be rendered at the moment the flag passes.(Added Pub. L. 105-225, Sec. 2(a), Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1498.) Historical and Revision Notes---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised Section Source (U.S. Code) Source (Statutes at Large)----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9..................................... 36:177. June 22, 1942, ch. 435, Sec. 5, 56 Stat. 380; Dec. 22, 1942, ch. 806, Sec. 5, 56 Stat. 1077; July 7, 1976, Pub. L. 94-344, (17), 90 Stat. 812.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A service of the U.S. Government Printing Office.
Last updated: >December 23, 2008
Page Name: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/uscode/browse.html

Besides read the language, SHOULD, is used not WILL... its a guidline not a law. You can't get arrested or charged for not standing for the anthem.

[wolf_chatter]

And in what way would that be unconstitutional?

Seriously? Because we have the right to dissent in this country thats why.

If the government forces you to do something as trivial as stand for the national anthem against your will I guarantee it will be found unconstitutional by the courts.

The gov can't force you to pray can they? The can't stop you from protesting peacfully (or their not supposed anyway). They can't force muslims to become christian, they can't tell you who to vote for so they have no authority to tell you you HAVE TO sing or stand for the anthem.

The government has the right to step in when harm has been commited. If your protest breaks out into a riot they can come in and stop. If you touch a person or assualt a Dr. going into an abortion clinic you will get arrested. But they cannot do a damn thing until a crime has been commited.

Perfect example of how it works is the douche bags that protest at dead military personel's funerals. What they do is foul and I wish they would all get shot but they have the right to do until it becomes harmful to another person or property. If they started smashing windows they lose their right to peacable assembly. If they physically harrass a person they lose their right to peacable assembly. Until then they can do whatever they wish.

[wolf_chatter]

This conversation is lunacy! Are you really defending your right NOT to stand when a judge enters the room? WOW! You obviously have no respect for our system of justice, because it's not about respecting the judge as a person, it's about respecting the position he holds. You should have been thrown in jail for contempt.

I wonder how you'll react when your kids tell you they disobeyed your orders because they didn't respect you, and that you have to earn their respect! That'll be a comedic filled day for the rest of us....:D

even though it has flaws I think its the best one in the world (although I think criminals sometimes seem to have more rights than the victims) and if the judge would have thrown me in jail for contempt I would have sued all the way to the supreme court if need be.

The state has no constitutional or any other legal right to force me to stand for another human being in any position. PERIOD.


Under American jurisprudence, acts of contempt are divided into two types.

Direct contempt is that which occurs in the presence of the presiding judge (in facie curiae) and may be dealt with summarily: the judge notifies the offending party that he or she has acted in a manner which disrupts the tribunal and prejudices the administration of justice. After giving the person the opportunity to respond, the judge may impose the sanction immediately.
Indirect contempt occurs outside the immediate presence of the court and consists of disobedience of a court's prior order. Generally a party will be accused of indirect contempt by the party for whose benefit the order was entered. A person cited for indirect contempt is entitled to notice of the charge and an opportunity for hearing of the evidence of contempt and to present evidence in rebuttal.

Not standing doesn't equate to either one these. It cant be direct contempt because it doesn't disrupt the tribunal nor does it prejudice the administration of justice. And it isn't inderect because that is disbodience of an outside order by the judge (not paying child support etc...)

And by the way my kids respect and listen to me because they know I am fair if not a little harder on them than mom. When I ask them to do something it gets done. And when the little bastards get to the age where they think they don't have to listen (like we all did) well... I will fix that then as well just like my dad did.

[Packfan11]

I think the one thing that has numerous definitions is the word RESPECT. Each person in this forum defines it differently. Some people feel it's earned and not given. Some feel it's inherent and some have none as they expect none from others. We each live our lives by our own "code" and our actions dictate how others perceive us. As long as we're comfortable in our own skin that's all that should matter. I pretty much disagree with everything that comes out of Chatter's mouth and he knows it. He cringes at my diatribes too. Most of our differences are how we were raised - atheist verses catholic. What drives me to do the right thing he follows for different reasons. That's fine. He has the time and energy to stand up for what he believes in and he'll admit he's come against some harsh criticisms over the years. I take my hat off to him in that he's willing to spend the time to question everything. Personally, it's easier for me to be a lemming than an activist.

[Slapdad]

even though it has flaws I think its the best one in the world (although I think criminals sometimes seem to have more rights than the victims) and if the judge would have thrown me in jail for contempt I would have sued all the way to the supreme court if need be.

The state has no constitutional or any other legal right to force me to stand for another human being in any position. PERIOD.


Under American jurisprudence, acts of contempt are divided into two types.

