Categories
Bill Whittle Now

Statesville Sues to Strike Huge American Flag: Marcus Lemonis Refuses

Marcus Lemonis, owner of Camping World and star of CNBC’s ‘The Profit’, must take down the 40′ x 80′ American flag he flies over his North Carolina business, Camping World. Lemonis refuses, and pays the daily fine. Now, Statesville is suing him to force him into compliance with the city ordinance regarding flag sizes within 100-feet of a highway.

Statesville Sues to Strike Huge American Flag: Marcus Lemonis Refuses

Marcus Lemonis, owner of Camping World and star of CNBC’s ‘The Profit’, must take down the 40′ x 80′ American flag he flies over his North Carolina business, Camping World. Lemonis refuses, and pays the daily fine. Now, Statesville is suing him to force him into compliance with the city ordinance regarding flag sizes within 100-feet of a highway.

21 replies on “Statesville Sues to Strike Huge American Flag: Marcus Lemonis Refuses”

May 23, 2019
I respectfully offer the following in response to the Bill Whittle Now episode entitled Your Flag is Too Big.

At 7:23 through 7:50 into the presentation, you explained a phrase someone used to describe you as a “conservative protestant” by saying that “by Protestant I don’t mean the religion, I mean the—-he meant, that the entire Protestant revolution was the idea that any individual could talk directly to God without having to go through a priest to translate it into Latin so that God could understand it.”

This is a weak analogy because it is based upon a false assumption. It implies that the Catholic Church (not the modern version—but that is another discussion) has taught that people cannot talk directly to God. This is not only factually incorrect, but the flippant tone of the statement is not worthy of you. It represents a misunderstanding of the function of the priest and the history of the use of Latin by the Church, but this too is another discussion. Suffice it to say that Catholics talk to God directly all the time when they pray.
The statement is based upon the Protestant teaching of private biblical interpretation. This has led to the proliferation of tens of thousands of Protestant sects each reading ostensibly the same Bible and each coming up with different answers or interpretations. Much like all of us reading the same US Constitution and coming up with our own interpretations. The ongoing battle over the 2nd Amendment is a good example.
So in such situations, biblical or secular, how do we know who’s right? We can all be wrong but we cannot all be right. This is why an authority, properly exercised, is needed, judicial overreach notwithstanding. In fact, I think a there is a case to be made that modern-day liberalism is an outgrowth of Protestantism which is founded on the rejection of authority outside of one’s self. But that too is another discussion. However, it seems that you do think there is need for an authority because at about 10:53 into your presentation you said that the flag owner “should take this to the Supreme Court if that’s what they want”.

This leads to another problem– making everything a federal issue. This flag thing should be handled under the auspices of local jurisdictions and the North Carolina State constitution. However, it appears that North Carolina has bigger problems than the size of flags. Under Article I Sec.5, the state seems to have abrogated its sovereignty by making the national government supreme over the state, to wit:

Sec. 5. Allegiance to the United States.
Every citizen of this State owes paramount allegiance to the Constitution and government of the United States, and no law or ordinance of the State in contravention or subversion thereof can have any binding force.

Judicial review is out of control, especially the power accumulated in SCOTUS which was never intended. This power is increased every time what should be a local issue is taken to and accepted by SCOTUS. But the abuse or misuse of authority does not negate the concept or principle of the need for an authority in the Biblical or secular realms.
Most respectfully,
Livia Laurenzano

When I heard “government restricting size of American flags,” my knee-jerk reaction was f-off. Seriously. Especially since I studied John Locke, any government action that does not serve to defend the liberty of citizens has become extremely offensive to me. I’m glad that you managed to restrain this knee-jerk reaction and think through it logically, considering the reasons behind the regulation. I had not initially considered the possible traffic danger. That’s why I’m a member, for your grounding, rational, common sense. Thanks again Bill. I’m still on that guy’s side, though.

