Guys, this is not considered an altered flag.

Quote:

Officials at Davis Monthan Air Force Base in Tuscon, Arizona, are allowing a rainbow-striped American flag to remain flying at someone’s home after an airman complained it violated Title 4 of the U.S. Code.

Writing for The Blaze, former Senior Airman Brian Kolfage said he was driving through the base when he saw an American flag with rainbow stripes instead of red and white stripes flying high on a two-story house.

Mr. Kolfage argued that the flag violates a section of Title 4 that states the American flag “shall be thirteen horizontal stripes, alternate red and white; and the union of the flag shall be forty-eight stars, white in a blue field.”

“The flag I saw is a parody of the American Flag with 50 white stars in the union, smeared with the rainbow colors as the stripes. The moment the flag took on the union stars is where it becomes a violation, with my understanding of the U.S. Code,” he writes.

The 355th Fighter Wing Public Affairs office first told Mr. Kolfage that they were reviewing the issue, though no action had yet been taken.

“We take seriously our responsibility to abide by federal law and defend the Constitutional rights of all citizens,” the office said.

Three days later, Mr. Kolfage received the following message: “The installation commander carefully considered the opinions of legal professionals and the law. The display in question is not an altered U.S. flag; therefore, its display does not violate federal law. No action will be taken.”

Link

Eh. There are bigger fish to fry. This is small potatoes compared to a large number of other things.

With that said, I would feel better about an unaltered flag and then a rainbow one AT A LOWER HEIGHT. Nothing should be merged with or elevated above the colors - but that's just my personal preference.

I guess it depends on how you define "unaltered". By the letter of the law, regulations, and general definition, it is most certainly altered.

Silly, but expected.

I don't like it, but they're right. It's not an altered US flag.

It's akin to this (which I don't like either):

If the colors are different, how is not considered altered?

The colors of the flag have specific meaning.

(02-10-2015 02:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  If the colors are different, how is not considered altered?

The colors of the flag have specific meaning.

For once I agree with you.

(02-10-2015 02:36 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 02:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  If the colors are different, how is not considered altered?

The colors of the flag have specific meaning.

For once I agree with you.

It is clearly altered. On a military base that flag should not be displayed.

(02-10-2015 02:52 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 02:36 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 02:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  If the colors are different, how is not considered altered?

The colors of the flag have specific meaning.

For once I agree with you.

It is clearly altered. On a military base that flag should not be displayed.

It shouldn't even be displayed in San Francisco.

(02-10-2015 12:20 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Eh. There are bigger fish to fry. This is small potatoes compared to a large number of other things.

With that said, I would feel better about an unaltered flag and then a rainbow one AT A LOWER HEIGHT. Nothing should be merged with or elevated above the colors - but that's just my personal preference.

While I agree, the bigger fish are just JV and aren't a threat so they get tossed back into the water.

This flag may not be considered altered, but it's a spit in the face of our military as it flies on a military base and should be torn down. I would burn it.

(02-10-2015 03:55 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:20 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Eh. There are bigger fish to fry. This is small potatoes compared to a large number of other things.

With that said, I would feel better about an unaltered flag and then a rainbow one AT A LOWER HEIGHT. Nothing should be merged with or elevated above the colors - but that's just my personal preference.

While I agree, the bigger fish are just JV and aren't a threat so they get tossed back into the water.

This flag may not be considered altered, but it's a spit in the face of our military as it flies on a military base and should be torn down. I would burn it.

I can't imagine anyone coming up with the idea of a rainbow American flag and it's even more unimaginable that they would go into production and make them. I'd laugh if they were made in Saudi Arabia.

(02-10-2015 03:57 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:55 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:20 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Eh. There are bigger fish to fry. This is small potatoes compared to a large number of other things.

With that said, I would feel better about an unaltered flag and then a rainbow one AT A LOWER HEIGHT. Nothing should be merged with or elevated above the colors - but that's just my personal preference.

While I agree, the bigger fish are just JV and aren't a threat so they get tossed back into the water.

This flag may not be considered altered, but it's a spit in the face of our military as it flies on a military base and should be torn down. I would burn it.

I can't imagine anyone coming up with the idea of a rainbow American flag and it's even more unimaginable that they would go into production and make them. I'd laugh if they were made in Saudi Arabia.

I'd just lower myself to their level, sneak over there at midnight, take the flag, and burn it. I mean, that's MY constitutional right, right?

(02-10-2015 04:04 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:57 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:55 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:20 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Eh. There are bigger fish to fry. This is small potatoes compared to a large number of other things.

With that said, I would feel better about an unaltered flag and then a rainbow one AT A LOWER HEIGHT. Nothing should be merged with or elevated above the colors - but that's just my personal preference.

While I agree, the bigger fish are just JV and aren't a threat so they get tossed back into the water.

This flag may not be considered altered, but it's a spit in the face of our military as it flies on a military base and should be torn down. I would burn it.

I can't imagine anyone coming up with the idea of a rainbow American flag and it's even more unimaginable that they would go into production and make them. I'd laugh if they were made in Saudi Arabia.

I'd just lower myself to their level, sneak over there at midnight, take the flag, and burn it. I mean, that's MY constitutional right, right?

Wrong.

You do not have the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it.

