That is why I maintain that burning the flag in the public square is not free speech. It is incitement to violence, as this fool found out. There is little difference between his action and shouting "fire" in a theater. Neither constitute free speech.
For those of you who support this so-called expression, just what does it mean? Does the generic torcher hate America, dislike President Bush, protest our Iraq policy, support the Kyoto treaty, dislike burning of tropical forests, hate toenail fungus or just what? If there is no distinct message in the act of burning Old Glory how can it be free speech?
Conservatives also get angry with federal, state laws, policies etc. Why don't they (we) burn the flag?
Um, what he did was actually start a fire in a theatre, if you think about it.
He could have easily set someone else's hair or clothing on fire with his "protected speech", and I think everyone around him was VERY aware of that possibility.
He's lucky he wasn't beaten to death. People tend to kick the sh!t out of someone who's trying to hurt them, and when they're full of adrenaline...