Burning a cross at a public gathering, as repugnant as that may be, does seem to
me to be a free-speech issue.  However, burning a cross on someone's lawn at
midnight is clearly meant to terrorize and intimidate, and ought to be dealt
with as such.  If I lived in an area where anti-American sentiment was high and
I found people burning an American flag on my lawn in the middle of the night,
I'd certainly consider it an act of intimidation rather than a political
expression.

Wayne




Arthur Frank <[log in to unmask]> on 05/30/2002 11:45:09 AM

Please respond to Arthur Frank <[log in to unmask]>

To:   [log in to unmask]
cc:    (bcc: Wayne Brown/Corporate/Altec)

Subject:  Re: [HP3000-L] OT: Supreme Court to hear Cross Burning Case



<flame-suit on>  (get it? flames? burning? oh, well...)

For me, this falls into the same category as flag burning.  And, I'm sure some
of you will disagree, but I think that's a free speech issue as well.

This has nothing to do with running into a crowded theater and yelling "FIRE!"
when there is no fire. That sort of "free speech" is outlawed (or should be
outlawed) because it needlessly incites panic, which could result in human harm
or death.  Burning a cross/flag/bra/symbol-du-jour at a public gathering is a
political/religious/social statement.  As long as the fire complies with all
federal, state, and local laws (did you get that burning permit?) and nobody
gets hurt, I don't see anything wrong with it.

Intimidating or scaring people?  That may already be illegal, and, if not, maybe
it should be.  But if me and my posse of narrow-minded zealots gets it in our
heads to scare and intimidate a specific group of people, we can do that pretty
easily without burning crosses.  Eliminating forms of expression does nothing to
address the underlying hatred and intolerance.

My opinion, not my employer's, blah, blah.

Art Frank

>>> Larry Barnes <[log in to unmask]> 05/30/02 08:27AM >>>
I find it interesting that the U.S. Supreme Court is going to hear a case on
Cross Burning because it deals with free speech.  The plaintiff argues that
s/he has the right to burn a cross, under the guise of free speech, to
intimidate people.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of this argument then I should be
allowed to enter a movie theatre and yell 'FIRE' because I want to
intimidate/scare people.

Where will common sense take hold again?


just my opinion, and I'm interested in yours.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *