QUOTE (A1 @ Oct 3 2008, 01:27 PM)
We beat this topic to death before. Good for the judge. Idiot parents.
You are absolutely right A-1, we did beat this topic to death once before and I still disagree with most of you posters out there.
I am however, in agreement with Whirlwind on this subject.
Listen; if this shirt would have said " National Anti-Terrorist Month, Terrorist Hunting Permit,
Shoot A Terrorist, No Bag Limit", I would have found it somewhat offensive.
I believe the last time research was done on this thread, the rule read "no clothing bearing any images of guns or weaponry of a violent nature". So, is the T-shirt okay if the guns are not on it ? I see so many of you talking in circles on these threads.
The shirt is not telling anyone to go out and "ace" someone with a pistol or any other type of weapon.
The issue here is more about our constitutional rights and this young man's parents poor attitude about how they should approach retalliation for the loss of those rights. The child's rights were violated. He, however should have complied with the rules and removed or turned the shirt inside out until such time that the shirt was declared non- offensive and then could wear it with even more pride than before.
Wearing images of weapons on our clothing or tattooed on our skin is not a State, local or Federal offense. If it were, there would be inmates hanging out of prison windows from over-stuffed cells. Images of a suggestive violent nature
should be but still, are not, thanks to our constitution. Walking through the city donning a firearm with that T-Shirt on might be considered a threat to those named on the garment and cause for concern, but if he has a permit to carry, he still is not breaking any laws.
My point is simple. In the United States of America, the laws and courts are set up so you can;
(a.) make your point, (b.) prove your point, and (c.) get the court to go along with your peril, and then you wear the image(s) with pride and flip off anybody who disagrees with you.
It's the approach that counts.
Follow the rules and procedures written in the constitution and you'd be surprised at how many times you can "fluff" your superiors.
I hope my stance is clear on this issue. (By now)