Emily Lance threatened after urinating on US flag on 4 July


darksithpro

macrumors 6502a
Oct 27, 2016
582
4,491
"She captioned it with: "F*** your nationalism. F*** your country. F*** your stupid f****** flag"."

Perhaps a complimentary one-way ticket to whatever country she would be proud living in? If she strongly feels this way, then perhaps she would be happier living somewhere else? I'm sure a lot of patriots would pitch in for her ticket.
 

dogslobber

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Oct 19, 2014
3,476
4,671
Apple Campus, Cupertino CA
freedom of speech, you can even burn it. it's her property to do as she sees fit.
When you deliberately set out to provoke a response from somebody the I don’t consider it “freedom of speech”. There should be some checks to see what a rational person would respond to the incident with. Freedom of speech has its limits.
 

rjohnstone

macrumors 68040
Dec 28, 2007
3,483
3,399
PHX, AZ.
When you deliberately set out to provoke a response from somebody the I don’t consider it “freedom of speech”. There should be some checks to see what a rational person would respond to the incident with. Freedom of speech has its limits.
It does have limits, but thank god you don't get to make that determination.

It was a social media post. No "individual" was targeted or provoked.
It's her right, whether you agree with it or not, to piss on a flag that she purchased.
I don't agree with it, but I'll defend her right to speak her piece.
No one was harmed and your "feelings" on the matter are irrelevant. No laws were broken.
 
Last edited:

dogslobber

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Oct 19, 2014
3,476
4,671
Apple Campus, Cupertino CA
It does have limits, but thank god you don't get to make that determination.

It was a social media post. No "individual" was targeted or provoked.
It's her right, whether you agree with it or not, to piss on a flag that she purchased in.
I don't agree with it, but I'll defend her right to speak her piece.
No one was harmed and your "feelings" on the matter are irrelevant. No laws were broken.
And by one’s actions comes accountability. I don’t agree with her and don’t defend her right as it’s pure provocation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gutwrench

FrankieTDouglas

macrumors 65816
Mar 10, 2005
1,489
1,966
And by one’s actions comes accountability. I don’t agree with her and don’t defend her right as it’s pure provocation.
No. A private individual making a personal post to an intended audience of those she at least knows on a Facebook-level, is not even the same as warranting a national spotlight being thrust upon her. She is more than free to make this video. It's her personal Facebook feed. Did she intend to provoke? Absolutely. So let the provocation happen within the context it was intended, not yet another nationally elevated stage for what is essentially noise.

If you don't know her from some random idiot on the street, who gives a **** what she does?!
 

dogslobber

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Oct 19, 2014
3,476
4,671
Apple Campus, Cupertino CA
i think your use of the term "rational" begs a few questions of its own.
What I mean is "of sound mind" like England uses for such cases. The USA could learn a lot from England.
[doublepost=1499378419][/doublepost]
No. A private individual making a personal post to an intended audience of those she at least knows on a Facebook-level, is not even the same as warranting a national spotlight being thrust upon her. She is more than free to make this video. It's her personal Facebook feed. Did she intend to provoke? Absolutely. So let the provocation happen within the context it was intended, not yet another nationally elevated stage for what is essentially noise.

If you don't know her from some random idiot on the street, who gives a **** what she does?!
But if it's posted on the internet then it becomes the domain of this forum. As I say, with one's actions come consequences.
 

quagmire

macrumors 603
Apr 19, 2004
6,255
1,063
And by one’s actions comes accountability. I don’t agree with her and don’t defend her right as it’s pure provocation.
She has the right to do it while you can use your right to say you don't like what she did. As we already know, the 1st amendment does not protect you from consequences from said free speech outside of the government coming after you for it.

What you can't do as a response to her actions is to make threats. That's where the response crosses the legality line.
 

