This is my personal view and comments on the issues and events that I feel a need to talk about or express my view. You don't have to agree, but lets carry on a adult, discussion and maybe you will see it the right way, mine. ;)
The death of freedom to fly the American Flag..
Published on June 9, 2004 By ShadowWar In Politics
This is the story of Richard Oulton, an American, a veteran, and a victim of the Ameircan Communist..the Leftys.

Richard Oulton put up a flag pole in his yard, and flew the American Flag and a purple heart flag. For those of you armchair libs, thats a medal you get for being wounded in time of war. Mr. Oulton was awared that medal while he was a member of the "Walking Dead Marines", the 1st BN, 9th Marine Regiment in Vietnam. His unit started out with 800 marines and lost 605 during the war. This unit suffered the highest casulty rate of any unit in the war. He has every right to be proud, and fly those flags, he earned it with his own blood.

In Richmond, Va., Richard Oulton's homeowner's association demanded his flagpole come down. But he said no way.

"To take it down now would be a total dishonor and an insult to everyone that has ever stood for the flag. If that flag comes down now, the next place it will fly will be over my coffin," Oulton said.

He's been raising the flag ever since he was a medic in Vietnam and flew the stars and stripes over his bunker. "I'm just trying to express my patriotism, my love for my country," he said.

Oulton is an attorney. When he moved into the Florida community he says he checked to see if there were any restrictions on flying the flag.

"There was no reference to flags or flagpoles anyplace," Oulton said.

So he put up a big flagpole next to the big home he built, on three lots. His neighbors say they don't object.

They say it's nice, it matches the house, and say it's an asset to the community.
(DID you get that, the neighbors had NO PROBLEM with the pole or the Flags, in fact they liked it!!))

Objection to Flagpole

But the homeowner's association board said the flagpole's too big.

"We had no idea someone would erect a flagpole that large when the guidelines were written," said Birdie Knuckols, former member of the association board.

Since the association guidelines did not mention flagpoles — the board instead ruled it was an unapproved structure. Later they adopted rules allowing flagpoles — but only small ones, no larger than 6 feet — and required them to be attached to the house.

"It's not an issue of patriotism. All we are asking Mr. Oulton to do is show his patriotism within the guidelines that everyone else in the community is willing to live by," Knuckols said.

Planned communities can set these rules because they're private, and many homeowners love the rules because they like the way the regulations make their communities look nice and uniform. They say this raises property values.

But sometimes the people on the boards of the homeowners' associations are very controlling. And the law is on their side. So, in 1999 the board took its complaint about Oulton's flagpole to court, and won. While he appealed, he was allowed to keep the flagpole up.

Oulton said, "I don't understand what the problem is. It's a property right that I have to fly this flag. It's a free speech right that I have to fly this flag."

He dedicated the flagpole to the Marine unit he served with in Vietnam, a unit dubbed the walking dead because three-quarters of its members were killed.

"I had a lot of guys die in my arms and once I put that plaque out there and said this flag will always fly because I owe it to my boys, my walking dead Marines … I owe it to my boys," Oulton said.

But it won't fly anymore. He took it down in March. All that remains is a hole in the ground, a broken plaque and mementos left by visiting veterans.

Oulton lost his case in local court, and then higher courts rejected his appeals. The presiding judge told Oulton, "You agreed not to erect a structure without prior approval. That's it. No more, no less. You violated that agreement." After a four-year battle, Oulton has lost his flag, and $150,000 to the association in legal fees.

Is this not a perfect example of the way in which the freaks, and deviants in this country take away our freedoms one at a time? Is this not a crime! Think about it, the neighbors LIKED the pole and flags, but some idiot with to much time on his hands and to little brain decided that he didn't like it, can this truely have been an American who felt that way? Does this not make your blood boil that they would go so far as to force him to remove them?? I can tell you where I would have told them to put the flag pole. Then they would have had to come take it down by force.

