Could this become a Waco/Ruby Ridge? Happening RIGHT NOW!

[Spreadfire Arms]

The bottom line is anyone who does not bow to government power will be crushed.

i think anyone who refuses to pay their fair share of taxes but benefits from it, is a militia wacko, barricades himself therefore becoming a public safety hazard, and threatens to use deadly force when it clearly isn't appropriate, deserves to go to jail. he has had his opportunity for due process and has lost.

the government who doesn't do anything to put this guy in jail is doing a disservice to its own people. imagine if you lived next door to this moron with your family. you'd be pretty pissed off at him.....especially if him or one of his moron militia members takes a wayward shot that happens to put one of your family members, or you, in danger.

it is very clear that this guy is a few sandwiches short of a picnic. all it takes is for him to get delusional and start popping rounds off.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Maybe we should organize a peaceable assembly and seek redress for our grievances in a march to Tienanmen Square - Oops! Sorry....It's the tyranny. I mean the mall at the Washington Monument...

Woody

"We the People are the government of this land. We decide who writes our laws, we decide who leads us, and we decide who will judge us; for as long as We the People have the guns to keep it that way." B.E.Wood

 

[Lupinus]

hes got dangleys the size of grapefruits and I commend him. I don't find cowardice in him letting his wife go through trial instead of holding up with him cause I think he knows the likely outcome as much as we do.

Sad what is likely going to happen to him.

 

[hankdatank1362]

t is very clear that this guy is a few sandwiches short of a picnic. all it takes is for him to get delusional and start popping rounds off.

I can see him now, his half blue and half white with war paint, bump-firing his WASR-10, screaming in his best Mel Gibson voice: "FREEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOOOOM!"

 

[Lupinus]

I can see him now, his half blue and half white with war paint, bump-firing his WASR-10, screaming in his best Mel Gibson voice: "FREEEEEEEEEEDOOOOOOOOOOOM!"

Whats so funny about that?

 

[hankdatank1362]

You're right. The scene I described would not be funny, it would be heartwarming. His rebellion against the government is inspiring.



Next time I get pulled over for speeding, I'm gonna pull down my pants and run down the highway screaming "FREEDOM" and expect people to sympathze with me.

 

[Lupinus]

right on hank!

just watch out for those arrows raining down some of those poor saps probably didn't sit to comfertably for awhile. And I doubt a few bullets in ye old booty would feel any better

 

[Glockfan.45]

Reading some of these post really leads me to question the motives of some of the people here. From what I gather a good number of posters seem to think that if .gov decides to pass a nation wide law mandating the turning in of any arms they claim not fit for civilian ownership we should all just accept it as the rule of law .

Spreadfire Arms, Austin, TX
FFL/SOT
Blackwater USA Executive Protection School Graduate
Bushmaster/Glock/Mossberg/Remington Armorer
Texas CHL, PSB Level III, and TCLEOSE Firearms Instructor

Reading this I wonder who the bulk of your clients are and if that may be influencing your responses here. The Real Hawkeye, I would refrain from passing judgement on this guy untill all the facts are out. Law and order are needed to continue living in a civil and prosperous society. Nobody here seems to be questioning that. However I am shocked at the number of people that attack folks for questioning the merit of the law in question. If we allow ourselves to be called nut jobs for questioning the validity of laws then everything is lost already. The more I learn about Brown the more I see him as being in the wrong here. However I am just disturbed at how quickly posters here will willing to jump on the "Browns a crazy bandwagon" without learning more details first.

 

[thexrayboy]

Next time I get pulled over for speeding, I'm gonna pull down my pants and run down the highway screaming "FREEDOM" and expect people to sympathze with me.

Hopefully a news crew will be handy to record your posterior for posterity.

 

[Lupinus]

Law and order are indeed needed for a civil peaceful society. Without law and order you would have anarchy.

However, it is sometimes a mater of which laws keep that civil peaceful society civil and peaceful.

 

[gunsmith]

man! this is a long thread!

Fox news did a story on this guy....real idiots...they were wondering
if his 'guards" had a "license" for the rifles.

 

[WeedWhacker]

i think anyone who refuses to pay their fair share of taxes but benefits from it

The Browns have paid state, local, and property taxes. I imagine they also pay sales tax (where applicable), gas tax, and the other general taxes their locale has. This is solely about the federal income tax, and they had been pestering the IRS for years about the applicability of the laws as it applied to them. This is no different than if they had been asking the state Attorney General about whether or not it is legal to, say, spit on the sidewalk on Sunday, getting no response for years, then spitting on the sidewalk and suddenly getting dragged into court (and subsequently being denied the ability to defend yourself - see below).

is a militia wacko

As opposed to a normal militia member? (Okay, so he's older than 45...)

barricades himself therefore becoming a public safety hazard, and threatens to use deadly force when it clearly isn't appropriate

The guy lives in a nice house on 110 acres of his own land. I don't know about you, but anyone living out in the sticks on 110 acres of land isn't exactly a hazard to anyone, certainly not the "public".
As for the deadly force threats, if the fed.gov leaves him alone, there won't be a problem. He's apparently pissed at the fed.gov's behaviour at each step along the way, from the IRS' non-responsiveness, to the raid(s) on his property earlier in the year, to the apparent kangaroo court (see below)... We may only be talking about one man's life in this case, but it is his life and his rights. One must only have a modicum of empathy to at least be able to understand Mr. Brown's response.

deserves to go to jail. he has had his opportunity for due process and has lost.

Mr. Brown introduced forty (40) motions/items in his defense, and the presiding judge dismissed all of them. That means that the judge denied him the ability to defend himself with each and every single reason the man tried to introduce to the jury to prove his innocence. It was, in effect, no different than if he'd been tied and gagged at the trial.

I don't have more than a general unease at the legalities of the federal income tax, but put me in Mr. Brown's shoes right now, and I'd be one extremely pissed-off person right now - at the very least.

 

[crazed_ss]

This is solely about the federal income tax, and they had been pestering the IRS for years about the applicability of the laws as it applied to them.

Why would income tax not apply to this guy when it applies to everyone else? What makes him so special that he doesnt have to pay income tax?

 

[the pistolero]

Law and order are needed to continue living in a civil and prosperous society. Nobody here seems to be questioning that. However I am shocked at the number of people that attack folks for questioning the merit of the law in question. If we allow ourselves to be called nut jobs for questioning the validity of laws then everything is lost already.

I have nothing to add to this, I just think it should be repeated.

 

[pcosmar]

Police power is the states, the Federal has no buisness with Police power.

"The police power under the American

constitutional system has been left to the states. It

has always belonged to them and was not

surrendered by them to the general government,

nor directly restrained by the constitution of the

United States... Congress has no general power to

enact police regulations operative within the

territorial limits of a state."

McInerney v. Ervin, 46 So.2d 458, 463 (Fla. 1950):

http://www.constitution.org/cs_abuse.htm

The Federal Government was never intended to have police power, that was reserved to the states alone.

Find out just what the people will submit to and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.
— Frederick Douglass, civil rights activist, Aug. 4, 1857

Any power that can be abused will be abused.
— Tyranny Law #1

Abuse always expands to fill the limits of resistance to it.
— Tyranny Law #2

If people don't resist the abuses of others, they will have no one to resist the abuses of themselves, and tyranny will prevail.
— Tyranny Law #3

 

[MachIVshooter]

However, it is sometimes a mater of which laws keep that civil peaceful society civil and peaceful.

Bingo.

The IRS is the biggest band of thugs in the country. If you don't give them what isn't theirs, they will come to take it. If you refuse, they will take you. If you refuse to be taken, they will kill you. And over a few thousand dollars that didn't belong to them in the first place.

I pay my taxes because I think there are more critical things ahead that may be more worth fighting for than a percentage of my income. I'm not willing to die for money (any amount of it).

But I will not call this guy a loon for doing what he feels necessary. It's not a battle I would fight, but I'm not him and it's his perogative.

The IRS/FedGov hides behind the 16th amendment while trying their best to destroy the first ten, and damage the 14th.

The 16, BTW, stands in stark contrast to the rest of the constitution:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Sure sounds like taxation without representation, doesn't it?

 

[meef]

At the risk of getting off topic here, does anybody know what's happening at the Brown compound lately?

 

[WeedWhacker]

Why would income tax not apply to this guy when it applies to everyone else? What makes him so special that he doesnt have to pay income tax?

Have you researched the tax code? Do you know what a "legal term" is? Have you seen a definition of the legal term "income"? I spent some time pouring over the (voluminous) tax code and it is completely ambiguous - there is NO clear definition of "income", and since the only clear definitions of taxable income/revenue apply strictly to business entities, I tend to sympathize with the Browns who have also studied the tax code, over an agency which was non-responsive until they didn't get "their" money.

So, why do I pay income tax? Simple: I work for other companies, and if I don't fill out the forms "voluntarily" declaring my wages to be taxable, I don't get the job - and because the IRS will send many armored men with guns to my place if I don't. Case in point...

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Then please explain to me what the 16th amendment means

The 16th Amendment refers to income, from whatever the source. Wages for employment, however, are not income. Income is gain over an initial investment, i.e., net profits. A man's labor belongs to himself alone, not the Federal Government. Trading your labor for pay is no different than chopping wood to build yourself a log cabin. If a man chops wood on his own property and builds with it a log cabin, he owes no income tax on the product of his labor. He has merely converted his labor into an improvement on his land equal to the value of his labor. Wages too are the conversion of a man's labor into something equal to its value. No income tax is due for the new log cabin, and no income tax is due for a man's wages, because they are not income by either the common or legal definition of the early 20th Century. Income is something businesses and corporations generate, not common workers for salary.