Direct contempt is that which occurs in the presence of the presiding judge (in facie curiae) and may be dealt with summarily: the judge notifies the offending party that he or she has acted in a manner which disrupts the tribunal and prejudices the administration of justice. After giving the person the opportunity to respond, the judge may impose the sanction immediately.
Indirect contempt occurs outside the immediate presence of the court and consists of disobedience of a court's prior order. Generally a party will be accused of indirect contempt by the party for whose benefit the order was entered. A person cited for indirect contempt is entitled to notice of the charge and an opportunity for hearing of the evidence of contempt and to present evidence in rebuttal.

Not standing doesn't equate to either one these. It cant be direct contempt because it doesn't disrupt the tribunal nor does it prejudice the administration of justice. And it isn't inderect because that is disbodience of an outside order by the judge (not paying child support etc...)

And by the way my kids respect and listen to me because they know I am fair if not a little harder on them than mom. When I ask them to do something it gets done. And when the little bastards get to the age where they think they don't have to listen (like we all did) well... I will fix that then as well just like my dad did.

People can and DO get arrested for not standing when a judge enters a courtroom. I don't care how you spin it, it is contempt. There was a case in Texas where seven people didn't stand and were arrested for contempt. It went to the supreme court, but it was ruled that they did not stand for religious reasons rather than out of contempt. Federal contempt powers are more limited than those of the state, but nearly all states have dealt with this very issue. Here is an excerpt from one case dealing with just this issue:

Those who refuse to stand, for whatever reason, must yield “to the imperative need of the community in having an established forum in which controversies between man and man and citizen and sovereign may be decided in a calm, detached, neutral atmosphere.” Id. (Widener, J., dissenting). Our trial court judges must be allowed to maintain order, respect and proper function in their courtrooms. Failure to stand when one is capable of doing so is indeed a contemptuous act.

[Paw]

I haven't read every post in this thread, so forgive me if someone has already brought this up. When you stand for the president or a judge or whomever aren't you paying respect to the position and not the individual that currently occupies that position?

That's how I see it.

[wolf_chatter]

People can and DO get arrested for not standing when a judge enters a courtroom. I don't care how you spin it, it is contempt. There was a case in Texas where seven people didn't stand and were arrested for contempt. It went to the supreme court, but it was ruled that they did not stand for religious reasons rather than out of contempt. Federal contempt powers are more limited than those of the state, but nearly all states have dealt with this very issue. Here is an excerpt from one case dealing with just this issue:

Those who refuse to stand, for whatever reason, must yield “to the imperative need of the community in having an established forum in which controversies between man and man and citizen and sovereign may be decided in a calm, detached, neutral atmosphere.” Id. (Widener, J., dissenting). Our trial court judges must be allowed to maintain order, respect and proper function in their courtrooms. Failure to stand when one is capable of doing so is indeed a contemptuous act.

I would argue that all the way to the supreme court and most likely win.

As a free man in a free society the government can't FORCE me to stand in a court of law. I would go to jail in heartbeat to have my point argued at any level. If I don't shake hands because I am a germaphobe does that mean I hate you? If I don't eat the meal you cooked for me because I am a vegetarian does that make me an ass? Whats the difference in a court of law I ask. I don't believe in standing up for the judge. Simple as that... it has nothing to do whatsever with how I feel about the judge or the american justice sytem so why should a religious person get excused but not a person with his/her own personal beliefs.

I guess in your mind if God says you don't have to do it then by golly it isn't contempt but whan a person decides they don't like it.. then tuff shit? That makes a ton of sense.

[Slapdad]

I would argue that all the way to the supreme court and most likely win.

As a free man in a free society the government can't FORCE me to stand in a court of law. I would go to jail in heartbeat to have my point argued at any level. If I don't shake hands because I am a germaphobe does that mean I hate you? If I don't eat the meal you cooked for me because I am a vegetarian does that make me an ass? Whats the difference in a court of law I ask. I don't believe in standing up for the judge. Simple as that... it has nothing to do whatsever with how I feel about the judge or the american justice sytem so why should a religious person get excused but not a person with his/her own personal beliefs.

I guess in your mind if God says you don't have to do it then by golly it isn't contempt but whan a person decides they don't like tuff shit? That makes a ton of sense.

Yeah, you would win because you know more about the constitution than judges and lawyers who have studied it for most of their adult lives. Good lord you're thick-headed. Fine...go to jail for not standing for a judge....and argue your point all the way to the supreme court. It's your time and money. Lots of people don't believe in doing a lot of things that are required by law.....that doesn't make it right. I don't care what your personal beliefs are, it is contempt of court. I'll take the text that explains it and paste here (again):

Our trial court judges must be allowed to maintain order, respect and proper function in their courtrooms. Failure to stand when one is capable of doing so is indeed a contemptuous act.

