How to stop paying taxes, and get out from under government control.

[BADecker]

Ok...   I finally read the link you provided.  All I can say is wow.   That is so full of BS, lies, inaccuracies, and flat out false information.  

So you get put on a "Red Flag" or "Restricted" list that says the cops know you are special?
You wont get taken in on warrants for not paying or responding to traffic citations?
Affidavit of high crimes and treason can get the judge/cop/prosecutor in trouble?

I pray that anyone who believes this load of crap prints out a copy and shows it to the arresting officers. The body cam footage will be priceless entertainment.

I've worked for the government since 1990. Both Federal, and local law enforcement.  And I will offer a 3 gazillion dollar reward to anyone who can provide direction to this Red Flag or Restricted list.

The fact that you offer a "3 gazillion dollar reward," shows that you are not sincere. But if you say that you said that you "will" offer that reward, shows that you are simply trying to mix us up just like government tries to do all the time.

Suppose someone shows you what you are denying exists, and they come to collect on your "reward," if you stand in court as a man, you can claim that the most you can afford to pay is $5 a month. If you haven't thrown yourself into a position of accepting court decisions regarding your monthly payments, you can get off just about scott free. I mean, what's $5 a month?

Just because you never took part of a situation where you have seen the red flags, doesn't mean that others haven't. What generally happens is that the standard LEO (Law Enforcement Officer) asks for clarification when he runs into something like this that he doesn't understand. His superior officer goes up the chain of command asking for advice regarding what to do. It gets to a judge who has the red-flag info, or understands the interpretation of it, and he is the one who says, "hands off in this instance."

If there is an arrest made without clarification of a "red flag," it is ultimately dismissed in court once it has been made know that the accused knows what he is talking about. The LEO is never given clarification of what happened. He/she knows that something doesn't seem kosher, but he never figures it out.

The fact that you haven't seen any of this is the same as all kinds of other LEO who haven't seen it. There are few people who fight it this way. And when one does correctly, the judge or prosecutor drops the case.

Watch  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyOBKiHUbuw.

Alright, want something sincere.   Say $100.  Or even $1,000.  I will offer any amount for proof, not just BS video's or websites. 

Or, If you want to put the proof in the pudding, you name the charge/violation you want me to write... I'll give you a location/date.  We can meet there. I'll cite/arrest/issue summons for the law you wish to violate..... and we can play it out in court. 

And we can both post the results in this thread

So, now you want to play with the court, right? Seems that we are posting our results already.

[1714643321]

1714643321

[1714643321]

1714643321

[1714643321]

1714643321

[1714643321]

1714643321

[PopoJeff]

Ok...   I finally read the link you provided.  All I can say is wow.   That is so full of BS, lies, inaccuracies, and flat out false information.  

So you get put on a "Red Flag" or "Restricted" list that says the cops know you are special?
You wont get taken in on warrants for not paying or responding to traffic citations?
Affidavit of high crimes and treason can get the judge/cop/prosecutor in trouble?

I pray that anyone who believes this load of crap prints out a copy and shows it to the arresting officers. The body cam footage will be priceless entertainment.

I've worked for the government since 1990. Both Federal, and local law enforcement.  And I will offer a 3 gazillion dollar reward to anyone who can provide direction to this Red Flag or Restricted list.

The fact that you offer a "3 gazillion dollar reward," shows that you are not sincere. But if you say that you said that you "will" offer that reward, shows that you are simply trying to mix us up just like government tries to do all the time.

Suppose someone shows you what you are denying exists, and they come to collect on your "reward," if you stand in court as a man, you can claim that the most you can afford to pay is $5 a month. If you haven't thrown yourself into a position of accepting court decisions regarding your monthly payments, you can get off just about scott free. I mean, what's $5 a month?

Just because you never took part of a situation where you have seen the red flags, doesn't mean that others haven't. What generally happens is that the standard LEO (Law Enforcement Officer) asks for clarification when he runs into something like this that he doesn't understand. His superior officer goes up the chain of command asking for advice regarding what to do. It gets to a judge who has the red-flag info, or understands the interpretation of it, and he is the one who says, "hands off in this instance."

