Wesley Snipes Gets Max Sentence

[ItsTime]

There is one sitting on the bench here in New Hampshire.

Do we have any RPR judges running anywhere? We've got 1 person in senate a dozen in congress any in the legislature branch?

 

[Deborah K]

...mostly dribble

And stop trying to recruit more tax protesters. You're just going to get them jailed, broke, or both.



These arguments have been repeatedly rejected by the court. Also, Amendments are designed to override earlier sections of the Constitution. That's why they're amendments.

What bunk! Amendments are supplements NOT designed to override. Where in the Constitution does the first amendment have to override it?!

And I'm not going to stop talking about the history behind the unconstitutional income tax. People have a right to know and it's their decision as to what they wish to do about it. I'm not in to protecting people from themselves, that's what BIG Government does, and apparently you ascribe to it.

 

[Nanerbeet]

So has anyone cited exactly which tax law Wesley Snipes broke? Sounds like he only got nailed for failing to file a return. Paying your taxes and filing a return are two different things; Haven't read the part of the story where he was convicted of something like witholding tax money from the government.

 

[jmdrake]

He deserves it

We all do it, its the law. You may not necessarily agree with it, but you need to follow the rules. I have no sympathy for a man who has more wealth than the common man get thrown in jail when millions of hard working citizens put into the system and get nothing.

There is something called "civil disobedience". The founding fathers could have chosen to obey the unjust tax laws too but instead they threw the Boston Tea Party and the rest is history. Yes I pay my taxes because that's not the fight I want to go to the mat on.

Regards,

John M. Drake

 

[jointhefightforfreedom]

THERE IS NO LAW THAT REQUIRES YOU TO PAY "PERSONAL INCOME TAX" taxes on your personal wages or labor!

Legal taxes must be apportioned under the constitution!

example of legal taxes :
corporate tax
sales tax

FEDERAL PERSONAL INCOME TAX IS NOT ONE OF THOSE AND IS AN ILLEGAL TAX!

SHOW ME THE LAW THAT SAYS DIFFERENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[asgardshill]

I'm telling!!! Teeeaaaacher!!!!!

You could obviously use a little maturity as well.

 

[torchbearer]

3 years for a misdemeanor, for a non-violent, non-threat to society human being... who will now be treated like an animal and be put in a zoo with the violent and the inhumane.
Great use of jail space. /sarcasm.

How much of your tax money is now going to provide food and housing to a bunch of common people who are enslaved against their will for not pay the king's taxes?

the Judge gave him max, to serve as a warning to all us little people to get back to work and pay your earnings to the King or you will rot in prison too.
That was actually the prosecutions argument for the 3 year sentence.
"This is a high profile case, if he doesn't get max, then what message would that send to the poor people?"

Does this whole thing just reek of socialism.. aka USSR type governance?
This isn't a free society anymore, this isn't a republic where people's wealth is protected from the majority.
Its sickening.....

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

3 years for a misdemeanor, for a non-violent, non-threat to society human being... who will now be treated like an animal and be put in a zoo with the violent and the inhumane.
Great use of jail space. /sarcasm.

How much of your tax money is now going to provide food and housing to a bunch of common people who are enslaved against their will for not pay the king's taxes?

the Judge gave him max, to serve as a warning to all us little people to get back to work and pay your earnings to the King or you will rot in prison too.
That was actually the prosecutions argument for the 3 year sentence.
"This is a high profile case, if he doesn't get max, then what message would that send to the poor people?"

Does this whole thing just reek of socialism.. aka USSR type governance?
This isn't a free society anymore, this isn't a republic where people's wealth is protected from the majority.
Its sickening.....

YEAP... welcome to the 21st Century 'Controlled Dictatorship'!

Well, it will also be $100+ grand in prison alone to keep Wesley Snipes locked-up at the TAXPAYERS cost. Of course, watch the prosecuting DA and associates... watch for BONUSES and PROMOTIONS in the near future!

I guarantee you... there were phone calls and strings pulled from 'other' government departments to this tax case, ensuring MAXIMIZING the full 'PUBLIC EFFECT'.

 

[Deborah K]

This battle should be fought legislatively NOT judicially. We can't win with a judicial system that legislates from the bench.

 

[Matt Collins]

The movie goes through a lot of effort to prove there is NO WRITTEN LAW that says we have to pay taxes.

http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/new/home.asp

Also of note is the blatant fact that the government cannot force you to sign your 1040 tax form. Why? Because the government CAN NOT force you to testify against yourself. A signed 1040 can and will be used against you in court later on thus testifying against yourself.

 

[torchbearer]

http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/new/home.asp

Also of note is the blatant fact that the government cannot force you to sign your 1040 tax form. Why? Because the government CAN NOT force you to testify against yourself. A signed 1040 can and will be used against you in court later on thus testifying against yourself.

You might as well not file if you don't sign, I forgot a signature once, they kept sending me notices to sign the amendment file for my tax filing to be complete.
So I guess if you don't sign, your filing isn't processed, but instead goes to a "subversive" department where you will have all the fun you can handle and more.

 

[FunkBuddha]

Yeah but, why should he get the maximum? If it really was his first time and he never does it again, what good is jail gonna do? If he paid his taxes, and he never does it again, I see no reason to assume he needs the maximum penalty.

Seriously... That judge made him serve the max for each charge with no prior offenses??? That's unheard of. Murderers get bigger breaks than that.

 

[Danke]

http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/new/home.asp

Also of note is the blatant fact that the government cannot force you to sign your 1040 tax form. Why? Because the government CAN NOT force you to testify against yourself. A signed 1040 can and will be used against you in court later on thus testifying against yourself.

The income tax predates the 16th Amendment. The 16th Amendment is not the reason most people owe the income tax, especially wage earners.

Bill Benson has not been able to get his case heard before the Supremes, so for now it is to be considered as ratified. But that is really immaterial.


Yes, you do not have to file a 1040, that is just a government provided return form. You can send in the same information using you own form, it will just cause delays and probably inquiries from the IRS worker bees. And they will still require a jurat.


But if someone claims you earned income (commonly done with a W-2, 1099, K-1) and you do not file a return, the amount the third party claims they paid you in income stands.

If you did not receive any Federally connected receipts, but money was improperly withheld, you should file a return to get the money returned.

 

[Zippyjuan]

The Constitution neither prohibits income taxation nor does it require it. The Congress has the power to change the laws and tax structure.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts

Article 1 Section 8.

If you do not like the law, try to have the law changed. I am not saying that I like taxes, but they are a fact of life.

How could you get rid of the income tax?

To get rid of the income tax you first need to either get rid of enough spending or increase other taxes to replace it. In 2007, the Federal Government took in $1.16 trillion in income taxes. That does not include Social Security taxes. Spending (not including Social Security) was about $2.2 trillion. Corporate income taxes came to $370 billion. Other sources including excise taxes only amounted to roughly $165 billion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2007 So leaving out Social Security taxes and income taxes, you have about $535 billion to pay for a $2.2 trillion budget.

About $250 billion went to pay interest on the Federal Debt. If you want to get rid of that, you need to cut other programs or raise enough taxes to pay off the over $9 trillion owed there. That is on top of any cuts to balance the budget in the first place.

Defense alone was $548 billion last year- and the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are not included in the budget figures since they were paid for via supplemental spending bills. That is to balance the budget without income taxes. We haven't touched the debt and reduced the interest payments yet.

If you decide to tax profits, then the companies will pass that on to consumers in the form of higher prices so the consumer ends up paying anyways. You don't really help yourself by doing that. What you do need to do is reduce the spending side. But getting Congress to cut anything is incredibly hard. If you make cuts, you are taking away money that goes to someone who may vote for you so as a rep you don't want that.

If you toss in Social Security the numbers are a bit better. Revenues are up to $1.4 trillion and expenditures are $2.8 trillion- or a shortfall of $1.4 trillion instead of $1.7 trillion.

And you still have $879 billion in Social Security taxes you are paying. And Medicare taxes. Plus state taxes.