(02-10-2015 04:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:04 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:57 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:55 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:20 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Eh. There are bigger fish to fry. This is small potatoes compared to a large number of other things.

With that said, I would feel better about an unaltered flag and then a rainbow one AT A LOWER HEIGHT. Nothing should be merged with or elevated above the colors - but that's just my personal preference.

While I agree, the bigger fish are just JV and aren't a threat so they get tossed back into the water.

This flag may not be considered altered, but it's a spit in the face of our military as it flies on a military base and should be torn down. I would burn it.

I can't imagine anyone coming up with the idea of a rainbow American flag and it's even more unimaginable that they would go into production and make them. I'd laugh if they were made in Saudi Arabia.

I'd just lower myself to their level, sneak over there at midnight, take the flag, and burn it. I mean, that's MY constitutional right, right?

Wrong.

You do not have the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it.

Yes I do. If people can burn my American flag, I can burn their unAmerican flag.

(02-10-2015 04:06 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:04 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:57 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:55 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  While I agree, the bigger fish are just JV and aren't a threat so they get tossed back into the water.

This flag may not be considered altered, but it's a spit in the face of our military as it flies on a military base and should be torn down. I would burn it.

I can't imagine anyone coming up with the idea of a rainbow American flag and it's even more unimaginable that they would go into production and make them. I'd laugh if they were made in Saudi Arabia.

I'd just lower myself to their level, sneak over there at midnight, take the flag, and burn it. I mean, that's MY constitutional right, right?

Wrong.

You do not have the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it.

Yes I do. If people can burn my American flag, I can burn their unAmerican flag.

No one has the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it. I don't know where on earth you ever got that notion.

(02-10-2015 04:08 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:06 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:04 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:57 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  I can't imagine anyone coming up with the idea of a rainbow American flag and it's even more unimaginable that they would go into production and make them. I'd laugh if they were made in Saudi Arabia.

I'd just lower myself to their level, sneak over there at midnight, take the flag, and burn it. I mean, that's MY constitutional right, right?

Wrong.

You do not have the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it.

Yes I do. If people can burn my American flag, I can burn their unAmerican flag.

No one has the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it. I don't know where on earth you ever got that notion.

Maybe he got the idea from Ferguson where they burned everything that moved and no one seemed to care. I mean, watching the TV I didn't see anyone running through Ferguson with the Constitution in his hand telling people they couldn't start fires. In fact, I even heard that Obama told the arsonists to stay the course. Now if Obama, who we all know is a Constitutional scholar, says it's OK to burn stuff that belongs to other people then who am I to agrue?

(02-10-2015 04:06 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:04 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:57 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:55 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  While I agree, the bigger fish are just JV and aren't a threat so they get tossed back into the water.

This flag may not be considered altered, but it's a spit in the face of our military as it flies on a military base and should be torn down. I would burn it.

I can't imagine anyone coming up with the idea of a rainbow American flag and it's even more unimaginable that they would go into production and make them. I'd laugh if they were made in Saudi Arabia.

I'd just lower myself to their level, sneak over there at midnight, take the flag, and burn it. I mean, that's MY constitutional right, right?

Wrong.

You do not have the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it.

Yes I do. If people can burn my American flag, I can burn their unAmerican flag.

Define an unAmerican flag please?

This should be good!

(02-10-2015 04:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:06 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:04 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:57 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  I can't imagine anyone coming up with the idea of a rainbow American flag and it's even more unimaginable that they would go into production and make them. I'd laugh if they were made in Saudi Arabia.

I'd just lower myself to their level, sneak over there at midnight, take the flag, and burn it. I mean, that's MY constitutional right, right?

Wrong.

You do not have the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it.

Yes I do. If people can burn my American flag, I can burn their unAmerican flag.

Define an unAmerican flag please?

This should be good!

See the picture in Post #1. Good enough?

Tom, how is it that the military allows many of us to be offended by this flag, yet when they ship a female soldier to Saudi Arabia they make her cover her arms so she doesn't offend the Saudis?

(02-10-2015 04:57 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:06 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:04 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:57 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  I can't imagine anyone coming up with the idea of a rainbow American flag and it's even more unimaginable that they would go into production and make them. I'd laugh if they were made in Saudi Arabia.

I'd just lower myself to their level, sneak over there at midnight, take the flag, and burn it. I mean, that's MY constitutional right, right?

Wrong.

You do not have the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it.

Yes I do. If people can burn my American flag, I can burn their unAmerican flag.

Define an unAmerican flag please?

This should be good!

Ok, the smiley on the cloud, getting off, is a bit creepy.

Any flag that attempts to replace the American flag is unAmerican. They should have hung it by the real flag.

(02-10-2015 04:08 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:06 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 04:04 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 03:57 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  I can't imagine anyone coming up with the idea of a rainbow American flag and it's even more unimaginable that they would go into production and make them. I'd laugh if they were made in Saudi Arabia.

I'd just lower myself to their level, sneak over there at midnight, take the flag, and burn it. I mean, that's MY constitutional right, right?

Wrong.

You do not have the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it.

Yes I do. If people can burn my American flag, I can burn their unAmerican flag.

No one has the constitutional right to take someone's flag and burn it. I don't know where on earth you ever got that notion.

Steve covered the explanation very well.