At 4:54, Bill said, “It’s his property.”

No, Bill, it’s not his property. You can call it “private land” all day, but that doesn’t give him “true ownership” of the property. He’s only the caretaker. The state owns the property and residents are bound by the laws of the state, county and local governments no matter how arbitrary they are. You can prove it to yourself. Simply don’t pay your real estate tax. In a few years, you’ll find out who really owns your property.

However, you are right on the nose about natural law and human rights. If people would understand that allodial lands rights are natural human rights, then the First Amendment would be amended with another negative liberty against Congress: “Congress shall make no law abridging the rights of land owners.” Then Mr. Lemonis could fly his flag without being molested by the city of Statesville.

If Mr. Lemonis and the rest of America want true ownership of the land they occupy, then they’ll have to wake up and assert allodial property rights. But, I doubt that will ever happen. There are too many lawyers sucking off the teat of property “caretakers”.

I pay taxes for my vehicle. Does the department of motor vehicles own my automobile?

I’m in favor of putting an American flag on the moon that’s so big, it can be seen from earth. Maybe w/ a little SpaceX bug in the corner of the flag.

You can easily find pictures of this location online. The Flag is NOT interfering with the roadway or safety in any manner. Down here in Texas we have lots of private businesses off major freeways flying these same huge American flags. They are mostly car dealerships, and they have been doing it for decades. I just happen live in the DFW area not far from Mr. Scott Ott! Howdy neighbor!

THIS IS NONSENSE- Camping World is YUGE !!!! the N.C. location, right near a freeway, has one – pictures are on the web. Anything smaller and it could not be seen from the farthest end of the property

Wow. That’s a huge flag. Literally casting a shadow onto the freeway at midday.

Click through where it says “WSOC reports” for the video and you can tell that photo isn’t from the same location. Can’t judge heights and distances too well but you can see here what looks like it’s probably the flag pole is pretty close to the highway.

We have a Camping World store near us. It is located adjacent to Interstate Hwy 5 (near Eugene, Oregon) and they have a giant flag. I love seeing the flag every time I go by. It looks very much like the picture in this article (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-north-carolina-city-is-suing-an-rv-retailer-over-its-gigantic-american-flag-they-still-wont-take-it-down/ar-AABMa0e?li=BBnb7Kz).
To say it poses a safety hazard is ridiculous. If there is ever a wind strong enough to blow it onto the freeway, there will be a lot more dangerous, bigger and heavier stuff (like over-turned tractor-trailer rigs) blowing around on the freeway at the same time.
One thing I do have a question about: Is the city ordinance only with respect to the American Flag? From the articles I have read it would seem so, but I am not sure. If it was some other kind of flag would it be OK under the city ordinance?

Sorry Bill, the proper recourse is to not pay the fine, but appeal it to an appellate court that can judge the law itself, the Supreme Court if necessary. Only then can it be judged unconstitutional.

Disagree. A flag that big, that close to the highway, is dangerous and distracting. The ordinance was likely created for safety reasons. Having said that, if I were a council member, I’d propose the city take the fines collected and subsidize the cost of relocating this glorious object that is a reflection of all the city’s patriotic citizens and businesses. There. Everyone wins.

Yeah, I’d want to know the rationale behind the law. In a storm the stresses on the flagpole and the flag attachments might be pretty severe with a flag that size. Potentially either or both could wind up in the freeway if they’re too close. Limiting the size of a flag to 1000 sq. ft. and/or the distance from the freeway doesn’t seem like a major imposition.

We had a similar issue around here a few years ago. A tropically themed casino decorated their property with two dozen multicolored plastic palm trees intended to attract the attention of passersby on the interstate. The city ordered the owner to remove them because they were eyesores and did not promote the traditional western theme of this Montana community. He fought them for months, but in the end the “trees” were removed. I think in both of these cases the real issue is about who is in charge, the government or the individual. It is an unending struggle.

Leave a Reply