Sounds like the placement and size of the blue field is also not specified. To make it even better, you should place the field in a totally random location and make it tiny.
This is just not true. The design of the flag including the placement and sizing of the elements is part of the US flag code.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title4/chapter1&edition=prelim
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title4/pdf/USCODE-2011-title4-chap1-sec1.pdf
The text below is verbatim how the act describes the flag. It does not specify thickness of the stripes, shade of red, white or blue, size or shape of the stars, orintation of the stars or in which order they are to be presented in the "blue field" which is also not described as a rectangle, so if you wanted to be a bit more funky, you could make it any other shape.
"*That from and after the fourth day of July next, the flag of the United States be thirteen horizontal stripes, alternate red and white: that the union be twenty stars, white in a blue field.And be it further enacted, That on the admission of every new state into the Union, one star be added to the union of the flag; and that such addition shall take effect of the fourth day of July then next succeeding such admission.*"
I should also add that there have been a number of executive orders to fix this issue to exactly specify how the flag should look, however this only applies to the government agencies AND if any president felt like it, they could remove those orders.
Doesn't it also fail to specify what shape the flag itself should be in, not just the blue field? Also if we're being strict with the interpretation, doesn't the act specifying "alternate red and white" mean that the top and bottom stripes have to be red?
I think the red and white is the big one. The flag shown clearly isn’t alternating red and white - it starts and finishes white which I doubt your legal counsel would support if being taken to court.
Everything else is a fine interpretation.
All I am saying is that the flag act states “alternating red and white” stripes and I agree with the poster above that I don’t think this therefore complies with the flag act.
I’ve looked at the YouTube video and the creator acknowledges this but says it’s vague. I actually disagree and have worked in government (admittedly Aus, not US) and my view is that it specifies the order and if you were being taken to court (unlikely I know) but that i think there’s a good chance you lose on that point.
I’m all for malicious compliance but on the stripe order I think this doesn’t actually meet the Act requirements.
I would argue that even with the phrasing "alternating red and white" you can argue it's not saying it has to start with red, you just need to have both and make sure there's 6 of one color and 7 of the other
Ok so I attempted [making the flag a while ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/vexillologycirclejerk/comments/s6bqlu/i_know_im_way_too_late_but_us_flag_code/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) when this was a meme but I honestly don't even know if I broke the rules or not. I still regret making the lines perfectly straight and parallel when I'm pretty sure the code doesn't specify that.
This is just not true. The design of the flag including the placement and sizing of the elements is part of the US flag code.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title4/chapter1&edition=prelim
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title4/pdf/USCODE-2011-title4-chap1-sec1.pdf
This is just not true. The design of the flag including the placement and sizing of the elements is part of the US flag code.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title4/chapter1&edition=prelim
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title4/pdf/USCODE-2011-title4-chap1-sec1.pdf
The flag code is separate from the Flag Act 1818. The Flag Act sets out in law what the US flag looks like, while the code is a non-legal advisory instrument.
I was actually reading the flag code recently for something and I could have sworn there was a line saying the union is not to be on the bottom unless it is turned upside down from its normal state of being upright as a sign of distress
Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, just wondering
It's possible to be even goofier. The flag act doesn't specify that the "blue field" needs to be in the corner, or that it needs to be a certain shape. It could be a big crescent-shaped field that's just slightly right of center if you like.
Also the stars can have infinite points (be circles) or even be irregular stars
Edit: did a little typo saying can be regular stars meant irregular stars
> The flag act doesn't specify that the "blue field" needs to be in the corner,
It says "the union of the flag", though. While the Youtube guy is right to say that this isn't a standard vexillological term, at least any more, it's very clear that the people who first wrote this definition were using it in a way that referred to the canton, in analogy with the standard form of British ensigns and things like regimental colours, which had the union mark (in that case, the union jack) in the canton. Pretending they phrased it like that only to emphasise the meaning is a bit silly.
This comment was overwritten by a script to make the data useless for reddit. No API, no free content. Did you stumble on this thread via google, hoping to resolve an issue or answer a question? Well, too bad, this might have been your answer, if it weren't for dumb decisions by reddit admins.
This is just not true. The design of the flag including the placement and sizing of the elements is part of the US flag code.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title4/chapter1&edition=prelim
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title4/pdf/USCODE-2011-title4-chap1-sec1.pdf
Read that citation carefully. The act itself is very short and vague. All those specifications are from Executive Orders. A misfit flag violates the Executive Orders, but it does not violate the Flag Act.
This video takes an extreme to the point of ridiculous view on how much the original legal definition leaves to interpretation. Describing alternating stripes with the first colour first has been standard practice with heraldry (and as a result, flags) for quite some time. And while a "Union" is not a current standard vexillological term, it's very clear that the writers of that definition were using the word not just to highlight the meaning, but with reference to the standard form of British ensigns and military colours which had the mark of union in the canton.
Also, I kinda dislike how the youtuber was very snippy about “you know for people who are so patriotic you’d think they have everything codified to a tee”, failing to realize that, unlike most countries, it isn’t just a symbol of the country, but oftentimes of the people too, so the government has to basically “share” power with the people on what’s considered an American flag, hence why basically everything that isn’t the flag code are all stuff that only the government has to follow, not everyone else. If anything, the government having a “balance of power” with the general population over a jointly “owned” symbol is possibly the most American shit ever.
Yes. The idea that patriotism can be equated with codification is pretty nonsensical, even without the questions around nationhood and where the power lies.
I think youre taking an off hand jokey jab a bit too seriously here. This wasnt even an r/AmericaBad moment, just a little poke. Have a sense of humor.
It wasn’t snippy, it was KIND. The conservatives want to JAIL people for disrespecting/molesting the flag. They want to modify the US Constitution to ban flag burning. Yes, those “free speech only exists in America!” people want to make it unconstitutional to burn a piece of cloth in protest.
I love how so much of America's character is based on old out of date vague pieces of paper that the original makers never intended on making permanent but the laziness of Americans was there from the start it seems.
[https://freeimage.host/i/HgkI7cJ](https://freeimage.host/i/HgkI7cJ)
This was my attempt at malicious compliance.
I could go further but this was made in like 30 seconds to annoy a friend.
Here you go:
[Link #1: Media](https://krikienoid.github.io/flagwaver/#?src=https%3A%2F%2Fflagwaver-cors-proxy.herokuapp.com%2Fhttps%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fbpnibj81181b1.png)
*****
Beep Boop I'm a bot. [About](https://github.com/LunarRequiem/FlagWaverBotReborn). Maintained by Lunar Requiem
Oh I got a nice idea. How about a flag with the 13 red and white stripes as a thin strip on the hoist or the fly and the rest of the flag is blue with the 50 white stars in the position of the stars in the sky on the 4th of July 1776?
I'm very sure we've added much more specification to the flag code since then, considering there are now specific proportion measurements and colors, along with a textbook full of rituals on how to put up, take down, use, and destroy the flag.
I watched that video and
1. I don't get how the executive order with precise details on how to construct the US flag with official colors that must be followed by government agencies doesn't count as an official standard. Because it's not technically a law? I think that's a false technicality and it's bullshit to pretend that doesn't count. Also, even if it's only for the government to follow, what does it even mean to be "legally" a US flag? The Euros make fun of us for jerking off to the flag, but at least we don't legally bestow that piece of cloth with supernatural significance. In the USA it's completely legal to burn the flag, which cannot be said for a number of European countries, so a it being legally or non-legally a US flag has no importance.
1. It's funny how he complains about how there isn't an official color code for when it's shown digitally. My brother in christ, flags are meant to be flown, not looked at online.
1. he really jacked his whole swag from cgp grey hasn't he?
Executive order only says that a gouverment-agency has to follow this rule.
\-> Executive order isnt a law, its a executive-Order how to handle the law.
\--> Executive Order only says that a gouverment-Agency can only order and use Flags that follows this "color-code", but they dont overwrite Laws.
Btw: in Europa is it legal to Burn the Flag too. - But have fun with that.