If there is an arrest made without clarification of a "red flag," it is ultimately dismissed in court once it has been made know that the accused knows what he is talking about. The LEO is never given clarification of what happened. He/she knows that something doesn't seem kosher, but he never figures it out.

The fact that you haven't seen any of this is the same as all kinds of other LEO who haven't seen it. There are few people who fight it this way. And when one does correctly, the judge or prosecutor drops the case.

Watch  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyOBKiHUbuw.

Alright, want something sincere.   Say $100.  Or even $1,000.  I will offer any amount for proof, not just BS video's or websites. 

Or, If you want to put the proof in the pudding, you name the charge/violation you want me to write... I'll give you a location/date.  We can meet there. I'll cite/arrest/issue summons for the law you wish to violate..... and we can play it out in court. 

And we can both post the results in this thread

So, now you want to play with the court, right? Seems that we are posting our results already.

No idea what you mean by that.

But what violation/crime do you think can be avoided by getting on your imaginary list?

[BADecker]

Ok...   I finally read the link you provided.  All I can say is wow.   That is so full of BS, lies, inaccuracies, and flat out false information.  

So you get put on a "Red Flag" or "Restricted" list that says the cops know you are special?
You wont get taken in on warrants for not paying or responding to traffic citations?
Affidavit of high crimes and treason can get the judge/cop/prosecutor in trouble?

I pray that anyone who believes this load of crap prints out a copy and shows it to the arresting officers. The body cam footage will be priceless entertainment.

I've worked for the government since 1990. Both Federal, and local law enforcement.  And I will offer a 3 gazillion dollar reward to anyone who can provide direction to this Red Flag or Restricted list.

The fact that you offer a "3 gazillion dollar reward," shows that you are not sincere. But if you say that you said that you "will" offer that reward, shows that you are simply trying to mix us up just like government tries to do all the time.

Suppose someone shows you what you are denying exists, and they come to collect on your "reward," if you stand in court as a man, you can claim that the most you can afford to pay is $5 a month. If you haven't thrown yourself into a position of accepting court decisions regarding your monthly payments, you can get off just about scott free. I mean, what's $5 a month?

Just because you never took part of a situation where you have seen the red flags, doesn't mean that others haven't. What generally happens is that the standard LEO (Law Enforcement Officer) asks for clarification when he runs into something like this that he doesn't understand. His superior officer goes up the chain of command asking for advice regarding what to do. It gets to a judge who has the red-flag info, or understands the interpretation of it, and he is the one who says, "hands off in this instance."

If there is an arrest made without clarification of a "red flag," it is ultimately dismissed in court once it has been made know that the accused knows what he is talking about. The LEO is never given clarification of what happened. He/she knows that something doesn't seem kosher, but he never figures it out.

The fact that you haven't seen any of this is the same as all kinds of other LEO who haven't seen it. There are few people who fight it this way. And when one does correctly, the judge or prosecutor drops the case.

Watch  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyOBKiHUbuw.

Alright, want something sincere.   Say $100.  Or even $1,000.  I will offer any amount for proof, not just BS video's or websites.  

Or, If you want to put the proof in the pudding, you name the charge/violation you want me to write... I'll give you a location/date.  We can meet there. I'll cite/arrest/issue summons for the law you wish to violate..... and we can play it out in court.  

And we can both post the results in this thread

So, now you want to play with the court, right? Seems that we are posting our results already.

No idea what you mean by that.

But what violation/crime do you think can be avoided by getting on your imaginary list?

Well, since you want to play with the court system, and you don't even know what that means, how do you expect to win in court with some kind of a frivolous accusation?

In court, a man has the right to face his accuser. Are you going to be my accuser on the indictment? If so, what harm or damage did I do to you since we agreed ahead of time to do this court thing? Show me the harm or damage, and prove that I did it.

But if the State is my accuser on the indictment, let him take the oath and get on the stand so I can cross examine him. Can the State take the oath and get on the stand? Isn't the State just paperwork? If someone else gets on the stand, I will be requiring that he prove that he is Mr. State of XXXXX. If he isn't and can't, perhaps he is perjuring himself.

So, why go through the trouble of doing your thing? My accuser won't get on the stand, or you will be in trouble for playing with the court system.

[PopoJeff]

Ok...   I finally read the link you provided.  All I can say is wow.   That is so full of BS, lies, inaccuracies, and flat out false information.  

So you get put on a "Red Flag" or "Restricted" list that says the cops know you are special?
You wont get taken in on warrants for not paying or responding to traffic citations?
Affidavit of high crimes and treason can get the judge/cop/prosecutor in trouble?

I pray that anyone who believes this load of crap prints out a copy and shows it to the arresting officers. The body cam footage will be priceless entertainment.

I've worked for the government since 1990. Both Federal, and local law enforcement.  And I will offer a 3 gazillion dollar reward to anyone who can provide direction to this Red Flag or Restricted list.

The fact that you offer a "3 gazillion dollar reward," shows that you are not sincere. But if you say that you said that you "will" offer that reward, shows that you are simply trying to mix us up just like government tries to do all the time.

Suppose someone shows you what you are denying exists, and they come to collect on your "reward," if you stand in court as a man, you can claim that the most you can afford to pay is $5 a month. If you haven't thrown yourself into a position of accepting court decisions regarding your monthly payments, you can get off just about scott free. I mean, what's $5 a month?

Just because you never took part of a situation where you have seen the red flags, doesn't mean that others haven't. What generally happens is that the standard LEO (Law Enforcement Officer) asks for clarification when he runs into something like this that he doesn't understand. His superior officer goes up the chain of command asking for advice regarding what to do. It gets to a judge who has the red-flag info, or understands the interpretation of it, and he is the one who says, "hands off in this instance."

If there is an arrest made without clarification of a "red flag," it is ultimately dismissed in court once it has been made know that the accused knows what he is talking about. The LEO is never given clarification of what happened. He/she knows that something doesn't seem kosher, but he never figures it out.

The fact that you haven't seen any of this is the same as all kinds of other LEO who haven't seen it. There are few people who fight it this way. And when one does correctly, the judge or prosecutor drops the case.

Watch  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyOBKiHUbuw.

Alright, want something sincere.   Say $100.  Or even $1,000.  I will offer any amount for proof, not just BS video's or websites.  

Or, If you want to put the proof in the pudding, you name the charge/violation you want me to write... I'll give you a location/date.  We can meet there. I'll cite/arrest/issue summons for the law you wish to violate..... and we can play it out in court.  

And we can both post the results in this thread

So, now you want to play with the court, right? Seems that we are posting our results already.

No idea what you mean by that.

But what violation/crime do you think can be avoided by getting on your imaginary list?

Well, since you want to play with the court system, and you don't even know what that means, how do you expect to win in court with some kind of a frivolous accusation?

In court, a man has the right to face his accuser. Are you going to be my accuser on the indictment? If so, what harm or damage did I do to you since we agreed ahead of time to do this court thing? Show me the harm or damage, and prove that I did it.

But if the State is my accuser on the indictment, let him take the oath and get on the stand so I can cross examine him. Can the State take the oath and get on the stand? Isn't the State just paperwork? If someone else gets on the stand, I will be requiring that he prove that he is Mr. State of XXXXX. If he isn't and can't, perhaps he is perjuring himself.

So, why go through the trouble of doing your thing? My accuser won't get on the stand, or you will be in trouble for playing with the court system.

You are so confused..  and its quite apparent you have no clue how the legal system operates.

Nice talk though.  Good luck

Thought i made it quite clear.   Pick your violation.... speeding, stop sign violation, drunk in public, etc...    you do it and I'll take the appropriate action.  Then pull your special list out when the case goes to court.

[BADecker]

Ok...   I finally read the link you provided.  All I can say is wow.   That is so full of BS, lies, inaccuracies, and flat out false information.  

So you get put on a "Red Flag" or "Restricted" list that says the cops know you are special?
You wont get taken in on warrants for not paying or responding to traffic citations?
Affidavit of high crimes and treason can get the judge/cop/prosecutor in trouble?

I pray that anyone who believes this load of crap prints out a copy and shows it to the arresting officers. The body cam footage will be priceless entertainment.

I've worked for the government since 1990. Both Federal, and local law enforcement.  And I will offer a 3 gazillion dollar reward to anyone who can provide direction to this Red Flag or Restricted list.

The fact that you offer a "3 gazillion dollar reward," shows that you are not sincere. But if you say that you said that you "will" offer that reward, shows that you are simply trying to mix us up just like government tries to do all the time.

Suppose someone shows you what you are denying exists, and they come to collect on your "reward," if you stand in court as a man, you can claim that the most you can afford to pay is $5 a month. If you haven't thrown yourself into a position of accepting court decisions regarding your monthly payments, you can get off just about scott free. I mean, what's $5 a month?

Just because you never took part of a situation where you have seen the red flags, doesn't mean that others haven't. What generally happens is that the standard LEO (Law Enforcement Officer) asks for clarification when he runs into something like this that he doesn't understand. His superior officer goes up the chain of command asking for advice regarding what to do. It gets to a judge who has the red-flag info, or understands the interpretation of it, and he is the one who says, "hands off in this instance."

If there is an arrest made without clarification of a "red flag," it is ultimately dismissed in court once it has been made know that the accused knows what he is talking about. The LEO is never given clarification of what happened. He/she knows that something doesn't seem kosher, but he never figures it out.

The fact that you haven't seen any of this is the same as all kinds of other LEO who haven't seen it. There are few people who fight it this way. And when one does correctly, the judge or prosecutor drops the case.

Watch  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyOBKiHUbuw.

Alright, want something sincere.   Say $100.  Or even $1,000.  I will offer any amount for proof, not just BS video's or websites.  

Or, If you want to put the proof in the pudding, you name the charge/violation you want me to write... I'll give you a location/date.  We can meet there. I'll cite/arrest/issue summons for the law you wish to violate..... and we can play it out in court.  

And we can both post the results in this thread

So, now you want to play with the court, right? Seems that we are posting our results already.

No idea what you mean by that.

But what violation/crime do you think can be avoided by getting on your imaginary list?

Well, since you want to play with the court system, and you don't even know what that means, how do you expect to win in court with some kind of a frivolous accusation?

In court, a man has the right to face his accuser. Are you going to be my accuser on the indictment? If so, what harm or damage did I do to you since we agreed ahead of time to do this court thing? Show me the harm or damage, and prove that I did it.

But if the State is my accuser on the indictment, let him take the oath and get on the stand so I can cross examine him. Can the State take the oath and get on the stand? Isn't the State just paperwork? If someone else gets on the stand, I will be requiring that he prove that he is Mr. State of XXXXX. If he isn't and can't, perhaps he is perjuring himself.

So, why go through the trouble of doing your thing? My accuser won't get on the stand, or you will be in trouble for playing with the court system.

You are so confused..  and its quite apparent you have no clue how the legal system operates.

Nice talk though.  Good luck

Thought i made it quite clear.   Pick your violation.... speeding, stop sign violation, drunk in public, etc...    you do it and I'll take the appropriate action.  Then pull your special list out when the case goes to court.

You are so sheltered.

Did you ever see anyone stand in court not represented?... stand without an attorney, not propria persona, not sui juris? Until you see a man stand in court as an unrepresented man, you are missing a whole lot of freedom.

It would be interesting to see the contract or agreement your attorney would come up with, that we would have to sign to do this thing, with the assurances that I would get paid if I won, and maybe with hold harmless clauses included.

Did anyone ever get a summons to appear for some violation where he was offered the choice of the charge to be presented against him? You are so naive. If you really are a LEO, you are kinda on the lower end of the stick. LOEs don't ask their "victims" to pick the infraction that they are going to be charged with. If they do, they are completely disregarding the justice of the situation. Google "police brutality."

[PopoJeff]

Clueless again. You are so off in left field.
I dont know how else to explain it to you. I'm sure everyone reading this has figured it out.

But I'll try one more time before i leave you in your fantasy world.

I have no attorney to arrange this.

I do, however, represent the state in a 25sq mi area for 40hrs a week.  What I am telling you is... come commit a violation/crime of your choice where I have jurisdiction, in my district, while I'm working. You choose your action, one you think you can get out of with your red flag list.

I'll represent the state's interest. And you play your red flag theory.  Since we are both on this forum offering opposite opinions of your theory, we can post the results for the others.

[Spendulus]

....
Did anyone ever get a summons to appear for some violation where he was offered the choice of the charge to be presented against him?...

yes...

[af_newbie]

https://www.irs.gov/privacy-disclosure/the-truth-about-frivolous-tax-arguments-section-i-a-to-c

+1

How about it BADecker?  Can you read?

Don't listen to some crazy militia guys, they will land you in jail.

The question is, Can YOU read without assuming?

A1 in the link starts: "Some taxpayers assert that they are not required to file federal tax returns because the filing of a tax return is voluntary." And that statement is absolutely true. The fact is that you can find taxpayers and non-taxpayers all over the place who assert all different kinds of things.

Since I wasn't talking about taxpayers, your link is probably not applicable. I didn't read it all, because I found the word "taxpayer" throughout, and I didn't find "non-taxpayer" or "not a taxpayer."

When you look into it, you will find that taxpayers are people who have a voluntary contract or voluntary agreement with the IRS. The word "taxpayer" isn't a normal word in the dictionary, except that it might gradually be becoming one. Rather, "taxpayer" is a legalease word. It is legal language, and you don't really know what it means, because judges can change it's meaning any time they want in court, because it is a legal word.

People on a simple job sign a W-4 in a standard way. They are taxpayers because they agreed to be such by voluntarily filling out and signing this form. There are ways around this, and still filing a W-4 in the regular way. One of them is by becoming a State Citizen rather than a U.S. citizen, as spoken about in the OP and other areas of this thread.

But the way to get around it when you ARE a U.S. citizen, is to write "n-a" on all the blanks of the W-4, "Exempt" on line 7, and sign it "non-assumpsit, Your Signature." To make this even stronger is to sign it "non-assumpsit, By: Your Signature, Agent, Man."

Now, if you have other documents that you have signed with the IRS, depending on what they are, you might still be a taxpayer. But if you don't have any other agreements or contracts or signed documents with the IRS, and only the W-4 as I have outlined above, you probably aren't a taxpayer, no matter where you live or work. Btw, if there is pressure on you to fill out a 1040, fill it out the same way: "n-a" on all the lines, and sign it "non-assumpsit, Your Signature."

You do it this way because you are not a taxpayer, and you don't really have any right to be filling out their forms. Just be sure to maintain the fact that you are not a taxpayer in any of your letters or other paperwork with them, and by signing: "non-assumpsit, Your Signature."

The "Frivolous Tax Arguments in General" at https://www.irs.gov/privacy-disclosure/the-truth-about-frivolous-tax-arguments-section-i-a-to-c is absolutely correct. It is for taxpayers, and if you want to be such, pay your taxes. In addition, if you use IRS forms in ways other than I have provided above, you might be making yourself into a taxpayer. If you are a taxpayer, pay your taxes. You have volunteered into the system by certain IRS documents you have signed. Don't break your contracts and agreements.

If you are the US citizen, you must follow the law of the land (Title 26 of U.S.C.).  All US citizens and permanent residents are subject to the federal income tax.  It does not matter if you agree with it. You are liable and uncle Sam with come to collect.  Take away all your property and sell it at auction, freeze your bank accounts, take your precious AR15s and throw you in jail.

If you don't pay taxes because you do not agree with the laws, you will be charged with tax evasion.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26

[BADecker]

If you are the US citizen, you must follow the law of the land (Title 26 of U.S.C.).  All US citizens and permanent residents are subject to the federal income tax.  It does not matter if you agree with it. You are liable and uncle Sam with come to collect.  Take away all your property and sell it at auction, freeze your bank accounts, take your precious AR15s and throw you in jail.

If you don't pay taxes because you do not agree with the laws, you will be charged with tax evasion.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26

The law of the land is private property, and the right to contract based on it. This is shown by the jury in court, and the 9th Amendment.

Just because you say that all US citizens and permanent residents are subject to the federal income tax, doesn't make it true.

If some government agent or agency takes your property away, either you don't know how to protect it, or they are disobeying the law. Your labor is your property. Your income is simply a representation of it.

It's the fact that I agree with the laws that I don't pay income tax. If you would like to focus on a section of the law that talks about how much you should pay, rather than the section of the law that shows you that you don't have to, that's fine with me. Along with me, most of the rest of the people who focus on the non-paying parts of the law, don't pay, either.

[af_newbie]

If you are the US citizen, you must follow the law of the land (Title 26 of U.S.C.).  All US citizens and permanent residents are subject to the federal income tax.  It does not matter if you agree with it. You are liable and uncle Sam with come to collect.  Take away all your property and sell it at auction, freeze your bank accounts, take your precious AR15s and throw you in jail.

If you don't pay taxes because you do not agree with the laws, you will be charged with tax evasion.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26

The law of the land is private property, and the right to contract based on it. This is shown by the jury in court, and the 9th Amendment.

Just because you say that all US citizens and permanent residents are subject to the federal income tax, doesn't make it true.

If some government agent or agency takes your property away, either you don't know how to protect it, or they are disobeying the law. Your labor is your property. Your income is simply a representation of it.

It's the fact that I agree with the laws that I don't pay income tax. If you would like to focus on a section of the law that talks about how much you should pay, rather than the section of the law that shows you that you don't have to, that's fine with me. Along with me, most of the rest of the people who focus on the non-paying parts of the law, don't pay, either.

You are knowingly breaking the law as defined in the United States Code.  The 9th Amendment was not added to allow people to break the laws they don't agree with. LOL.

Your rights are not violated when you pay taxes.  You are fulfilling your obligation as a US citizen.  If you don't like it, renounce your citizenship and you will not have to pay taxes.

BTW, when a SWAT team swarms your compound one day, you will have about 2 minutes to drop your weapons, if you plan to walk again.

I am telling you, you cannot win this 'fight'.  You are breaking the law, you are getting away with it for now, but when they find out, they will come after you hard.

Who knows they might be already counting the penalties and interests and are just waiting for the right time to take it all away.

[BADecker]

If you are the US citizen, you must follow the law of the land (Title 26 of U.S.C.).  All US citizens and permanent residents are subject to the federal income tax.  It does not matter if you agree with it. You are liable and uncle Sam with come to collect.  Take away all your property and sell it at auction, freeze your bank accounts, take your precious AR15s and throw you in jail.

If you don't pay taxes because you do not agree with the laws, you will be charged with tax evasion.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26

The law of the land is private property, and the right to contract based on it. This is shown by the jury in court, and the 9th Amendment.

Just because you say that all US citizens and permanent residents are subject to the federal income tax, doesn't make it true.

If some government agent or agency takes your property away, either you don't know how to protect it, or they are disobeying the law. Your labor is your property. Your income is simply a representation of it.

It's the fact that I agree with the laws that I don't pay income tax. If you would like to focus on a section of the law that talks about how much you should pay, rather than the section of the law that shows you that you don't have to, that's fine with me. Along with me, most of the rest of the people who focus on the non-paying parts of the law, don't pay, either.

You are knowingly breaking the law as defined in the United States Code.  The 9th Amendment was not added to allow people to break the laws they don't agree with. LOL.

Your rights are not violated when you pay taxes.  You are fulfilling your obligation as a US citizen.  If you don't like it, renounce your citizenship and you will not have to pay taxes.

BTW, when a SWAT team swarms your compound one day, you will have about 2 minutes to drop your weapons, if you plan to walk again.

I am telling you, you cannot win this 'fight'.  You are breaking the law, you are getting away with it for now, but when they find out, they will come after you hard.

Who knows they might be already counting the penalties and interests and are just waiting for the right time to take it all away.

There isn't any fight. There is nothing to win. The IRS has acknowledged what I am doing, and I don't pay.

You suggest to renounce my US citizenship. But that is exactly what getting State Citizenship is all about. Check the OP links. Not that anybody needs this. It simply makes things easier.

When I did the legal/lawful thing that I am telling you about, that is when the IRS penalties and interest went away.

Let me tell you one thing that is very important for you. In your state of mind, if you somehow find out that everything that I am saying is true, don't do it yourself. You simply don't have the mentality for it. Your mindset will cause you to make mistakes.

