Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   The Club House (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f12/)
-   -   US appeals court panel: Law against faking receipt of military medals is unconstituti (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f12/us-appeals-court-panel-law-against-faking-receipt-military-medals-unconstituti-30567/)

opaww 08-18-2010 12:51 PM

US appeals court panel: Law against faking receipt of military medals is unconstituti
 
FOXNews.com - US appeals court panel: Law against faking receipt of military medals is unconstitutional

PASADENA, Calif. A three-year-old federal law that makes it a crime to falsely claim to have received a medal from the U.S. military is unconstitutional, an appeals court panel in California ruled Tuesday.

The decision involves the case of Xavier Alvarez of Pomona, Calif., a water district board member who said at a public meeting in 2007 that he was a retired Marine who received the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest military decoration.

Alvarez was indicted in 2007. He pleaded guilty on condition that he be allowed to appeal on First Amendment grounds. He was sentenced under the Stolen Valor Act to more than 400 hours of community service at a veterans hospital and fined $5,000.

A panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with him in a 2-1 decision Tuesday, agreeing that the law was a violation of his free-speech rights. The majority said there's no evidence that such lies harm anybody, and there's no compelling reason for the government to ban such lies.

The dissenting justice insisted that the majority refused to follow clear Supreme Court precedent that false statements of fact are not entitled to First Amendment protection.


Dozens of people have been arrested under the law at a time when veterans coming home from wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are being embraced as heroes. Many of the cases involve men who simply got caught living a lie without profiting from it. Almost all the impostors have been ordered to perform community service.

The U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles said it was deciding whether to appeal Tuesday's ruling.

freefall 08-18-2010 03:40 PM

So does that mean it's cool to go into business manufacturing fake medals to sell to the poseurs? Anybody want a Nobel Peace Prize for $19.95? As seen on Al Gore, Barak Obama, Yassir Arafat, and other benefactors of mankind!

dunerunner 08-18-2010 03:46 PM

I hope this is overturned in a higher court.

CA357 08-18-2010 03:47 PM

That's bullsh!t.

c3shooter 08-18-2010 09:19 PM

Suggest that the poseurs wear their medals in public. Any Saturday nite on Hayes Street in Fayetteville NC would be a good start. :cool:


Pleae note that there would BE no appeals.

danf_fl 08-18-2010 09:38 PM

And this is the crap that I, as a veteran, served to protect.

Talk about a slap to the face.

JoeFromSidney 08-18-2010 09:43 PM

Judges and the law
 
Makes you wonder how some people ever got through law school. Just no common sense.

doctherock 08-18-2010 09:56 PM

Raising the BS flag on this one. I served my time and busted my ass for my medals, dont need posers fakin it. Guess ya just have to ask to see their DD214.

IGETEVEN 08-18-2010 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by c3shooter (Post 334023)
Suggest that the poseurs wear their medals in public. Any Saturday nite on Hayes Street in Fayetteville NC would be a good start. :cool:

Pleae note that there would BE no appeals.

Indeed!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by doctherock (Post 334055)
Raising the BS flag on this one. I served my time and busted my ass for my medals, dont need posers fakin it. Guess ya just have to ask to see their DD214.

I HATE POSERS! :mad:

Worthless, lazy, low self esteem, dishonoring, disrespectful, riding tailcoats, lying, pieces of sh!t!!! :mad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrjF1...eature=related

pandamonium 08-18-2010 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by opaww (Post 333767)
[The dissenting justice insisted that the majority refused to follow clear Supreme Court precedent that false statements of fact are not entitled to First Amendment protection..

I would like to hear the other two judges explain why they felt they shouldn't follow Supreme Court precedence.:mad:


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:52 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.