Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 77

Thread: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

  1. #21
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

    Lying is not illegal until it crosses into fraud. The supreme court struck down the law because it would apply it situations that clearly are not fraudulent, such trying to impress women in a bar.

  2. #22
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Anagram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    St. Louis MO
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    6,174

    Re: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    Then why is it illegal for me to provide false information on all sorts of forms - for things like school applications, etc.

    If you're lying to gain some sort of financial benefit that otherwise would have gone to someone else I really think that's a serious issue. It's not just free speech when it's intent - it amounts to theft.

    Or is the act of valor thing more broad reaching than that and not just reliant on you claiming funds under false pretenses?
    It is more broad reaching. From the article- "Alvarez made his claims by way of introducing himself as an elected member of the Three Valleys Municipal Water District in Pomona, Calif. There is nothing to suggest that he received anything in exchange or that listeners especially believed him."

    I do agree with your scenarios though. When speech amounts to theft it should not be protected under the first amendment. However, when nothing is received in exchange, no matter how contemptible it may be, I think it should be protected.
    There should be Instant Runoff Voting

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Lying is not illegal until it crosses into fraud. The supreme court struck down the law because it would apply it situations that clearly are not fraudulent, such trying to impress women in a bar.
    Women hate being impressed.

  4. #24
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktoria View Post
    That's a lie.
    ...thus, protected.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    ...thus, protected.
    Nothing is protected. Everything is exposed.

  6. #26
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

    Quote Originally Posted by Anagram View Post
    It is more broad reaching. From the article- "Alvarez made his claims by way of introducing himself as an elected member of the Three Valleys Municipal Water District in Pomona, Calif. There is nothing to suggest that he received anything in exchange or that listeners especially believed him."

    I do agree with your scenarios though. When speech amounts to theft it should not be protected under the first amendment. However, when nothing is received in exchange, no matter how contemptible it may be, I think it should be protected.
    So someone who uses such info to benefit monetarily thus denying someone else those funds would (could) still be charged for lying . . . this act doesn't touch on that; it's just 'in general - you can make up stories'
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    In the aftermath of the Obamacare decision, this one flew under the radar, but it is revealing something very important about the political makeup of the court, and the direction that Chief Justice John Roberts is taking. Although the majority opinion was written by Kennedy, Roberts once again sided with the Liberal faction of the court in striking this law down.

    I'm sorry, but I don't buy "first amendment" here. Those who wear medals that they never earned do not deserve any of the valor that they steal from those who actually fought and possibly died to earn theirs. This decision is flawed, and although this would have passed without Roberts' vote, I am disappointed that Roberts would side with those scumbag liars who steal what isn't theirs.

    And now the question that we are dying to know the answer to - Could John Roberts be the next David Souter?

    Article is here.

    I agree, they are scumbag liars if they wear medals they didn't earn.

    But in a sense, the American flag stands for the freedom to burn it in protest of American policy.

    I cringe that he have to make freedom that absolute, the WBCs and fake medals and even Hustler, but it is what it is.

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

    Nobody burns American flags.

    Greatest story of all time.

  9. #29
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,590
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    Lying is protected under the first amendment.
    Yes, but there are most certainly many exceptions. Lying under oath, for example, is perjury and is a criminal offense. Lying to the SEC or FBI is a criminal offense, as Martha Stewart now knows. Lying to one's probation or parol officer is a criminal offense. The list goes on.

    The Metal of Honor opens so many national security doors, providing MOH winners access to Congressional halls, the WH, military bases, military and political functions, military tours, etc., that using a stolen MOH could be a national security issue, and it's most certainly fraud. Fraud is a criminal offense. That's why I'm leaning toward believing that SCOTUS should have upheld the law criminalizing this kind of fraud.

  10. #30
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Anagram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    St. Louis MO
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    6,174

    Re: Supreme Court strikes down Stolen Valor law

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Yes, but there are most certainly many exceptions. Lying under oath, for example, is perjury and is a criminal offense. Lying to the SEC or FBI is a criminal offense, as Martha Stewart now knows. Lying to one's probation or parol officer is a criminal offense. The list goes on.

    The Metal of Honor opens so many national security doors, providing MOH winners access to Congressional halls, the WH, military bases, military and political functions, military tours, etc., that using a stolen MOH could be a national security issue, and it's most certainly fraud. Fraud is a criminal offense. That's why I'm leaning toward believing that SCOTUS should have upheld the law criminalizing this kind of fraud.
    I disagree. I feel the law as written was applied to broadly. If they limited it to only cases where lying about MOH were fraud I'd be alright with it. But when it criminalizes speech where there is no material gain, it overreaches.
    There should be Instant Runoff Voting

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •