This boils down to the difference between Irwin Schiff and his son Peter, the former who is imprisoned, the latter who was not caught in web of Legal Verbiage vs. The Reality of Common Misapprehension.
Just as definitions change through common usage, and even common (mis)understanding, so does the force and effect of law--not though law or words, so much as common (mis)understanding of them, which are exploited and become the de facto laws--not in terms of verbiage or original legislative intent, but only in terms of the reality of social momentum that comes from majority misapprehension.
If you said that something you're selling costs "five", and you meant five hundred, and yet the buyer misunderstands and doles out five thousand instead, and walks away, are you going to stop him, and correct his order of magnitude misunderstanding? An honest person might. Most won't, if they think they'll get away with it. Many would take that as a clear sign that whatever they were selling was underpriced to begin with (i.e., whatever they can get away with, or 'what the market will bear').
If the government writes laws, statutes, rules or regulations code that apply only to a certain class of entities or individuals (e.g, those who take from government), but literally millions are led to believe that it applies to them as well, and "comply" with something that never applied to them in the first place, is the government going to correct their mistake--their misunderstanding? Or is the government instead going to take that as a sign that MOST people believed that it really did, and even should, apply to them? And if those "most people" include those who are collecting on the government's behalf, even to the point where there is no outcry or defense of a man who sees through the Common Misunderstanding Facade, and goes to prison as a result of his "non-compliance", and that reinforcing the common misapprehension, where does that leave you? Like him, you really can be right--and risk losing any combination of part or all of your life, liberty and property, like Irwin did. Or, you can do as Peter Shiff has chosen to do, and go along with the REALITY of the momentum effects of common misunderstandings, give payola to the thieving bandits who really will fuck you up if you don't go along with the charade, and avoid all trouble.
Where are the alternate choices? Are there other choices, and is there an in between? I guess that is the question, but it deserves, at the very least, to be answered in a present reality context.
Ask your employer to be paid in gold/silver coins which are deemed legal tender in the us. Claim your salary was the amount of the coin's face value (e.g. $50 instead of $1700 for 1 oz).
A guy named Robert Kahre from NV did this in 2003 and won in court against the IRS and the DOJ. (somebody please post a link, I can't do it from a mobile phone).
Maybe that's a solution for you?
sentenced to fifteen years for federal tax crimes.
Again, all you need for such a conviction--and therefore de facto change in the force and effect of law--is a jury of "peers" who misunderstand everything in pretty much the same way, and a judge who sees it pretty much the same way, and will not intervene.
I mean, FFS--for those who insist that the so-called "rule of law" should semantically prevail, with insistence that the real meanings of words should trump everything, does it get any clearer than "No State shall... make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts"? And does ANY STATE even regard that explicit provision of the Constitution? Even one? No. Not one.
Last edited by Steven Douglas; 12-06-2012 at 07:19 PM.
Robert D. Kahre and his sister, Lori A. Kahre, each were convicted of intentionally and knowingly conspiring to defraud the federal government, U.S. Attorney Greg Brower of Nevada said.
Robert Kahre was also convicted of 49 counts of failure to collect or pay employment taxes, two counts of attempting to interfere with administration of IRS laws, four counts of tax evasion and one count of wire fraud.
Lori Kahre was also convicted of two counts of attempting to interfere with administration of IRS laws, one count of making a false statement to a bank and seven counts of tax evasion.
Robert Kahre faces up to 296 years in prison and fines of up to $14 million, Brower said. Lore Kahre faces up to 71 years in prison and fines of up to $2.75 million.
Hold up a liquor store and shoot the clerk in the face while you are at it.Robert Kahre faces up to 296 years in prison and fines of up to $14 million, Brower said. Lore Kahre faces up to 71 years in prison and fines of up to $2.75 million.
It will get you, on average, an 8 year sentence, roughly.
It's clear who the government thinks is a threat.
We agree.and I think it's foolish for anyone to dismiss it outright.
ignominia et contemptum tyrannis
Habeo excelsum artem; afflixerim cum crudelitate illis qui laedas me
The affairs of gold-laden Gyges do not interest me.
Zealousy of the gods has never seized me nor anger
at their deeds. But I have no love for great tyranny
for its deeds are very far from my eyes. -Archilochus
Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine