Update on Ed Brown IRS case...

I bet the Founding fathers had a heck of a tough time with the colonists who had authoritarian personalities. It seems the authoritarian personality will stand for those who rule the current status quo no matter how corrupt and tyrannical they get.
During the revolution, I bet many colonists called the Founding Fathers stupid idiots for upsetting the status quo and sacrificing themselves when they could just work within the system or pursue material gains while ignoring incremental tyranny.

Well, the takers, those that benefit from the system of course don't want this to end.

And while many of us point to takers of welfare, the biggest takers of welfare (government), are corporations. Especially financial companies, military weapons makers, and oil companies (who get the benefits of military actions).

These folks also have alot more say in our system than any other group of citizens.

And, the financial corporations have the biggest say of all, because our system of money is nothing more than a bond based upon those taxes the federal government can get. We work not for the IRS, but for the Federal Reserve. The IRS is the collection agency. And the Federal Reserve is a cartel of private banks. Ed Brown decided to fight that theft system, and he is going to pay the price.

The Constitution grants power to Congress to "lay and collect taxes ..." (Article I, Section 8). It doesn't outline what a "fair" tax is, only that the Congress has the right to lay it and collect it.

Click to expand...

It absolutely does. But whether that power was used or not (and if so, how) is the issue.

The 2nd Amendment recognizes you have certain rights, but it does not impose any obligation on you to excercise them. In the same way authorizing something is meaningless unless it has been authorized by congress, and in a way where this man is liable.

Bottom line:

This is a money matter. I don't read anywhere where this man has hurt anybody, committed fraud or theft (the monies in question were being held in an account pending resolution). If they say he owes money, put a lien on his possessions or estate until a criminal court can hear the case (not some banana-republic-lite "tax court"). Jailing and shooting people over money is unjustified and just plain stupid.

In a private business I don't get to kill those who don't pay me. Especially those I could hypothetically charge on my own and who did not voluntarily buy my services.

Enjoy:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6739968836156843573

Tired of these illegal tax protestors...

That's what they used to call them before the IRS reform act passed at the end of the '90s. I know because I used to work for the IRS. (I don't anymore, got tired of not being permitted to bring my gun to work even though 18 USC 930(d)(3) says I was allowed to. But I digress...)

I'm disgusted by these people who don't want to pay their taxes. The money for all these government services that people feel they're enitled to has to come from somewhere.

For your perusal, I include the following article.

The Law

Wrong. The bottom line is those in the government are trying to enforce the law.

Click to expand...

Ahh. It's the law.

Well.

That's okay then.

When we got a home equity loan, and paid off the plastic, we were questioned too.

Click to expand...

Bat1, who were you questioned by?

Watching that video, hearing his account of being tackled by four thugs on and screamed at, then being strip searched and essentially raped... it just hit a button, or something, and filled me with an intense, vitriolic, blood-boiling rage. The concept, that Ed Brown did nothing but refuse to give up his legitimate property, and he's treated like this... aside from laws, aside from politics-it is wrong. The disgusting scum that would take this man's freedom away, destroy his life, treat him as if he were a dog... they can rot in hell.

Uhmm... errh.... May I post from the begining of this thread.

This thread was started to update the popular thread related to this incident in New Hampshire, which was closed after some members took the low road. Please refrain from insults to keep this thread from being locked. Thank-you! Mods, recognizing this could be an emotional topic, how about just deleting the offending posts rather than locking the whole topic? Just a suggestion...

Click to expand...

The above post does not appear to follow the first part of this request.


Just an observation.

NukemJim

Since the Constitution doesn't specify what a fair tax is, then it is up to our Representatives to define to what extent we are taxed. If they aren't representing us correctly, vote them out.

This has no similarities to our right to bear arms being infringed. The 2nd Amendment is clear and if Congress or any other entity tries to restrict this "basic right", then you have the right to refuse it.

Click to expand...

There may be no similarities, but wait until someone (Hillary) decides to impose a 500% sales tax on firearm sales. Now that $300 pistol is $1800.00, and that $900.00 Bushmaster is $5400.00.

There may be no similarities, but wait until someone (Hillary) decides to impose a 500% sales tax on firearm sales. Now that $300 pistol is $1800.00, and that $900.00 Bushmaster is $5400.00.

Click to expand...

Give Joe a heavily taxed, non-Cuban cigar!

And guess what? This would be within that dreaded realm of "letter of the
law" rather than "spirit of the law." In spirit, we would not want such measures
that would in effect restrict the common American from exercising what we
see and know as a right under the Constitution.

Take it another step, Joe: How close are we to universal gun registration
with a yearly tax (like on cars)?

The above post does not appear to follow the first part of this request.

Click to expand...

I didn't attack or insult anyone personally. I don't see how my comment was inappropriate.

Edit: I can see how it may have been misinterpreted, but my comment was not directed towards any board members, or any individual in particular.

There may be no similarities, but wait until someone (Hillary) decides to impose a 500% sales tax on firearm sales. Now that $300 pistol is $1800.00, and that $900.00 Bushmaster is $5400.00.

Click to expand...

Don't the courts recognize something called prohibition by taxation as illegal? Don't know of any cases(really, that should have been the attack on the NFA), but it's something I've heard of.

Article 1(8) does lay out limits on the power of taxation. The 16th amendment removes those limits.