FrankieTDouglas

macrumors 65816
Mar 10, 2005
1,489
1,966
What I mean is "of sound mind" like England uses for such cases. The USA could learn a lot from England.
[doublepost=1499378419][/doublepost]

But if it's posted on the internet then it becomes the domain of this forum. As I say, with one's actions come consequences.
Things posted on the internet usually have a target audience and typical forms of interaction. The "spotlight of the internet" is not typical, expected, or in the overwhelming amount of cases, asked for. So again, why do you care if she made a video and shared it with her friends?
 

Mac'nCheese

Suspended
Feb 9, 2010
3,732
4,967
What I mean is "of sound mind" like England uses for such cases. The USA could learn a lot from England.
[doublepost=1499378419][/doublepost]

But if it's posted on the internet then it becomes the domain of this forum. As I say, with one's actions come consequences.
So if by posting this woman's name and what she did on this forum, if someone sees it and does something horrible to her family, is that ok? Are those consequences ok with you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda

FrankieTDouglas

macrumors 65816
Mar 10, 2005
1,489
1,966
So if by posting this woman's name and what she did on this forum, if someone sees it and does something horrible to her family, is that ok? Are those consequences ok with you?
Exactly. The title is written in such a way that I felt like I should know who this person of notoriety is, due to their public nature. But she's not someone in the public eye, so it's ridiculous to treat the story as such, or even frame it in such a way unless you're just trying to smear her name needlessly.
 

darksithpro

macrumors 6502a
Oct 27, 2016
582
4,491
why do you care if she made a video and shared it with her friends?

I don't, what I do care about is the BBC creating an article about this and calling her a "victim." If you go to Yankee Stadium with a Boston jersey, calling every Yankee fan insults and get attacked, are you the victim, or just a consequence of your own stupidity?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gutwrench

LordVic

macrumors 603
Sep 7, 2011
5,440
10,366
And by one’s actions comes accountability. I don’t agree with her and don’t defend her right as it’s pure provocation.
Part of the right to freedom of expression is that a person has the right to piss you off if they want

At no point does it state they are free from the consequences of that. Are death threats or real legitimate threats of bodily harm appropriate. NEVER.

But she deserves all the mockery, ridicule. Just as much as she deserves the freedom to say it.

She's not inciting hate. She's not inciting fear. she fully entitled to it, even as stupid as she is
 

quagmire

macrumors 603
Apr 19, 2004
6,255
1,063
I don't, what I do care about is the BBC creating an article about this and calling her a "victim." If you go to Yankee Stadium with a Boston jersey, calling every Yankee fan insults and get attacked, are you the victim, or just a consequence of your own stupidity?
Depends... The insults that the Red Sox fan hurl at the Yankee fans threats or just the usual, " Yankees suck!!!!" " Losers!!!!"?

If the former and the threats made the Yankee fan think he was in imminent danger, Red Sox fan not exactly a victim. If it was the latter, absolutely a victim( by attacked, I am assuming assaulted, not verbally attacked back in similar fashion).
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
39,010
Criminal Mexi Midget
Freedom of speech protects you from the government, not from society.
I have a 1911 that can protect me from both ;) then again I don't go around trying to piss people off for no reason.
[doublepost=1499380202][/doublepost]
When you deliberately set out to provoke a response from somebody the I don’t consider it “freedom of speech”. There should be some checks to see what a rational person would respond to the incident with. Freedom of speech has its limits.
OMG, someone is burning their own property, quick let's kick their butt to teach them a lesson :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,608
24,528
Texas
And by one’s actions comes accountability. I don’t agree with her and don’t defend her right as it’s pure provocation.
I do defend her right.
I love that flag with all the fibers of my being, I worship that flag. It's my adoptive country and I am a civil servant because I love this country. One reason why I love it is freedom of speech, and the fact that whatever you say that is not a threat or intended to cause damage, you don't have to fear for your physical well being or your freedom.
I do believe in consequences, and I hope she'll never see a decently paying job again. But under no circumstances her despicable, revolting action authorizes other people to commit illegal and possibly dangerous actions.