[BADecker]

Clueless again. You are so off in left field.
I dont know how else to explain it to you. I'm sure everyone reading this has figured it out.

But I'll try one more time before i leave you in your fantasy world.

I have no attorney to arrange this.

I do, however, represent the state in a 25sq mi area for 40hrs a week.  What I am telling you is... come commit a violation/crime of your choice where I have jurisdiction, in my district, while I'm working. You choose your action, one you think you can get out of with your red flag list.

I'll represent the state's interest. And you play your red flag theory.  Since we are both on this forum offering opposite opinions of your theory, we can post the results for the others.

Folks - whoever reads this - I apologize. It wasn't my idea to get PopoJeff all riled up like this. Now, everybody will have to be careful in his jurisdiction.

If he is DPS, or some other form of State cop, he will be out to ticket anybody he can, just because he is riled with me. So, be careful to be law abiding within his district.

No more going 2 or 3 mph over the speed limit. No more screeching tires even a little. Check your lights to be sure they are all working. And be sure to use your turn-signal for every turn, even if you don't think he is watching.

Most of all, get to the OP and follow the links. Study hard so that you know how to beat him in court when he bothers you for essentially nothing.

Again, sorry for getting him this riled at everybody. I know. He's riled at me. But he will take it out on everybody hoping that he might somehow get me. Does he have police brutality websites against him already?

[Spendulus]

Clueless again. You are so off in left field.
I dont know how else to explain it to you. I'm sure everyone reading this has figured it out.

But I'll try one more time before i leave you in your fantasy world.

I have no attorney to arrange this.

I do, however, represent the state in a 25sq mi area for 40hrs a week.  What I am telling you is... come commit a violation/crime of your choice where I have jurisdiction, in my district, while I'm working. You choose your action, one you think you can get out of with your red flag list.

I'll represent the state's interest. And you play your red flag theory.  Since we are both on this forum offering opposite opinions of your theory, we can post the results for the others.

Folks - whoever reads this - I apologize. It wasn't my idea to get PopoJeff all riled up like this. Now, everybody will have to be careful in his jurisdiction.

If he is DPS, or some other form of State cop, he will be out to ticket anybody he can, just because he is riled with me. So, be careful to be law abiding within his district.

No more going 2 or 3 mph over the speed limit. No more screeching tires even a little. Check your lights to be sure they are all working. And be sure to use your turn-signal for every turn, even if you don't think he is watching.

Most of all, get to the OP and follow the links. Study hard so that you know how to beat him in court when he bothers you for essentially nothing.

Again, sorry for getting him this riled at everybody. I know. He's riled at me. But he will take it out on everybody hoping that he might somehow get me. Does he have police brutality websites against him already?

Actually I think your bluff has been called, and your antics and theatrics are on the line as true or false.

People here who have experience with the law and with the tax code know that your ideas on this subject are ridiculous.

However, some are not and they could be harmed if they listened to you.

[BADecker]

Actually I think your bluff has been called, and your antics and theatrics are on the line as true or false.

People here who have experience with the law and with the tax code know that your ideas on this subject are ridiculous.

However, some are not and they could be harmed if they listened to you.

Consider the court system. Often a judge or the attorneys in a case will site some other case from years before to make a point for upholding a certain position in the case at hand. And adjudications are often made based on these other cases.

But none of the other cases fit the current case exactly. If the defendant had the ability to speak in court - or maybe to even think - he might bring this up as a point for not using examples in other similar cases. If he did bring it up in the right way, it could change the whole outcome in his case.

The point? If you want to do a trial such and such a way, you are going to get such and such results. If 99% of the trials are done in such and such ways, there will be such and such results.

I am not suggesting that the law and tax code can be overcome (so to speak) using the standard approach. What I am saying is that when one uses other laws, codes, and court cases in other ways, to fight an IRS case, the outcome is essentially guaranteed to be different than the standard.

It's difficult to find court wins against the IRS, of the kind I am talking about, because the IRS often drops the case when it sees that they are going to lose. Often the judge or a prosecutor will dismiss the case when they understand that losing it could set precedent against the IRS. So, even if the records of the case exist, they don't show anything definitive.