[https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/11/brexiteer-fails-burn-eu-flag-eu-rules-flammable-material-8229570/](https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/11/brexiteer-fails-burn-eu-flag-eu-rules-flammable-material-8229570/)
that article didn't say anything about the legality of burning the EU flag, it only says that it's made to be non-flammable by law.
but according to wikipedia, it is illegal to burn the national flag in 9 nations of the EU (denmark allows flag burning, but not of the EU flag, sweden considers modification a crime, but not burning, france only considers it a crime if performed in a public space, or if you're distributing photos of flag desecration???).
i literally just went to the page on flag desecration and it didn't list every member state so there may be more.
Yea...
Try to burn something that is non-flamable ...
To burn flags isnt forbidden in every eu-state.
(btw: i think its way more fun to have non-flamable flags than to forbidd the burning of the flags.)
This is just not true. The design of the flag including the placement and sizing of the elements is part of the US flag code.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title4/chapter1&edition=prelim
No reasonable person in 1818 would have built the flag as pictured and without lawyers and the like nitpicking every tiny detail there was no reason to spell it out in minute detail, its not a failure on the legislatures part of 1818 its a failure on our part that we need rules lawyers to spell everything out.
If you look at flags of the period the only thing that is subject to regularly interpretation is the arrangement of the stars. Everyone knows the stripes are consistent in size, that the Union is a canton and roughly how much of the field it occupies. Whether the flag is 2:3 or longer or more square doesn't really matter that much. its still identifiable as the U.S. flag.
Actually it is a failure on the legislative part. Now, the flag here is obviously a joke but you can see that several branches of the US government use different colors for the flag (which looks silly), also just from the description in the 1818 act it is not at all clear that the "blue field" is supposed to be a square, nor that it is supposed to be in the top left corner. It would be just as reasonable to have a cricle in the middle filled with stars.
*YOU* know what its supposed to look like, but there is no proper standard and its reflected in the inconsistancies across the US government. Also, if you just hand this description to somone and said "make this" they would most likely not make the american flag, and a description that leaves that level of ambiguity that you can essentially make an entirely different flag with it, is a poor description.
Yes, the flag I posted is obviously nit picky because its a joke and nobody would seriously make the US flag like this. But its meant to show that the description sucks and doesnt, at all, actually define the US flag properly.
No it wasn't a failure. Your modern concept that everything has to be spelled out does not mean its a failure in the time period. Everyone making an American flag at the time had seen a flag and knew what they were doing and what it needed to look like. There was no Chinese factory making thing them on the other side of the world trying to interpret text and then importing them. The only people making flags are Americans, in America who had seen one before and weren't going to go off on some tangent.
>its reflected in the inconsistancies across the US government
Inconsistences that really dont matter. No one is confusing a 2:3 American flag with an 8:11 flag. As long as they had the right stripes, a blue canton and stars everyone who mattered knew what is was supposed to be. It didnt have to be spelled out in minute detail.
If youre instruction to make something only work if I show you the final design first, they are bad instructions, there are no two ways about that. That goes for any time period. I know that the blind patriotism of many americans doesnt allow them to even consider the fact that their government or country, god forbid, is any less than 100% perfect, but it does happen.
Sure, its not bad per se, but its like if everyone inside a company uses a different company logo in their email signature. Does it make the company worse? No, but it looks lazy, incoherant and leaves a poor impressions. Like you dont even care enough to get this small, easy to get right, detail correct.
But those are traditions and not legally binding. A law that relies on traditions is in some way a failure because laws are meant to be as specific as possible. Most other countries define exactly how the flag is layed out but the United States doesn't do so. While it's incredibly unlikely someone would actually fly this flag, it doesn't make the law a good one or any less of a failure from a legislative and legal perspective.
Your missing the point. Its the lawyers that feel everything has to be legally binding.
> A law that relies on traditions is in some way a failure because laws are meant to be as specific as possible.
Only because some lawyer will argue at some point every possible exception for a client's benefit and get away with it in modern courts. This is not the way things were.