 

[Lupinus]

thank you hawk

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

i think anyone who refuses to pay their fair share of taxes but benefits from it, is a militia wacko, barricades himself therefore becoming a public safety hazard, and threatens to use deadly force when it clearly isn't appropriate, deserves to go to jail. he has had his opportunity for due process and has lost.

LOL!! You remind me of Moses the raven in Orwell's Animal Farm.

 

[hammer4nc]

Definition of a corrupt system:

Mr. Brown will have as much impact on the income tax system as the "President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform" did last year. Namely, zilch. In the end, .gov will get Brown's property, and maybe his life, in the effort. How much did anyone benefit from the money spent on the tax reform boondoggle?

How ironic that Pres. Bush is going to introduce "tax reform" as it relates to healthcare, as the centerpiece for the upcoming state of the union speech. That's going to be another whopper, eh? About like social security reform was last year...

Those who portray this incident as the conflict between lawful order and ANARCHY, really haven't examined the current system. A quick search yielded this article: http://www.dicksonherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070121/BUSINESS01/701210389/1297/MTCN02

excerpts:

A review of 40 years of IRS data has shown that small-business owners and the self-employed have historically reported about 70 percent of what they make, said Joe Bankman, a Stanford University professor of law and business who studies taxpayers' behavior. That drops to about 57 percent when someone runs a mostly cash-based business, he said.

As someone who's involved with self employed small businesses daily, I'd say that 57 percent is way high...most make a game out of writing off every roll of toilet paper and light bulb as a business expense, talk about their business for a couple minutes so they can write off their caribbean cruises, and that's just for starters.

The tax prosecution of singer Phil Driscoll makes for interesting reading...

Anyone ever wonder why the tax code is so voluminous? Could it be that its crammed with special-interest loopholes for big business? How many millions did it cost in campaign contributions per page to generate those revisions?

In summary, the system stinks. Portraying the status quo as the embodiment of anything respectible is "delusional". Simply stating that all who resist the corrupt system end up in jail, merely confirms the judicial complicity in the corruption. But then, we need the tax dollars to wisely spend on roads (lmfao!), so its justified. Deep thinking here.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

In summary, the system stinks. Portraying the status quo as the embodiment of anything respectible is "delusional". Simply stating that all who resist the corrupt system end up in jail, merely confirms the judicial complicity in the corruption. But then, we need the tax dollars to wisely spend on roads (lmfao!), so its justified. Deep thinking here.

Nice summary, Hammer. Needless to say, I agree with every word of it.

 

[hankdatank1362]

he 16th Amendment refers to income, from whatever the source. Wages for employment, however, are not income. Income is gain over an initial investment, i.e., net profits. A man's labor belongs to himself alone, not the Federal Government. Trading your labor for pay is no different than chopping wood to build yourself a log cabin. If a man chops wood on his own property and builds with it a log cabin, he owes no income tax on the product of his labor. He has merely converted his labor into an improvement on his land equal to the value of his labor. Wages too are the conversion of a man's labor into something equal to its value. No income tax is due for the new log cabin, and no income tax is due for a man's wages, because they are not income by either the common or legal definition of the early 20th Century. Income is something businesses and corporations generate, not common workers for salary.

Wow. That makes sense to me.

Thanks for the explaination. Definitely something new to bring up in class tomorrow. (BTW, my instructor is also a retired ATF agent :banghead: )

 

[DMF]

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casec...ubchapters/b/parts/i/sections/section_61.html

26USC61

Gross income defined

(a) General definition
Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means
all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited
to) the following items:
(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions,
fringe benefits, and similar items;
(2) Gross income derived from business;
(3) Gains derived from dealings in property;
(4) Interest;
(5) Rents;
(6) Royalties;
(7) Dividends;
(8) Alimony and separate maintenance payments;
(9) Annuities;
(10) Income from life insurance and endowment contracts;
(11) Pensions;
(12) Income from discharge of indebtedness;
(13) Distributive share of partnership gross income;
(14) Income in respect of a decedent; and
(15) Income from an interest in an estate or trust.

TheRealHawkeye can claim all day long that wages are not income, but he's wrong.

However, I again challenge him to man up and take a stand for what he believes, rather than impotently pounding away on the keyboard. TheRealHawkeye doesn't have to risk his life, but merely avail himself of the protections of the Constitution, specifically Article III by fighting for his interpretation of income in the federal court system. However, he's already shown he isn't willing to risk anything for what he believes.