Top 10 Reasons Why I Think A Tax Revolt Is Necessary

Obviously, if one's very life is being threatened, then violence is an answer... but only as a method of self-defense. WWII was self-defense, because the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. If they hadn't, my guess is that we may not have ever joined WWII.

Violence, however, is not a good way to create CHANGE. There are better ways than killing people to make a statement.

Take a look at the religious wars, and how many thousands of years they've been going on, and how many millions of lives that have been lost because one side thought that violence was the answer. Has it worked? No. The same religious wars have been going on for centuries, and there is never any end to it. Violence only begets more violence. Violence as a way to change ideology...to change another person's way of thinking... does NOT work. Like the other poster on here said...that's how terrorists think.

If my life was at stake, then sure, I would defend myself. But my life is not at stake right now. My country is at stake, and maybe the entire capitalist system, but not my life. Is it worth it for me to kill someone over values? No, because then I lower myself to their level.....and even lower. Taking a life is never the answer, unless yours is in danger.

I do, however, believe our country is at stake, and I believe that change needs to happen. And I believe that peaceful, civil disobedience is the best way.

If a tax revolt isn't the answer, then give me a better one. I'm open to all ideas, as long as the ideas are peaceful and non-violent.

Besides, nobody said that a tax revolt couldn't just be ONE method of peaceful, civil disobedience. There can be many methods happening at the same time. But it will take the entire country to come together on this one.

reply to post by unityemissions


Section 1 in the tax code, (see post above) imposes an income tax. The sixteenth amendment argument does not work in a court of law. If that were the case, tax lawyers like me would be out of business. Anytime somebody came up to me with a tax question, I could say "Don't worry about it. Just plead the 16th and everything is going to be fine."

Come on people, do you think Congress would allow the Internal Revenue Code to be "broken" in any way?

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


If this were the case, why have several people won using this defense? Are the judges merely incompetent.

reply to post by unityemissions


Please give me a link to the precedent. I would love to see it! If such a precedent existed, I could clean up representing people before the IRS.

In all seriousness, nobody has won using such defenses. I could never raise such a defense for my client because I would risk losing my license and a massive malpractice liability.

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


CASE #03-CR-20111
Won against the IRS

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


The problem isn't trying to plead the 16th amendment...

The problem with the 16th amendment is that it is directly opposite what the constitution says.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

(No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.)

The current tax code violates these two congressional requirements.

16th amendment; 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.

source page: www.usconstitution.net...

Tax Lawyer? You must lose quite a bit. But then again I guess you don't need to know the Constitution to uphold an illegal scam.

See we have a sliding scale for taxes that are not uniform or we wouldn't have an increase of taxation on the rich would we? A set amount of x amount or percent would be uniform, but tax code kinda took on a life of its own. So much so the guy Geitner can't even keep track of tax codes, isn't that a bit ridiculous?

How can the gub ment expect us to respect their laws if they don't follow the law of the land?

I wish I could Flag MAGNUM for his/her sterling work in this thread !


As for the rest, well, I've never heard whining like this from anyone but Americans

Whine, whine .... all the damn time !

Whining about paying taxes for Pete's sakes ! It's ceaseless


And at the same time as they're whining about paying their way --- they're threatening to launch wars on their government. Like a bunch of stroppy kids threatening to kick their parents out of home

Good grief. Grow UP, America ! You behave like clueless brats !

reply to post by Dock9


Oh sorry for getting all indignant because our government is breaking its own laws. Let me guess you're british. And after we beat you, you all couldn't stop taking it in the bum and are upset to see people standing up for themselves.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by oppaperclip]

reply to post by unityemissions


Those are jury verdicts that favored the taxpayer in criminal tax cases. These are not court decisions that have any precedential value. They also have no bearing on whether one can be civilly liable for tax evasion.

Here is a web page the IRS has put out about tax scams and frivolous arguments.

IRS Link

It includes all the standard arguments like the 16th amendment was not ratified. The PDF link on the page mentions "We the people" by name and states the owner of this website was permanently enjoined from selling his tax evasion kits.

reply to post by oppaperclip


The 16 Amendment is an amendment to the constitution i.e. it is a change in the constitution. If the 16th amendment conflicts with an earlier provision, the 16th amendment controls because it was a change to the constitution.

To illustrate, the constitution currently grants freedom of religion in the 1st amendment. If the constitution were amended tomorrow to ban certain forms of Christianity, this would conflict with the 1st amendment. However, the amendment is not invalid because it contradicts an earlier provision. Rather, the amendment supersedes the earlier provision. Certain forms of Christianity would be banned.

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


I beg to differ sir. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land, and people could nullify the effects of such a change. Just because a judge says some dumb crap doesn't make it right as you lawyers would have us believe.

The 16th amendment doesn't nullify all parts of the constitution to make the implementation of that amendment legal, as I pointed out in my post above.

The constitution can have amendments to it, however it is not a "living" document and it supposed to give us more freedom not less.

Originally posted by lagenese
I've done some research and this is what i found.