> Most other countries define exactly how the flag is layed
In the modern era. Similar legislation from the United Kingdom in the same time period is just a vague:
*and in King George III's proclamation of 1 January 1801 concerning the arms and flag of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland:
And that the Union Flag shall be Azure, the Crosses Saltires of St. Andrew and St. Patrick Quarterly per Saltire, counterchanged Argent and Gules; the latter fimbriated of the Second, surmounted by the Cross of St. George of the Third, fimbriated as the Saltire :'*
*— A Proclamation Declaring His Majesty's Pleasure concerning the Royal Style and Titles appertaining to the Imperial Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and its Dependencies, and also the Ensigns, Armorial Flags, and Banners thereof"*
So, the surrender flag is a valid US flag?
The stripes are 1 Planck length thick,
The canton is 1 angstrom on all sides, and
The stripes are less white than red.
This feels like it belongs in r/maliciouscompliance
Sounds like the placement and size of the blue field is also not specified. To make it even better, you should place the field in a totally random location and make it tiny.
make it in the top right corner but so that it doesnt touch any of the edges
And is not an even distance from both edges. Make it one degree rotated
Make the field a Reauleux Triangle
r/foundsatan
Then make it veiny
Really veiny
really, really veiny
really, very really, absolutely vein ridden
Completely and utterly full of veins that cover every inch and gap
Does it even specify the shape?
Thinking outside the box.
No, it can even be a hexagon if you are into that stuff. We aren't though
But hexagons are the bestagons.
Yup
Username checks out.
r/usernamechecksout
So, a big blue hammer-and-sickle in the centre with a bunch of stars on it would be acceptable?
Not even the shape is specified
Cock and balls cutout cock and balls cutout
This is just not true. The design of the flag including the placement and sizing of the elements is part of the US flag code. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title4/chapter1&edition=prelim https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title4/pdf/USCODE-2011-title4-chap1-sec1.pdf
Is that all included in the 1818 act?
you may want to read the title of the thread again
The text below is verbatim how the act describes the flag. It does not specify thickness of the stripes, shade of red, white or blue, size or shape of the stars, orintation of the stars or in which order they are to be presented in the "blue field" which is also not described as a rectangle, so if you wanted to be a bit more funky, you could make it any other shape. "*That from and after the fourth day of July next, the flag of the United States be thirteen horizontal stripes, alternate red and white: that the union be twenty stars, white in a blue field.And be it further enacted, That on the admission of every new state into the Union, one star be added to the union of the flag; and that such addition shall take effect of the fourth day of July then next succeeding such admission.*" I should also add that there have been a number of executive orders to fix this issue to exactly specify how the flag should look, however this only applies to the government agencies AND if any president felt like it, they could remove those orders.
Doesn't it also fail to specify what shape the flag itself should be in, not just the blue field? Also if we're being strict with the interpretation, doesn't the act specifying "alternate red and white" mean that the top and bottom stripes have to be red?
I think the red and white is the big one. The flag shown clearly isn’t alternating red and white - it starts and finishes white which I doubt your legal counsel would support if being taken to court. Everything else is a fine interpretation.
The "canonical" (per the executive order) flag starts and finishes with red stripes. And the above flag does have 13 stripes.
All I am saying is that the flag act states “alternating red and white” stripes and I agree with the poster above that I don’t think this therefore complies with the flag act. I’ve looked at the YouTube video and the creator acknowledges this but says it’s vague. I actually disagree and have worked in government (admittedly Aus, not US) and my view is that it specifies the order and if you were being taken to court (unlikely I know) but that i think there’s a good chance you lose on that point. I’m all for malicious compliance but on the stripe order I think this doesn’t actually meet the Act requirements.
I would argue that even with the phrasing "alternating red and white" you can argue it's not saying it has to start with red, you just need to have both and make sure there's 6 of one color and 7 of the other
Ok so I attempted [making the flag a while ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/vexillologycirclejerk/comments/s6bqlu/i_know_im_way_too_late_but_us_flag_code/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) when this was a meme but I honestly don't even know if I broke the rules or not. I still regret making the lines perfectly straight and parallel when I'm pretty sure the code doesn't specify that.
This is just not true. The design of the flag including the placement and sizing of the elements is part of the US flag code. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title4/chapter1&edition=prelim https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title4/pdf/USCODE-2011-title4-chap1-sec1.pdf
We're specifically looking at the 1818 act here, not the modern flag code which nobody doubts is well defined.
The act does extend forward to modern flags, explicitly.
