I am not arguing your right to protest, or use your freedom of expression. Nor am I against your arguments to prevent an abuse of your constitution. The point I choose to illustrate is that:

a: State and Municipal laws adequately can adequately cover the issue of flag burning if needed so why pass an ammendment? (thus supporting your argument indirectly)

b: There is a perceived threat to safety in any act of arson, and freedom expression is curtailed by law only to prevent injury, indecency or loss.

c: If someone commits an act of violence during a flag burning protest are they merely exercising expression of free speech too?

There has to be some limitations on freedom of expression, my comments about urinating on Hillary Clinton as a perfect example.
I have seen a young man get shot for hoisting a flag in a country that just had a military coup overnight (without his knowledge) I have seen people lose their tempers and turn to acts of violence over a flag desecration. I have watched a couple of people get burned by lighter fluid during a flag burning incident. I have even witnessed people getting stoned for wearing a particular flag. I have also been attacked for wearing a flag once.

Do you think I am using illogical arguments now, or perhaps just acting under the voice of experience and reason? Calling my arguments phoney, belies your own comments on freedom of expression.

Yours, Aye. Dave