I just don’t get this logic. Speeding through a red light while you’re distracted in the middle of the night when no one is around and there is no danger is just as punishable as speeding through a red light in the middle of the day and causing a wake of fender benders behind you while running from the police.
Your chances of getting out of the ticket are greater in the former, but the offense is just as punishable from a legal standpoint, for a reason. Maybe my analogy is flawed, but I’m just not seeing any difference here.
I said that i had respect for the courage of the armed forces members. You said “Yeah right :rolleyes:”. If that’s not an accusation that i was lying, i don’t know what it is.
Only in your feeble mind.
I play softball three to four times a week. One of the pleasures of living in Southern California is the awesome weather. I play a pickup game with men and women, and a considerable portion of them are in the armed forces, mainly Marines and the Navy. Frequently, we lose people from our game because they have to get on the boat, or they have to ship out to the Middle East (again). And just as frequently we get people back who we haven’t seen for months on end. We have players who take phone calls in the middle of games because it’s the only time their brother or sister or spouse in Afghanistan or Iraq could make a call to them.
These people are my friends. I couldn’t do what they do. Not only do i respect the type of valor required to get a medal, i respect the type of valor required simply to be a member of the armed forces and go into a dangerous situation. If you’re going to keep insisting otherwise, you can kiss my ass.
Ooooh, wow. You sure burned me there. The poor dumb civilian used “officer” when he really meant all members of the military. I guess that invalidates my whole argument. :rolleyes: Back atcha.
You’re hilarious. Now your argument is that, if we don’t stop this, we’ll be overrun with fake marines. Get a life.
Yes, you wrote that not three sentences after also stating “Maybe, in my rush to defend our fake military, i have been overestimating our real military.” :rolleyes: Can you honestly not see that one might read your supposed respect for members of the military as being somewhat hollow?
Is that so? Show them this thread sometime, then.
You know, you’ve been nothing but offensive in much of this thread.
Actually, it is your statements in this thread that show a lack of respect for those who have demonstrated valor and/or have been injured or killed in service to our country. You are taking the very rights that those people fought and died to protect and flushing them down the toilet by banning speech you find distasteful.
Also, the arguments you have advanced in this thread are so unbelievably bad, I almost think you are being intentionally obtuse.
My reference to “overestimating our real military” was not a dig at them; it was a dig at you.
It was designed to show how ridiculous your argument was that simply walking around in a uniform poses a threat to national security. My point was that, if this were the case (it’s not), then it would be a pretty sad commentary on how bad our military security is in America.
Be happy to.
Some, maybe even most, of them would probably disagree with my position on the Stolen Valor law, and on the wearing of military uniforms by non-military people. That’s fine. There have been others in this thread that i’ve disagreed with on the issue as well. As i said to hajario earlier on, i understand the visceral reaction on some level, and i also recognize that actual military people are more likely than most to have a visceral reaction to this issue. But, as hajario admitted, this visceral reaction is not necessarily rational, and i don’t believe our laws should simply reflect our visceral reactions to things we don’t like; they should reflect compelling and rational arguments about benefits to society as a whole.
Anyway, whether my military friends agreed with my interpretations or not, i think they would all believe me when i say i respect what they do, and that the presence in our society of a few douchebags dressing up as fake military heroes doesn’t change that fact.
Wow. The first paragraph is so laughable it barely deserves acknowledgment. As to the second paragraph, I’d say the onus is on you, since robby is arguing from the side with the law. You’re arguing against it. robby has offered arguments in defense of the law. What have you offered?
I’ll cop to the “feeble mind” one. The “hypocrite” was not an insult, it was a statement of fact. He essentially called me a liar, and then berated me for being insulting. I know of no other term for that except hypocrisy.
As i said, i’ll cop to the personal insult. I did it, and it was against the rules. But what do you mean “inappropriate language”? Are you talking about swearing?
I wasn’t aware of any language restrictions in this forum. The restriction, as far as i can tell, is on personal insults, whether or not they involve swearing.
Fuck. Shit. Piss. Cunt. Those words appear in plenty of MPSIMS thread.
But you’re not the one who gets to decide what those rights are.
As it happens, we have a system to do that. You can CLAIM the Constitution protects the right to impersonate a member of the armed forces or wear military medals you didn’t earn, but Congress doesn’t agree with you, and neither did the federal court that has considered the issue.
So what’s your basis for asserting that this law violates the Constitution? Unless the Predsident has appointed you to a federal bench somewhere, I don’t see why we would take your interpretation as the right one, and the actual Congress of the United States and an actual federal district judge’s as the wrong ones.