Taxes

Reduce the size of government...stop adding "programs" I am so sick of politicians telling us we need the help of the government to live our lives. The government is here to protect us as a nation...not to tell us how to live....taxes can come down but, we need to cut out all the "fat". :banghead: :banghead:

Thin Black line said:

uh oh....the lawlessness is spreading --it has even gone to the White House. Apparently, there are federal employess holed up in the heavily fortified and heavily armed household who are not paying their taxes:

Quote:
Seventy-one employees in the Executive Office of the President, which includes the White House, owe $664,527 in taxes for 2005. About 20 of those employees have entered into an IRS payment plan, bringing the EOP balance down to $455,881 owed by 50 employees.

Click to expand...

Well, according to the news report you quoted they are paying their taxes - to the tune of $208,646 according to your article. They aren't holed up in a 8" concrete bunker house claiming they have no obligation to pay taxes.

Congress has the power to lay taxes via Art. 1 Sec. 8 of the Constitution of the United States.

The poster claiming to distinguish between indirect and direct taxes is either confused or poorly informed. The Supreme Court ruled prior to the 16th Amendement that a tax on wages was an indirect tax or excise tax. Only a tax on property was considered a direct tax. The practical meaning of that is that people who own a 1,000 shares of Rockefeller pay no tax; but people who work for their $30k pay all of the tax. Keep an eye out folks, not all those who claim to support your values do.

What I can't figure out is why people keep trying this scam. It hasn't worked in some 26 yeas that I know of, and 26 years is less than the length of time that Irwin Schiff played Larry The Loser with IRS.

Back in 1981 a buddy of mine fell in with one of these tax-protest attorneys. I've heard every argument mentioned in this thread, and more than just once. True believers never quit preaching, regardless of the merits of the case.

My comment to my buddy was, "When an attorney gives bad advice, it ain't the attorney that goes to the joint."

I was right. Two misdemeanor counts, "Guilty," and my buddy goes off to the Federal Playpen at Big Springs for a year and a month plus five years probation. Now, Big Springs wasn't all that bad, back then. But federal probation officers are not at all Nice People. They don't like their probationers. His next five years were not fun.

I guess the point of all this is that this case is not at all new. But for the publicity gained by holing up in his "fortress", Brown is just another fool who thought that repeating the same experiment could achieve a different result. Odds are, when it got going, one IRS agent says to another, "Hey, we got us another idiot!" Relief from boredom, I guess...

Art

the irs

is not as bad as some would have you believe
i survived 3 audits 2 hostile ones a couple info requests
and i didn't file at all from 85 to 99 they were no big deal when i resurfaced though it did perplex a mortgage loan officer in 2000
i ended up in court after 3rd audit and got a favorable result and in none of the audits did i end up owing

For those bringing up the fact that Congress has the right to levy and collect taxes: you are absolutely, 100% correct.

And that has absolutely nothing to do with this. The IRS is not Congress, and as far as I know there is no concensus in this amendment for Congress to have a 3rd party act under their authority. There is no stipulation for Congress to impose fines for tax liens, either - just collection of taxes. And there is no mention whatsoever of criminal prosecution for not paying such taxes - just that they may be collected.

Or do you think the 2nd Amendment refers to only sporting weapons usable for self-defense? And the 1st Amendment only applies to speech itself, not the written word or things of a political nature?

Don't the courts recognize something called prohibition by taxation as illegal? Don't know of any cases(really, that should have been the attack on the NFA), but it's something I've heard of.

Click to expand...

Yeah. So? There's clearly precident in the NFA, as well as elsewhere (cigarettes, anyone?). The federal government has not paid heed to the Constitution even in token since George HW Bush, and not in any realistic form since before Regan.

What I can't figure out is why people keep trying this scam.

Click to expand...

If it was a Scam, then why does the IRS repeatedly REFUSE to produce the law that the people are requesting?

If they did so it would end the whole thing permanently.

Zedicus, IRS never has bothered to respond to this request-for-authority stuff. Never. SFAIK, the courts have held (whether directly or indirectly as part of the case, I don't know) that IRS need not do more than enforce their rules and regulations.

Over and over and over, the courts have held against the Schiffs and Browns and dozens of others. For decades. Now, I grant that a cynical person might assume that no judge will vote against a system that provides his paycheck, but we do have a system that we're stuck with.

The system exists. It has rules. The rules are known. According to the courts, the rules are legal. Anybody who knowingly breaks these rules--breaks the law--is scamming. Simple as that.

There are plenty of ways to shelter a great deal of one's income from taxes, assuming you're in the higher brackets. It is foolish to buck the existing laws--as the Browns are discovering.

While most of us wouldn't risk our life and liberty to protest the system, Ed Brown isn't an "idiot" for doing so. It's obvious he understands the penalties involved, and the danger he's putting himself in. He's considered the consequences and has chosen to stand up against a system he considers to be unjust, and in my opinion, he deserves the utmost respect- whether you agree with his position or not.

ServiceSoon said:

Every American I have spoken with thinks the current tax system is horrible. I bet everybody on this board agrees. Who are these "majority of Americans" you are referring to?

Click to expand...

Who are these "majority of Americans"? The majority of Americans that are not voting their representatives out of Congress. Therefore, we are stuck with the current system. Just as if Americans were really tired of our borders being overrun with illegals, they would vote those out of congress that are allowing this mess.

Like it or not, America isn't ready to put their vote where their mouth is. Either that, or they are, and then we're really in trouble.

The 1st Amendment
I may not agree with what he says.
But I will defend to the death his right to say it.

The freedoms we have were paid for at a very high price.
However somewhere I seem to remember a tea party, something to do with taxation without representation.