The law is the law. All I am saying is that the law in the OP links is sufficient to stop not only IRS taxes, but even property taxes when handled the right way. If you don't want to believe that there is a possibility, so you don't really even look or consider, that's fine. Your choice. Or maybe you just don't have time to study it.

[Spendulus]

Actually I think your bluff has been called, and your antics and theatrics are on the line as true or false.

People here who have experience with the law and with the tax code know that your ideas on this subject are ridiculous.

However, some are not and they could be harmed if they listened to you.

Consider the court system. Often a judge or the attorneys in a case will site some other case from years before to make a point for upholding a certain position in the case at hand. And adjudications are often made based on these other cases.

But none of the other cases fit the current case exactly. If the defendant had the ability to speak in court - or maybe to even think - he might bring this up as a point for not using examples in other similar cases. If he did bring it up in the right way, it could change the whole outcome in his case.

The point? If you want to do a trial such and such a way, you are going to get such and such results. If 99% of the trials are done in such and such ways, there will be such and such results.

I am not suggesting that the law and tax code can be overcome (so to speak) using the standard approach. What I am saying is that when one uses other laws, codes, and court cases in other ways, to fight an IRS case, the outcome is essentially guaranteed to be different than the standard.

It's difficult to find court wins against the IRS, of the kind I am talking about, because the IRS often drops the case when it sees that they are going to lose. Often the judge or a prosecutor will dismiss the case when they understand that losing it could set precedent against the IRS. So, even if the records of the case exist, they don't show anything definitive.

The law is the law. All I am saying is that the law in the OP links is sufficient to stop not only IRS taxes, but even property taxes when handled the right way. If you don't want to believe that there is a possibility, so you don't really even look or consider, that's fine. Your choice. Or maybe you just don't have time to study it.

What you are doing is playing lawyer.

But you don't know anything about it.

For example, take one of your favorite mantras. Jury Nullification.

Here's an unbiased look at the subject. Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

Pretty much shows that anyone that goes for it has at best a 1-5% chance, doesn't it?

[BADecker]

Actually I think your bluff has been called, and your antics and theatrics are on the line as true or false.

People here who have experience with the law and with the tax code know that your ideas on this subject are ridiculous.

However, some are not and they could be harmed if they listened to you.

Consider the court system. Often a judge or the attorneys in a case will site some other case from years before to make a point for upholding a certain position in the case at hand. And adjudications are often made based on these other cases.

But none of the other cases fit the current case exactly. If the defendant had the ability to speak in court - or maybe to even think - he might bring this up as a point for not using examples in other similar cases. If he did bring it up in the right way, it could change the whole outcome in his case.

The point? If you want to do a trial such and such a way, you are going to get such and such results. If 99% of the trials are done in such and such ways, there will be such and such results.

I am not suggesting that the law and tax code can be overcome (so to speak) using the standard approach. What I am saying is that when one uses other laws, codes, and court cases in other ways, to fight an IRS case, the outcome is essentially guaranteed to be different than the standard.

It's difficult to find court wins against the IRS, of the kind I am talking about, because the IRS often drops the case when it sees that they are going to lose. Often the judge or a prosecutor will dismiss the case when they understand that losing it could set precedent against the IRS. So, even if the records of the case exist, they don't show anything definitive.

The law is the law. All I am saying is that the law in the OP links is sufficient to stop not only IRS taxes, but even property taxes when handled the right way. If you don't want to believe that there is a possibility, so you don't really even look or consider, that's fine. Your choice. Or maybe you just don't have time to study it.

What you are doing is playing lawyer.

But you don't know anything about it.

For example, take one of your favorite mantras. Jury Nullification.

Here's an unbiased look at the subject. Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

Pretty much shows that anyone that goes for it has at best a 1-5% chance, doesn't it?

Is that a claim or a complaint? File it if you like.

Check https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bundys+jury+nullification&t=hd&ia=web for jury nullification.

Jury nullification is something that the people have forgotten about over the last 100 years. But they are waking up. Besides, Wikipedia doesn't show the truth except when it suits them. So, how do you know?