Another small part of American Freedom and the right to express your love of this Country died that day.
The like shows you pictures of this case and a little more in-depth info. I mistakingly said the ACLU was involved inthis case, they were not to my knowledge (now I know this) but this is just the type of thing thye would do. But this was just done by local idiots and leftys.. They must have had troubled childhoods and blame the USA for all the welfare checks they are forced to get.
Comments (Page 4)
9 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last
on Jun 10, 2004

25 feet for a flag pole is really big. REALLY BIG. The standard flagpole, for houses, is 12-14 ft tall. Something 25 ft tall can be seen from the interstate near my house

A standard flag pole is 15' (which is the average elevation of a single story house) with a 4" diameter trunk.  They usually fly a standard 3'x5' flag.

You will not see a 25' pole from the interstate.  "Commercial" size poles start at 30'.  Most of the ones that you see in front of places like manufacturing plants are 50' or higher. 

The picture posted in #42 looks like what the pole would really look like when shot at a straight line of sight.

I would consider a flag pole a structure since it is cemented in the ground.

No matter where you live, there are rules.  *Everywhere* in the US has zoning.  There is federal zoning, state zoning and local zoning.  Where I am, I have to have at least 30' between my house and any of my property lines.  I also have to have a house that is wider than a single wide trailer, and I have to have at least 2 acres to build on.  I had to get a variance to built on my lot because it is 1.9875 acres.  Why didn't he try to get a variance from his association? 

I have no problem with associations.  They just aren't for me.  But, when you buy a house in an association you do it because you like the laws of the association and you expect everyone to follow those laws.  If you hated fences, and you moved someplace because they didn't allow them, wouldn't you be mad if your neighbor put up a fence?  My neighbor has done some amazingly stupid things with their property.  Luckily, I find it amusing, but if their were more rules where I live, then they couldn't have done those stupid things.  But, I am sure that us taking advantage of there not being noise ordinances where we live, by starting up a race car to put it in the trailer to take to the track at 8am on a Saturday, evens the playing field.

People just need to buy homes where they want to live and live with the rules that are in that area.  This isn't a "rights" issue.

on Jun 10, 2004

Karma, you don't know how far I live from the interstate ::


No but seriously, if the standard residential flag pole is 15' and his was 25', I think we can see he was doing this to be obstinate.


Cheers

on Jun 10, 2004
The law wasn't in effect at the time of the case. It was irrelevant.
on Jun 10, 2004

if the standard residential flag pole is 15' and his was 25', I think we can see he was doing this to be obstinate.

I don't think so.  15' is standard for a single story house.  His is at least 2, so a 25' pole would be a correct proportion.  25' is still a residential height.

I don't think that the size of the flags or flagpole is the issue.  It's that it wouldn't be allowed even if it were 15'.

on Jun 10, 2004
If it was a colorful maypole for the children of the land to celebrate the conception of the divine child by the Goddess on Beltaine, it would be permissable, but a flagpole is ugly, useless, and out of the question. Flagpoles are for schools, post offices, and state houses, not yards where children play and worms fertilize the ground so the seed might grow.
on Jun 10, 2004

The judge enforced the covenant.  A 25 foot flag is a structure.  Again, if you don't live in an association, you probably aren't familiar with these things.  In an association, you typically can't build a basketball net into the ground (i.e. take the pole, cement it in by the drive way).

If a basket ball pole/net isn't allowed, why on earth woudl soemone assume a 25 foot pole with giant flag attached be okay?

Baker: Fine, I sound snotty, whatever.  Millions of Americans live in associations because we got fed up with neighbors who would let their house gone down the tubes making the whole neighborhood decline.  Snotty or not, people know what they're getting into when they  move into neighborhood associations. If he doesn't want to live near snotty people like me he didn't have to. There's pleny of other snotty people looking to move in.

on Jun 10, 2004

Oh he was definitely being obstinate to some degree btw.  Neighborhood associations can pass rules (voted on by the entire neighborhood). It's not like these things are soley decided by a couple of busy bodies.