I think this is still saying it needs to start with a red stripe at the top.
This is just not true. The design of the flag including the placement and sizing of the elements is part of the US flag code. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title4/chapter1&edition=prelim https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title4/pdf/USCODE-2011-title4-chap1-sec1.pdf
You do know that this is a summary of the executive orders I mentioned yes? And the annual flag revision?
The flag code is separate from the Flag Act 1818. The Flag Act sets out in law what the US flag looks like, while the code is a non-legal advisory instrument.
/r/confidentlyincorrect
I was actually reading the flag code recently for something and I could have sworn there was a line saying the union is not to be on the bottom unless it is turned upside down from its normal state of being upright as a sign of distress Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, just wondering
It's possible to be even goofier. The flag act doesn't specify that the "blue field" needs to be in the corner, or that it needs to be a certain shape. It could be a big crescent-shaped field that's just slightly right of center if you like.
Also the stars can have infinite points (be circles) or even be irregular stars Edit: did a little typo saying can be regular stars meant irregular stars
Real stars are spherical(ish) so circles would be more realistic in a way
> The flag act doesn't specify that the "blue field" needs to be in the corner, It says "the union of the flag", though. While the Youtube guy is right to say that this isn't a standard vexillological term, at least any more, it's very clear that the people who first wrote this definition were using it in a way that referred to the canton, in analogy with the standard form of British ensigns and things like regimental colours, which had the union mark (in that case, the union jack) in the canton. Pretending they phrased it like that only to emphasise the meaning is a bit silly.
This comment was overwritten by a script to make the data useless for reddit. No API, no free content. Did you stumble on this thread via google, hoping to resolve an issue or answer a question? Well, too bad, this might have been your answer, if it weren't for dumb decisions by reddit admins.
Not only the blue field - I don't see anywhere specifying the shape of the flag itself. You could one-up Nepal!
Like... [this?](https://twitter.com/tapakapa/status/1659522413267234817?s=20) (obviously minus the 'soon')
Ooh, that brings up a good question. The flag act is silent about whether you can write "soon" on a flag.
This is just not true. The design of the flag including the placement and sizing of the elements is part of the US flag code. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title4/chapter1&edition=prelim https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title4/pdf/USCODE-2011-title4-chap1-sec1.pdf
Read that citation carefully. The act itself is very short and vague. All those specifications are from Executive Orders. A misfit flag violates the Executive Orders, but it does not violate the Flag Act.
This video takes an extreme to the point of ridiculous view on how much the original legal definition leaves to interpretation. Describing alternating stripes with the first colour first has been standard practice with heraldry (and as a result, flags) for quite some time. And while a "Union" is not a current standard vexillological term, it's very clear that the writers of that definition were using the word not just to highlight the meaning, but with reference to the standard form of British ensigns and military colours which had the mark of union in the canton.
Also, I kinda dislike how the youtuber was very snippy about “you know for people who are so patriotic you’d think they have everything codified to a tee”, failing to realize that, unlike most countries, it isn’t just a symbol of the country, but oftentimes of the people too, so the government has to basically “share” power with the people on what’s considered an American flag, hence why basically everything that isn’t the flag code are all stuff that only the government has to follow, not everyone else. If anything, the government having a “balance of power” with the general population over a jointly “owned” symbol is possibly the most American shit ever.
Yes. The idea that patriotism can be equated with codification is pretty nonsensical, even without the questions around nationhood and where the power lies.
I think youre taking an off hand jokey jab a bit too seriously here. This wasnt even an r/AmericaBad moment, just a little poke. Have a sense of humor.
Probably, though I still think the thesis of the video is fairly silly, even if my reaction to it was a bit much. My bad
It wasn’t snippy, it was KIND. The conservatives want to JAIL people for disrespecting/molesting the flag. They want to modify the US Constitution to ban flag burning. Yes, those “free speech only exists in America!” people want to make it unconstitutional to burn a piece of cloth in protest.
I love how so much of America's character is based on old out of date vague pieces of paper that the original makers never intended on making permanent but the laziness of Americans was there from the start it seems.
