That's nice. To you, you couldn't care less. Which is all fine and dandy but what about the vets that it DOES matter? To me, it's kind of like a traditional / sacred 'rule'. I don't know if that's the case behind the statute against it, but it's how I'd look at it.

I don't take those uniforms lightly, and I wouldn't want other citizens to do so either. Wearing someone's BDUs or any sort of Full Dress Uniforms isn't something I could condone as 'not a big deal', costume for Halloween or not.

---

This is really a hard one for me, a self-proclaimed "real" conservative. One that preaches that we should never attempt to quell free speech or any of our other rights just because we disagree with the person expressing them. I do respect military service and attempting to impersonate a veteran is one of the more despicable actions I can think of at the moment, but what is the legal/constitutional argument that such an act cannot be considered free speech? I'm sure there's been constitutional cases where there's basic requirements for an act to be considered free speech (an actual message, for example), but in such a circumstance where basic requirements have been met, why is this a special case where the constitution should not apply?

What's the point of defending and respecting our veterans if we're trampling on the constitution at the same time? Again, correct me if I'm wrong about there being no constitutional basis for this protection, I'd love to be wrong in this scenario so I can go back to being angry.

I think the courts have set aside free speech when it comes it impersonation issues. You can't have people dressed up like police. (badges, guns and so on.) They can cause real problems if someone came to them for aid. Or the impersonator tried to get people to do what they want by implying they were a police officer.
The same could be said for a person dressed in an authentic military uniform. It could cause serious problems.

---

Formo gets a +1 from me. He summed it up quite nicely.
To serve in the military is a big sacrifice. To pretend like you did when you didn't, is wrong.
I have way too much respect for those that have served to take that lightly.

---

I guess I didn't think about that one, I guess that my only concern is that while a police officer has actual authority on the homeland, a marine doesn't have that same sort of authority. But hey, at least there's some rationale to this.

Maybe they should chill out and not take themselves so seriously. It's just a job, people -- and one for which servicemembers are paid twice, sometimes even three times what they'd make in the civilian world for comparable work. (Try getting paid $40,000 a year to be an EMT, secretary, or truck mechanic on the civilian side -- they'll laugh in your face.) Any vet who tells you he didn't do it for the money is lying to you. There isn't a person in the military who'd show up for work if he knew he wasn't getting that guaranteed paycheck every month. Veterans screamed to high heaven when George Bush proposed eliminating all combat pays. I should know -- I was one of those who screamed.

While I certainly met quite a few jingoists in the military, I didn't meet too many true patriots, at least not any who had a genuine understanding of the principles upon which this country was founded. I did, however, meet a whole lot of people who openly admitted to being too scared to try to make it in the civilian world and whose main reason for staying in the military was that it was perceived by society as more honorable than living on welfare. (And let's face it: the military lifestyle truly is one grandiose welfare scheme.) The number-one reason given to encourage soldiers to stay in: "It's easy money." Which it truly is.

No joke.

---

So deal with the problems when they arise and punish them severely. No one is harmed by someone walking around in military or police regalia. Now if the impersonator tries to use the perceived sense of authority derived from their costume to compel others to perform an action against their will, that should probably be a felony. But only a fool would attempt that stunt openly. The costume would make him so distinctive and easy to identify.

Similarly, as I said above, if someone attempted to fraudulently obtain benefits appertaining to their impersonated position, that should be punishable too. But it's not like a uniform alone is enough to get someone a pension or healthcare. One has to have documentation and paperwork. Heck, one must present a military ID just to get the military discount on a haircut or the free meal on Veterans Day at Applebee's.

Just because someone could abuse their costume in such a fashion doesn't mean that the liberty of other responsible individuals to express themselves in this manner should be restricted.

---

so you are saying we should wait until the child in the park who needs help runs up to a costumed officer to do something about it instead of not allowing the confusing in the first place?

---

I remember being terrified of a Yoda costume when I was five or six. Are you saying we should ban someone from wearing the costume of a monster because it might frighten a child -- or worse, be used to disguise the identity of a kidnapper?

While we're at it, why don't we ban computers because they might be used to purvey child porn?

---

I am convinced of it.. as generations pass, the core values such as respect and honor are diminishing rapidly.

It is quickly become a society of do as I want, when I want, however I want with very little societal concern whatsoever.

Next up.. abolishing the very union of the United States because it is restricting.

---