If I had been in this guy's shoes, I would have brought a motion to explicitly allow flag poles of 25 foot at the neighborhood association meeting and let the people vote on it. I suspect, actually, that he did and hence the rule changed that allowed 12 foot (or whatever it was) flag poles be allowed. 

The claim that "his neighbors were fine" rings false because like I said, the only thing standing between him and getting his way is the association modifying its rules which can be modified at any time by a simple majority vote of the residents.  In the previous association some residents wanted street lights.  The entire neighborhood voted and it lost.  A few months later some residents wanted to change the rule about cars being parked on the drive way (to change it so that people could park their cars on their drive way -- most "default" covenants are very strict) and it passed easily. 

Most associations make major tweaks to their rules all the time based on the needs of the residents.  I am pretty darn sure that if the residents were okay with a 25 foot flag pole with old glory flying that it would be allowed. In our old neighborhood, btw, while I was on the board, the residents voted in allowing people to have above ground pools.  The rules can change.

on Jun 10, 2004

(i.e. take the pole, cement it in by the drive way

Right, a flagpole (of even 15') is cemented in the ground, therefore it should be considered a structure. 

on Jun 10, 2004
Exactly.
on Jun 10, 2004
Again, Brad, I'm venomous. You know me. No personal offense intended, this is just gonna be one of those topics that raise my hackles.



I like and admire many snotty people, Mr Howell among them .
on Jun 10, 2004
Draginol,
I acquiesce on the definition of "structure" including flagpoles, although I don't care for the definition myself.
However, the law specified that covenants are not allowed to implicitly forbid flags or flagpoles:

"A. Unless specifically prohibited by the association's rules and regulations or architectural guidelines provided in the disclosure packet required pursuant to Section 55-512, the association shall not prohibit any lot owner from displaying the flag of (i)the United States, (ii) the Commonwealth, (iii) any active branch of the armed forces of the United States, or (iv) any military valor or service award of the United States.
B. In any action brought by the association under § 55-513, the lot owner shall be entitled to assert as an affirmative defense that the required disclosure of any limitations pertaining to the display of flags or any flagpole or similar structure necessary to display such flags was not contained in the disclosure packet required pursuant to § 55-512."

To simplify, "A: You have to specifically say 'No Flags Allowed'. B: if you don't say 'No Flags Allowed', and you sue someone over a flag or a flagpole, you lose."

The association eventually admitted that flagpoles were not specifically prohibited; they brought suit against him by claiming that the FLAG (not the flagpole) was a "Visual Nuisance"; and the judge, in spite of the clear wording of the law quoted above, sided with the association.

And one of the other articles mentions that all his neighbors signed a petition supporting his flagpole. I'm willing to guess that the association board members kept any flag-based resolution from coming to a vote.


on Jun 10, 2004
A question.

It seems from the timeline that the board asked him to take it down. Court proceedings began, the state made the law and the judge ruled. If that is the case, would not expost facto come in, since the event in question happened before the law was passed. And that is what the judge used in his decision?

Also when the board when to a plan "B" with the visual nuisance tack, the judge did not have to use the new law because the rules of the community probably cover large displays on your lawn.

IG
on Jun 10, 2004

If a law is passed, and declared unconstitutional, or even irrelevant by a judge, it doesn't matter if someone else who reads the law thinks it applies.


Cheers

on Jun 10, 2004
"If a law is passed, and declared unconstitutional, or even irrelevant by a judge, it doesn't matter if someone else who reads the law thinks it applies."


The people speak, and they courts say "nope". Thus ends Democracy, and begins the brave new world of Rule by Attorney. The Imperial "Court", if you'll pardon the pun.
on Jun 10, 2004
Thus ends Democracy

article 3, section 2 prevents tyranny if youre of a mind to take madison's word for it.
9 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last