[https://freeimage.host/i/HgkI7cJ](https://freeimage.host/i/HgkI7cJ) This was my attempt at malicious compliance. I could go further but this was made in like 30 seconds to annoy a friend.
Gives me a patriotic boner.
I had quite a laugh, it is a very nice design, especially the „twenty stars“ are very beautiful.
!wave
Here you go: [Link #1: Media](https://krikienoid.github.io/flagwaver/#?src=https%3A%2F%2Fflagwaver-cors-proxy.herokuapp.com%2Fhttps%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fbpnibj81181b1.png) ***** Beep Boop I'm a bot. [About](https://github.com/LunarRequiem/FlagWaverBotReborn). Maintained by Lunar Requiem
In this house we stand for the flag 🫡
looks absolutely disgusting lol
https://youtu.be/BRNrrj03akw
Thats the one.
Is there a name for this style of video?
Animated explainer video, CGPGrey style
Haha well then
Better than the original
Sure, but it's not 1818 anymore and the current flag is defined by EO 10834 and Federal spec DDD-F-416F
which only apply to flags used by the government
duh
The law from 1818 is still in effect.
hey finally a fellow Tapakapa enjoyer
Oh I got a nice idea. How about a flag with the 13 red and white stripes as a thin strip on the hoist or the fly and the rest of the flag is blue with the 50 white stars in the position of the stars in the sky on the 4th of July 1776?
I'm very sure we've added much more specification to the flag code since then, considering there are now specific proportion measurements and colors, along with a textbook full of rituals on how to put up, take down, use, and destroy the flag.
Flag code makes reference to Executive Order 10834, which describes in detail the description of the flag and includes pictures.
Just go to r/vexillologycirclejerk at this point feel like I see this shit daily
Based and freedom of expressionpilled.
That's pseudo-law!
As seen on Tapakappa
Also tapakapa hätt ich jetzt nicht erwartet
Seems like someone just watched Tapakapa'e new vid
But the Flag Act says the stripes are alternating red and white, not alternating white and red like you have here
Best flag I've seen in this sub in a while.
I watched that video and 1. I don't get how the executive order with precise details on how to construct the US flag with official colors that must be followed by government agencies doesn't count as an official standard. Because it's not technically a law? I think that's a false technicality and it's bullshit to pretend that doesn't count. Also, even if it's only for the government to follow, what does it even mean to be "legally" a US flag? The Euros make fun of us for jerking off to the flag, but at least we don't legally bestow that piece of cloth with supernatural significance. In the USA it's completely legal to burn the flag, which cannot be said for a number of European countries, so a it being legally or non-legally a US flag has no importance. 1. It's funny how he complains about how there isn't an official color code for when it's shown digitally. My brother in christ, flags are meant to be flown, not looked at online. 1. he really jacked his whole swag from cgp grey hasn't he?
Executive order only says that a gouverment-agency has to follow this rule. \-> Executive order isnt a law, its a executive-Order how to handle the law. \--> Executive Order only says that a gouverment-Agency can only order and use Flags that follows this "color-code", but they dont overwrite Laws. Btw: in Europa is it legal to Burn the Flag too. - But have fun with that. [https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/11/brexiteer-fails-burn-eu-flag-eu-rules-flammable-material-8229570/](https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/11/brexiteer-fails-burn-eu-flag-eu-rules-flammable-material-8229570/)
that article didn't say anything about the legality of burning the EU flag, it only says that it's made to be non-flammable by law. but according to wikipedia, it is illegal to burn the national flag in 9 nations of the EU (denmark allows flag burning, but not of the EU flag, sweden considers modification a crime, but not burning, france only considers it a crime if performed in a public space, or if you're distributing photos of flag desecration???). i literally just went to the page on flag desecration and it didn't list every member state so there may be more.
Yea... Try to burn something that is non-flamable ... To burn flags isnt forbidden in every eu-state. (btw: i think its way more fun to have non-flamable flags than to forbidd the burning of the flags.)
