I don’t know if I have just been noticing more these last few years, but it seems like the flag is at half-mast a tremendous amount of time. A nation cannot be perpetually in mourning, but it seems like I see the flag displayed in the attitude of mourning much of the time. Often, I have no idea what tragic event occasions the display.
If you’re wondering about it as well, here’s a free resource that explains why the flag is at half-staff today. In our case, it’s a statewide declaration from our governor to honor a deputy sheriff who died recently.
4 comments:
I've seen flags at half-staff within states for retired (or state) senators and reps, as well as former governors. But I agree on the national lowerings. We should stay with the original limits on when the flag should be lowered, and for whom.
LittleRed1
I seem to recall back in 2002 that flags were to be flown half-staff for servicemen killed in Afghanistan. I got it, and didn't get it. In war time, it would pretty much always be at half staff. It would seem more appropriate to fly it higher, if possible, as a promise that we would exact a price from the enemy.
But I've never been on the pointy end (just barely too young for Vietnam), and don't know how it would seem to somebody who has.
If it were up to me, I would strip state governors of the ability to lower the national flag for any cause: that's a decision that should be made only on behalf of the nation. The state has its own flag, which could be struck on days of state-level mourning (as it properly is when the American flag is at half-mast: at half-staff the American flag should always be displayed alone).
As for the occasions that a nation should mourn, I would say that they should be few indeed. The deaths of heroes, not politicians; at least some of those who died in Afghanistan would have been that.
Just had to chime in that I concur with all of this, it's epidemic.
James, I have my suspicions it was anti-war propaganda, honestly. Or maybe it just looked that way from California.
Post a Comment