Don't know what to tell you.....other than you were in contempt. Make whatever statement you want......tell me how you feel about it all day long.......put on your beret and gaze out over the crown in your best Che pose, but at the end of the day, you're wrong. And regarding the reason why you were there in the first place......what sort of ticket was it? Was it some ticky-tack law that you don't agree with too? Laws are funny that way.

[wolf_chatter]

Yeah, you would win because you know more about the constitution than judges and lawyers who have studied it for most of their adult lives. Good lord you're thick-headed. Fine...go to jail for not standing for a judge....and argue your point all the way to the supreme court. It's your time and money. Lots of people don't believe in doing a lot of things that are required by law.....that doesn't make it right. I don't care what your personal beliefs are, it is contempt of court. I'll take the text that explains it and paste here (again):

Our trial court judges must be allowed to maintain order, respect and proper function in their courtrooms. Failure to stand when one is capable of doing so is indeed a contemptuous act.

Don't know what to tell you.....other than you were in contempt. Make whatever statement you want......tell me how you feel about it all day long.......put on your beret and gaze out over the crown in your best Che pose, but at the end of the day, you're wrong. And regarding the reason why you were there in the first place......what sort of ticket was it? Was it some ticky-tack law that you don't agree with too? Laws are funny that way.


Seems as though thats from a case in Texas not the supreme court. SO find me one where the supreme court of the United states have upheld a contempt case. If so I will admit under the eyes of the law it is considered contempt. Still won't do it though.

I was in court for doing brodies in the snow in a vacant lot at 11 PM. We had a big storm that day and me and another guy where at work (General rent a car) and the field next to us was an empty dirt lot so we were out there messing around with some jeeps and just having fun. A cop saw us and gave us wreckless driving tickets... thats a big ding on your record and fairly expensive ticket. It was almost 23 years ago and I dont recall the amount. I argued that I was on private property owned by the company I was working for at the time and not on a public street and because there was no concievable way I could injure anyone other than me and the car it didn't constitute wreckless driving.

Judge didn't necessarily agree 100% but he threw it out saying he didn't think kids doing brodies in the snow was worthy of the ticket, especially since it wasn't on a public street.
Justice system at its best I say!

[battle.borne]

put on your beret and gaze out over the crown in your best Che pose, but at the end of the day, you're wrong. .

:p

http://rumplo.s3.amazonaws.com/images/tees/0000/7303/7303-0.jpg

[wolfin1]

:p

http://rumplo.s3.amazonaws.com/images/tees/0000/7303/7303-0.jpg

funny thing about cliche images http://www.altfg.com/Stars/g/green-berets-john-wayne.jpg

[nmsuspurts1]

Seems as though thats from a case in Texas not the supreme court. SO find me one where the supreme court of the United states have upheld a contempt case. If so I will admit under the eyes of the law it is considered contempt. Still won't do it though.

I was in court for doing brodies in the snow in a vacant lot at 11 PM. We had a big storm that day and me and another guy where at work (General rent a car) and the field next to us was an empty dirt lot so we were out there messing around with some jeeps and just having fun. A cop saw us and gave us wreckless driving tickets... thats a big ding on your record and fairly expensive ticket. It was almost 23 years ago and I dont recall the amount. I argued that I was on private property owned by the company I was working for at the time and not on a public street and because there was no concievable way I could injure anyone other than me and the car it didn't constitute wreckless driving.

Judge didn't necessarily agree 100% but he threw it out saying he didn't think kids doing brodies in the snow was worthy of the ticket, especially since it wasn't on a public street.
Justice system at its best I say!


wolfchatter said: I have been in court 1 time in my life (a fix it ticket I refused to pay)


Haha....i thot only the NMSU athaletic dept considered wreckless driving "fix it tickets"

[Slapdad]

wolfchatter said: I have been in court 1 time in my life (a fix it ticket I refused to pay)


Haha....i thot only the NMSU athaletic dept considered wreckless driving "fix it tickets"

LOL......that didn't work out so well.

[wolf_chatter]

wolfchatter said: I have been in court 1 time in my life (a fix it ticket I refused to pay)


Haha....i thot only the NMSU athaletic dept considered wreckless driving "fix it tickets"

I did get a fix it ticket for my bug... when I was restoring it I drove it without rear lights for a while and got caught... I put them in and paid the fine which was minimal. The wreckless driving I did get out of along with my co-worker Christian... who by the way is a sports psychologist in San Diego now. I should see if he will get on here he has some very interesting stories about helping athletes.

[PackBlue]

is Wolf Chatter Maine Pack Fan?

[Nosebleed]

Sorry for being late to the party, but responding to the OP.

The one-eyed man is king in the land of the blind.

Erasmus