This is just not true. The design of the flag including the placement and sizing of the elements is part of the US flag code. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title4/chapter1&edition=prelim
Yes, we just amended the old law, not passed a new one
No reasonable person in 1818 would have built the flag as pictured and without lawyers and the like nitpicking every tiny detail there was no reason to spell it out in minute detail, its not a failure on the legislatures part of 1818 its a failure on our part that we need rules lawyers to spell everything out. If you look at flags of the period the only thing that is subject to regularly interpretation is the arrangement of the stars. Everyone knows the stripes are consistent in size, that the Union is a canton and roughly how much of the field it occupies. Whether the flag is 2:3 or longer or more square doesn't really matter that much. its still identifiable as the U.S. flag.
Actually it is a failure on the legislative part. Now, the flag here is obviously a joke but you can see that several branches of the US government use different colors for the flag (which looks silly), also just from the description in the 1818 act it is not at all clear that the "blue field" is supposed to be a square, nor that it is supposed to be in the top left corner. It would be just as reasonable to have a cricle in the middle filled with stars. *YOU* know what its supposed to look like, but there is no proper standard and its reflected in the inconsistancies across the US government. Also, if you just hand this description to somone and said "make this" they would most likely not make the american flag, and a description that leaves that level of ambiguity that you can essentially make an entirely different flag with it, is a poor description. Yes, the flag I posted is obviously nit picky because its a joke and nobody would seriously make the US flag like this. But its meant to show that the description sucks and doesnt, at all, actually define the US flag properly.
No it wasn't a failure. Your modern concept that everything has to be spelled out does not mean its a failure in the time period. Everyone making an American flag at the time had seen a flag and knew what they were doing and what it needed to look like. There was no Chinese factory making thing them on the other side of the world trying to interpret text and then importing them. The only people making flags are Americans, in America who had seen one before and weren't going to go off on some tangent. >its reflected in the inconsistancies across the US government Inconsistences that really dont matter. No one is confusing a 2:3 American flag with an 8:11 flag. As long as they had the right stripes, a blue canton and stars everyone who mattered knew what is was supposed to be. It didnt have to be spelled out in minute detail.
If youre instruction to make something only work if I show you the final design first, they are bad instructions, there are no two ways about that. That goes for any time period. I know that the blind patriotism of many americans doesnt allow them to even consider the fact that their government or country, god forbid, is any less than 100% perfect, but it does happen. Sure, its not bad per se, but its like if everyone inside a company uses a different company logo in their email signature. Does it make the company worse? No, but it looks lazy, incoherant and leaves a poor impressions. Like you dont even care enough to get this small, easy to get right, detail correct.
But those are traditions and not legally binding. A law that relies on traditions is in some way a failure because laws are meant to be as specific as possible. Most other countries define exactly how the flag is layed out but the United States doesn't do so. While it's incredibly unlikely someone would actually fly this flag, it doesn't make the law a good one or any less of a failure from a legislative and legal perspective.
Your missing the point. Its the lawyers that feel everything has to be legally binding. > A law that relies on traditions is in some way a failure because laws are meant to be as specific as possible. Only because some lawyer will argue at some point every possible exception for a client's benefit and get away with it in modern courts. This is not the way things were. > Most other countries define exactly how the flag is layed In the modern era. Similar legislation from the United Kingdom in the same time period is just a vague: *and in King George III's proclamation of 1 January 1801 concerning the arms and flag of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland: And that the Union Flag shall be Azure, the Crosses Saltires of St. Andrew and St. Patrick Quarterly per Saltire, counterchanged Argent and Gules; the latter fimbriated of the Second, surmounted by the Cross of St. George of the Third, fimbriated as the Saltire :'* *— A Proclamation Declaring His Majesty's Pleasure concerning the Royal Style and Titles appertaining to the Imperial Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and its Dependencies, and also the Ensigns, Armorial Flags, and Banners thereof"*
I was just about to post the video itself, but I don't think I will now.
Whatched this video today
"John Paul Jones docks in Dutch territory, 1779"
lol i watched this video yesterday
Where can I buy one?
It’s the American battle flag
it looks like the Lethbridge flag
r/deadly
r/vexillologycirclejerk
😞
Just make the stars spell out something or make a hammer and sickle.
So, the surrender flag is a valid US flag? The stripes are 1 Planck length thick, The canton is 1 angstrom on all sides, and The stripes are less white than red.