Getting rid of it in theory sounds nice, but in reality, what do you do? How do you achieve the goal?

Here is what you have to pick from for your $1.4 trillion in cuts:

$586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security
$548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2]
$394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
$294.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
$276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related
$89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training
$76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation
$72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
$43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
$33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment
$32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs
$27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture
$26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development
$25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology
$23.5 billion (+0.8%) - Energy
$20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government

Medicare and Social Security are presently funded via their own taxes.
I removed the interest on the debt from this list since you cannot get rid of that until you pay off the $9 trillion+ debt.

Or what taxes do you increase:

$869.6 billion - Social Security and other payroll taxes
$370.2 billion - Corporate income tax
$65.1 billion - Excise taxes
$26.0 billion - Customs duties
$26.0 billion - Estate and gift taxes
$47.2 billion - Other

 

[Danke]

The Constitution neither prohibits income taxation nor does it require it. The Congress has the power to change the laws and tax structure.

You know not what you are talking about. Congress actually must abide by the Constitution. Read up on direct and indirect taxes. And then tell us all what category the income tax falls under. Also, show us where "income" is defined.

 

[Kludge]

Expenses :

$869.6 billion - Social Security and other payroll taxes (Phase Out/Eliminate)
$586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security (Phase Out/Eliminate)
$548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2] (Phase Out/Eliminate)
$394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare (Phase Out/Eliminate)
$294.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare (Eliminate)
$276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related (Privatize)
$89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training (Privatize)
$76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation (Privatize)
$72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits (Eventual phase out)
$43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
$33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment (Privatize/Eliminate)
$32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs (Eliminate)
$27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture (Privatize [grants])
$26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development (Eliminate)
$25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology (Privatize [grants])
$23.5 billion (+0.8%) - Energy (Privatize [grants])
$20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government (Reduce by at least 50%)
_
_
_
Revenue :
$370.2 billion - Corporate income tax (Phase Out when debt eliminated)
$65.1 billion - Excise taxes (Eliminate)
$26.0 billion - Customs duties (Eliminate)
$26.0 billion - Estate and gift taxes (Eliminate)
$47.2 billion - Other


Problem solved

 

[Mortikhi]

U.S. District Judge William Terrell Hodges

...needs to be made an example of.

 

[Conza88]

Problem solved

Thanks for that! Would it be too much to ask for figures on how much was saved?

 

[majinkoola]

You would eliminate defense? I don't think that would ever happen. And so I assume you're against Ron Paul's support of a "strong national defense."

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Civil Purpose Vesus Legal Precedents

, using fringe arguments common to "tax protesters" who say the government has no legal right to collect.

Expect to face severe consequences when addressing the issue of paying taxes on the "legal" level. First off, it wasn't the intentions of our government to have this type of legal government; rather, it was their intentions that we have a Constitutional government with a civil purpose. The use of the legal system was supposed to be secondary in that it was intended only as a necessary evil for the purpose of dispensing a civil constitution. That primary civil purpose was to utilize whatever means necessary to maintain a modern civilization with every citizen, ideally speaking, sitting Democratically at the political dinner table. This maintenance entails the constant creation of fresh, legal measures -- movements -- to bring the nation away from legal tyranny back to the civil purpose our founding fathers intended. The term "legal tyranny" here represents the natural tendency for a government to erode back to the prior, primitive kind of master/slave caste system.
The best argument against the tax policy we implement today is how its method of dispersal endangers our Constitutional government. As it is dispersing wealth towards the extreme top and to the bottom of our economy by way of penalizing the middle class out of business, our present tax system is reconstituting the very kind of primitive caste system our Constitutional government opposes.
This is the real crime against our Constitution in that such policy endangers modern civilization. As a legal client myself -- one who is incompetent in representing myself in legal matters -- I don't care about legal precedents; while, on the other hand, as a civil citizen, I am competent in representing myself in the civil matters in the Consitution.
So, one is not being smart, politically speaking, when arguing issues on the level of legal precedents.