Marxist ßastard Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 When soldiers exchange liberty for trinkets, they no longer deserve respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 On 2/20/2012 at 11:20 PM, Marxist ßastard said: When soldiers exchange liberty for trinkets, they no longer deserve respect. Holy smokes. What the heck are you smoking? The soldiers EARN those "trinkets" defending YOUR rights. To put it off so lightly is a major slap in the face to those that have sacrificed much, and, in a lot of cases, ALL, to give you the right to piss on them on an online forum. Try serving your country for a few years. Especially in a combat zone. You might change your views. I am outta here, before I get myself in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balagor Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Anyone remember @hoshi? Don´t know why I came to think of him.Never mind, back to topic. @Aurielius, I have the deepest respect for all of your medals of honour. I know what a Silver Star or a Purple Heart is, and what is involved by having it.Though I do not find war as a meaningfull tool, I respect the values of others.Still if some guy is lying about having such an honour, and bragging about it for example in a bar, well one can only guess what happens to him when his lie is discovered. Other than that, he has "only" insulted others, not harmed, thus no further action should be taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grannywils Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Sorry, I'm going to have to jump in here too, and then I'll be outta this one as well. The Congressional Medal of Honor is no mere trinket. MB, Marharth, Aurielius, HeyYou, and so many others of us are sitting here chatting on these forums because some of the aforementioned had the courage and the fortitude to step up and be counted when the going got tough. Some were awarded medals, some were not. Some came home, some did not. The acknowledgement of these men and women for their exceptional service is NO MERE TRINKET, and when someone feels the need to pretend that he has been the recipient of such an honor, he is being a Butt to put it in the gentlest terms I can find at the moment. I believe this thread was meant to be about that person's behavior, not about the honor of receiving this Country's highest awards. To those of you who have received them, you have my respect and gratitude (even though I am a die hard Liberal and don't much care for war). I believe that you did your Country a great service and deserve your awards without denigration or belittlement by those who more than likely haven't a clue. Enough said..... I am now officially out of here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McclaudEagle Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 (edited) @Marxist Bastard... Salvatore Giunta - Received the Medal of Honor for risking his life to save a wounded soldier from being captured. Was the first living recipient since the Vietnam War. Dakota Meyer - Receive the Medal of Honor after he defied orders from superiors and rescued 23 Afghan Allies and 13 Americans in the heat of battle. Robert James Miller - Posthumously received the Medal of Honor after he was fatally shot while diverting gunfire from Taliban forces in Afghanistan so that his fellow soldiers could escape. Jared C. Monti - Posthumously received the Medal of Honor after he was killed while trying to rescue a wounded soldier from intense small arms and rocket-propelled grenade fire. Michael P. Murphy - Posthumously received the Medal of Honor after he led a four-man reconnaissance team in a fight against superior numbers, exposed himself to hostile fire in order to call for help. Leroy Petry - Receive the Medal of Honor after he picked up and threw a live grenade away from his fellow soldiers, was seriously wounded in the process. As you can see, the Medal of Honor is no 'mere trinket', but holds extremely high value. If you still believe that it's just a trinket, and that these soldiers died, or risked death for a 'trinket', then you have no right to call yourself a man, nor do you deserve respect. Give this a read: Medal of Honor Receipients Edited February 21, 2012 by McclaudEagle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyMilla Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 On 2/20/2012 at 11:20 PM, Marxist ßastard said: When soldiers exchange liberty for trinkets, they no longer deserve respect. I'm sure you can express your thoughts with well-reasoned arguments instead of going confrontational.Replacing valid ways of reasoning with snappy one-liners comes dangerously close to what I regard as flame-baiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flintlockecole Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 I'll be honest, the day I can be charged and arrested for being a drunken boastful a** is the day I move into the hills. The mans a liar, so what. We've all lied once, whether if it's for making us look bigger badder than we seem to be or to save our sorry backsides from something we've done wrong. I've got all my great-grandfathers medals, he didn't care much for them other than dust them off every so often and I do the same in that respect. Quote "They're committing fraud. They're impersonating somebody else. They take on attributes of somebody else, attributes of a hero who served honorably," Isn't that what actors do? Impersonate whatever the character is even if they are/or based after a real person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marxist ßastard Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 On 2/21/2012 at 12:50 AM, McclaudEagle said: It seems like you're trying to imply that I said all medal recipients don't deserve respect, just because they're medal recipients – and I never did. Now tell me, who in that list knowingly supports eroding the First Amendment to protect the sanctity of their medals? I'd think no one. But if someone does – then I stand by what I said. It's wrong to degrade freedom in the name of a medal awarded for protecting freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted February 21, 2012 Author Share Posted February 21, 2012 (edited) On 2/21/2012 at 1:35 AM, Flintlockecole said: I'll be honest, the day I can be charged and arrested for being a drunken boastful a** is the day I move into the hills. The mans a liar, so what. We've all lied once, whether if it's for making us look bigger badder than we seem to be or to save our sorry backsides from something we've done wrong. I've got all my great-grandfathers medals, he didn't care much for them other than dust them off every so often and I do the same in that respect. Quote "They're committing fraud. They're impersonating somebody else. They take on attributes of somebody