1- There is no law that obliges any US worker (not corporation) to produce a 1040

2- There is no law that says that workers must pay income tax

3- The IRS is not part of the government. Their role is to collect income tax in order to pay the interest of the US debt to the banksters of Europe. They use intimidation and scare tactics to meet their goals.

So, this is about it. I rest my case.

fine...don't pay taxes, and you will be sent to jail...not to embarass you but, you need to read case law and court decisions regarding this matter. sorry, but i won't go to jail by refusing to pay my taxes or filing a 1040.
thousands of court cases and the state always wins, no matter how illogical their decision.

[edit on 3-4-2010 by jimmyx]

reply to post by jimmyx


You know who else won with those type of decisions? The mob! Things were a little rougher for them though like the ST.Valentines day massacre.

Originally posted by oppaperclip
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint

 

I beg to differ sir. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land, and people could nullify the effects of such a change. Just because a judge says some dumb crap doesn't make it right as you lawyers would have us believe.

The 16th amendment doesn't nullify all parts of the constitution to make the implementation of that amendment legal, as I pointed out in my post above.

The constitution can have amendments to it, however it is not a "living" document and it supposed to give us more freedom not less.

uhmm...it doesn't matter...it's how judges interpret constitutional law, they can and do rule on the interpretation, not on the letter of the law. they will rule against you on not paying your taxes. it doesn't matter what you think or one of your lawyers think is constitutional, you will go to jail, if you blatantly avoid paying taxes

reply to post by oppaperclip


well most of them got put in prison for NOT paying taxes, instead of murder.
just look at the decisions rendered...they all are losses for people refusing to pay taxes

reply to post by jimmyx


I am not an american citizen, so your "laws" don't apply to me. I live in Canada. Also, i haven't filled any paperwork regarding taxes for the past 13 years, and they never bothered me about it. See here, there is no law that forces workers to declare anything regarding revenue. The only one's who are forced to do it are business (companies and corporations). (Maritime law).
I'm a freeman of the land and proud of it. I do not trust anyone when it comes to my life and what i do with it, especially not the "so called government".

reply to post by oppaperclip


if a "dumb judge" as you call them, rules against you, you go to prison, regardless of how "dumb" you think he is, and regardless of what the constitution says...it's THE INTERPRETATION that counts.

reply to post by lagenese


well, good for you...hope you can stay under the radar...problem is...life has a funny way slapping you upside the head when you least expect it...so good luck.

reply to post by oppaperclip


You are right in that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land, but an amendment to the constitution changes the Constitution itself as well as the Supreme law of the land. Before the Civil War, it was not against the Supreme Law of the Land to own slaves. Now of course, due to the 13th amendment, the Constitution was changed to outlaw slavery.

Ok, I think this thread got off course a little bit. Thanks to those (on both sides of the argument) who have enlightened me on the tax issue....I do appreciate your input.

However, the legality of the tax code was not my main point. As I said in one of my arguments, I wasn't sure if the tax system was truly constitutional or not. So, for the sake of argument, let's say the IRS and the current income tax is 100% legal.

My point about starting this thread is that not paying taxes would be an example of PEACEFUL CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE. I would like to that debated here, more than the tax legality issue.

In the past, I have never had a problem paying taxes, because I know that taxes pays for fire, police, schools, civil defense, etc... And further more, I know full well that not paying taxes (i.e. doing something illegal) would be something that could put me in jail.
However, there comes a point when every person has to ask: what am I willing to do for my country?

Am I willing to kill? No.

Am I willing to write and call and fax my congressman and senators? Yes, and I do all the time, but it doesn't work. (God knows, I've tried!)

Am I willing to protest? Yes, but it seems that protesters are not being heard these days...they are being ridiculed and vilified on national TV, and I really don't want to be vilified on national TV for speaking up.

So, what is left? Peaceful civil disobedience, or violence. I will not choose violence, so I may choose civil disobedience. And, a tax revolt would be my preferred method of peaceful civil disobedience.

And, peaceful civil disobedience works. Look at Ghandi. Look at MLK and the civil rights movement. They got changes made. Did they have to break the law to do it? Yes. Did they get arrested? Hell yes, many did, many times.

For example, it was illegal for black people to sit at the lunch counter in Mississippi, but they sat down anyway. And they got arrested. It was illegal for black people to ride in the front of the bus in Alabama, but Rosa Parks did it anyway. And she got arrested.

But as they found out in the days of the civil rights....how many people could they arrest in one day for sitting down at lunch counters? How many people could they arrest for refusing to ride in the back of the bus? How many people could they arrest for signing others up to vote, as was their right?

I am not saying that not paying taxes wouldn't get me arrested. But if enough people decided to stage a tax revolt, how many Americans could they put in jail? THAT was my point. A tax revolt would give us leverage, just like the civil rights movement did.

Think of it as the "taxpayer rights movement", if you will.

After a while, if the numbers of tax revolters got so great, that they couldn't continue to ignore us. THAT was my point. I'm sorry I brought up the legality of the tax system. I should have left that argument out. Whether it is legal, or whether it is not legal, doesn't really matter, I suppose.

Because what really matters is if I am willing to do something civilly disobedient, as a way of protest.




[edit on 3-4-2010 by nikiano]