else, attributes of a hero who served honorably," Isn't that what actors do? Impersonate whatever the character is even if they are/or based after a real person. Actors present their fiction as entertainment, impostors present their fiction for personal gain whether that is monetary or for undeserved respect. As for moral ethics, well thats a personal choice which one lives with or not depending on the degree of conscience one has. I'm not much for trotting out my medals to civilians and not even for other vets ( because we already know who and what we are or are not) but they are a reminder to me of friends who didn't live to get to enjoy that option. So to say that impostors offend me is an understatement but I am not willing to trample on the Constitution in order to give them what they deserve. Impostors are not pond scum that is too high an accolade, they are the mucus that feeds off pond scum. Edit: But at the moment it is a Constitutional law unless or until the Supreme Court says otherwise, which is the actual debating point of this thread. The function of the original question was about how or if this impinges on established protections. Please try to confine your thesis to the legal issues and not the actual medal holders whose deeds already place them above reproach. Edited February 21, 2012 by Aurielius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintii Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 (edited) Where I live a famous sportsman - now retired - had a daughter, on a day she went out but forgot her keys at home ... later on that evening she returned andupon realising that she had no keys, she proceeded to climb into the house through a window ... unfortunately for her, her father had a gun ... and he thinkingthat she was a criminal opened fire and killed her. Now because a crime of murder had been committed it wenrt to court ... and this was the judge's ruling: You are free to go, let the memory of killing your own daughterbe your punishment for the rest of your life. Now that is my link to this topic ... HE WILL NEVER FORGET ... Wherever he goes he will be remembered as the man who tried to impersonate a hero and failed, surely that is a punishment not soon forgotten.They say that the worst kind of pain is not physical pain but rather the pain of regret. Provided below is a document on American Law concerning Impersonation ... well worth the read. Reveal hidden contents West's Encyclopedia of American Law: Impersonation Top This entry contains information applicable to United States law only. The crime of pretending to be another individual in order to deceive others and gain some advantage. The crime of false impersonation is defined by federal statutes and by state statutes that differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In some states, pretending to be someone who does not actually exist can constitute false impersonation. For example, suppose Bill attempts to evade prosecution for a crime by giving the arresting officer a fictitious name and address. In Colorado, where "[a] person who knowingly assumes a false or fictitious identity and, under that identity, does any other act intending unlawfully to gain a benefit for himself is guilty of criminal impersonation," Bill could be charged with a crime (Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 18-5-113(1) [West 1996]). In this situation, the benefit Bill hopes to realize is avoiding prosecution, so that element of the offense has been satisfied. To be charged, the defendant does not need to seek a monetary benefit from the impersonation. In New York, giving only a fictitious name does not constitute false impersonation. Under New York law, criminal impersonation is committed when an individual "mpersonates another and does an act in such assumed character with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or defraud another" (N.Y. Penal Law § 190.25 [McKinney 1996]). In other words, it is illegal to impersonate a real person, but not a fictitious one. Thus, if Carol forges Ann's name on checks made out to Ann so that Carol can cash the checks, Carol could be guilty of false impersonation — but only if Ann is a real person. Such laws are designed to protect innocent people from the losses they may incur owing to the wrongful acts of others and to restore any loss of dignity and reputation they may have suffered as a result of impersonation. Most state laws also provide that the impersonation of a public official is a criminal act. In Texas, impersonating "a public servant with intent to induce another to submit to his pretended official authority or to rely on his pretended official acts" is a crime (Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 37.11 [West 1996]). Depending on the jurisdiction, the public servant being impersonated does not always have to actually exist. For example, suppose Carl pulls over a driver, shows her a fake police badge, and reprimands her for speeding but tells her that he will not arrest her if she pays him $50. Carl's actions constitute the crime of false impersonation, in addition to any other crimes, including extortion, that may apply to the situation. Thousands of criminal reports are filed every year by individuals victimized in various ways by persons impersonating police officers. Under federal law, pretending to be "an officer or employee acting under the authority of the United States" in order to demand or obtain "any money, paper, document, or thing of value" can result in a fine as well as imprisonment for up to three years (18 U.S.C.A. § 912). Like state false impersonation statutes, the federal law also seeks to protect interests such as the dignity and prestige of individuals, especially those who hold federal office. Federal statutes also prohibit other types of impersonation, including pretending to be a U.S. citizen; pretending to be a U.S. officer or employee attempting to arrest or search a person or search a building; pretending to be a creditor of the United States or a foreign official; and pretending to be an agent or member of 4-H or of the Red Cross. Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/impersonation#ixzz1n1BbaIii The reason as to why people tend to impersonate other people is manifold and in my thinking unless it's a case of life or death it's not good enough and they should finda tall building and hurtle themselves over the edge and all their lemming lying brothers and sisters should be swift to follow suit. But as flintlockecole says we have all lied at some stage in our lives ... my friends and I have pretended on a number of occasions to being each other ... this is quite "normal" for a girl when it comes to relationships and a phone is around. Edited February 21, 2012 by Nintii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts