http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,245003,00.html

(sorry bout the fox news link, I know some of you guys hate it, but thats the only site that had it when i googled it)



*sadly I have to put a disclaimer on here to prevent stupid drama about a certain news site... rather than discussing the situation

1/21/2007 4:20:26 AM

the guy is an idiot.

1/21/2007 9:14:51 AM

Yep, the tanks and helicopters will be there soon.

1/21/2007 9:30:34 AM

DEAD MAN WALKING!!!



^^ it has nothing to do with being an idiot, last I checked being an idiot isn't illegal... but it isn't a crime punishable by death from tax agents armed with machine guns either

wonder how they'll do it this time?

5 gallons of gas and 9 lbs of c4 from a chopper???

that hasn't been used lately, but it worked in Philly

1/21/2007 11:41:46 AM

why does this guy hate America so much?

1/21/2007 12:08:42 PM

Quote :

"My wife is a basket case."

Well, there's your problem.

1/21/2007 12:17:04 PM

yeah they're totally going to get MURDERED



[Edited on January 21, 2007 at 12:17 PM. Reason : /]

1/21/2007 12:17:31 PM

Quote :

"it has nothing to do with being an idiot, last I checked being an idiot isn't illegal... but it isn't a crime punishable by death from tax agents armed with machine guns either"

Not paying your taxes and trying to be a tough guy with federal agents by having a armed standoff is being a fucking idiot.... and quite illegal.

And when shit goes down, these morons and all the other nutjobs will cry like they are victims of an oppressive government. Give me a break.

1/21/2007 1:01:04 PM

Hey Gonzales, blow that shit up.

1/21/2007 1:38:40 PM

yeah spending millions of dollars in taxpayer money doing what they are doing is better use of our tax money

how about just lay off, the dude will come out and they can arrest him if they need to eventually

but now they're making a scene and causing more drama, blowing tax money to collect less tax money than they have spent or will have spent

ok, so you lefties hate Bush and what he does in Iraq(for pretty good reason honestly) and use every reason under the sun to do so, but as soon as something happens domestically with someone that isn't gay, a minority, or some other person that the system has "oppressed" it's ok because they are a nut job, a gun nut, or whatever

THE US GOVERNMENT IS SO HORRIBLE LOOK AT WHAT THEY DO IN OTHER COUNTRIES!!!!! RAWR

but when the government blows our tax money and murders people that don't deserve to die because of TAX MONEY it's ok

I don't understand you people at all

there is no death penalty for being nutty, eccentric, or whatever...

Quote :

"Not paying your taxes and trying to be a tough guy with federal agents by having a armed standoff is being a fucking idiot.... and quite illegal. And when shit goes down, these morons and all the other nutjobs will cry like they are victims of an oppressive government. Give me a break"

guess what he's allowed to have weapons to defend his home, has he pointed them at anyone yet?

not that it matters, we know tax agents don't care and will not hesitate to fire the first shot at someone

ask the baby that was killed in David Koresh's arms when he opened the door to his compound unarmed and a BATF agent decided to let loose with an MP5 subgun

ask the families of all the agents that died, (most shooting each other), ask the families of the 90 people that were burned to death while the BATF waited almost 40 minutes to call the fire department

over 100 dead and countless millions of dollars spent over a $200 tax on a part that they never even found (don't give me the crap about how his wives or what not, if that was the issue local PD or deputies would have picked him up for it)

ask the people that used to live in a 10 block area in Philly because they decided to drop 10 pounds of c4 and a 5 gallon gas can on the roof of a house and detonate it (WHY IN THE HELL DOES DOMESTIC LAW ENFORCEMENT NEED C4... much less has the urge to use it and not know how)

why do they spend countless millions of tax money on a man because a piece of wood 3/8" was missing on a 20 dollar shotgun.... eventually killing his wife, his son, his dog, and wounding a neighbor and the man in the process ?

not one of those shots fired by this "expert marksmans" sniper rifle was fired in defense, all of his shots were either at unarmed people, or into someones back....

all because of some tax issue that can be resolved without violence, machine gun toting tax agents that can't hit their target, or blowing millions more in taxpayer money

while none of the people involved on the government side faced a judge, a jury, or so much as getting fired from their job

it isn't about the money... it's about "showing who the boss is", if it was about taxpayer money, they wouldn't do this crap

I like this country, I love it, I like a lot of LEOs, hell, my dad is a retired high ranking LEO in this state...

but I have an issue with tax agents that have had nothing to do since prohibition ended; carrying suppressed submachine guns with "armor piercing ammo", using military equipment(tanks, blackhawks under the guise that someone might have drugs... to keep it legal), and blowing 100x more taxpayer money to prove a point to american citizens that don't agree with them, killing them, knowing that all they have to do is demonize them in the media and it suddenly makes it ok to murder someone who might not even be guilty of anything

thats my problem... I hope this guy gives up before he gets blasted because he owes taxes

1/21/2007 4:04:36 PM

Quote :

"yeah spending millions of dollars in taxpayer money doing what they are doing is better use of our tax money"

Well, if they don't spend the millions to enforce the tax code here, they're opening the door for any idiot to say "Hey, that shit worked for those Browns, let's give it a go"

1/21/2007 4:08:39 PM

^^dude just move to montana and start a compound or join a militia

christ

Quote :

"Well, if they don't spend the millions to enforce the tax code here, they're opening the door for any idiot to say "Hey, that shit worked for those Browns, let's give it a go""

exactly.

[Edited on January 21, 2007 at 4:31 PM. Reason : .]

1/21/2007 4:17:40 PM

if you challange the government in a show of force i dont understand how death is not an expected outcome or how it is murder

1/21/2007 5:05:51 PM

^ its not a show of force if he refuses to open the door and says he has weapons and will shoot intruders.

oh. fuck. i guess it is.

1/21/2007 5:28:10 PM

If the perception that the government has a monopoly on authority and force is lost...the consequences of such a precedent have the potential to be devastating. No, I honestly don't care how expensive it is and to a certain extent I don't care how many of the people involved in holing up get killed.

You can't just "wait it out" and bust him whenever he leaves the compound, because then you're announcing, "Well, you're untouchable as long as you're holed up with your gun buddies, but you're ass is grass as soon as you're not."

And you can't just ignore "minor" tax infractions, either. The realistic expectation that the government will prosecute you for failing to do so is the only deterrent against everybody doing that activity.

I hope he surrenders quietly, but if he doesn't, I don't really give a hoot in hell if they drop a MOAB on his house.

1/21/2007 7:59:05 PM

Quote :

"ask the baby that was killed in David Koresh's arms when he opened the door to his compound unarmed and a BATF agent decided to let loose with an MP5 subgun ask the families of all the agents that died, (most shooting each other), ask the families of the 90 people that were burned to death while the BATF waited almost 40 minutes to call the fire department"

Wow. David Koresh. A model human being. I'm sure all these Waco stories you're told are fact.

I have no sympathy for all these lowlife militia nut-jobs who get whats coming to them.

1/21/2007 8:46:07 PM

Quote :

"If the perception that the government has a monopoly on authority and force is lost...the consequences of such a precedent have the potential to be devastating. No, I honestly don't care how expensive it is and to a certain extent I don't care how many of the people involved in holing up get killed."

Woah dude, due process ring a bell? In all aspects this guy appears to be in the wrong, but the whole point is that government does not have a monpoly on the use of force and power. By the very principles that our government was set up, those are powers delegated to the government by the governed. If he shoots first, by all means, light the old man up, but until he does, they can't just bust a cap in his ass because he refuses to pay his taxes or leave his house. Neither of these is a capital crime and I don't think we really want to go down the road where financial hardship is a justification for deadly force.

1/21/2007 9:05:56 PM

dont forget to ask the branch dividians who poured gasoline and kerosene on everyone

1/21/2007 9:10:39 PM

/

[Edited on January 21, 2007 at 9:19 PM. Reason : .]

1/21/2007 9:19:00 PM

^^^ hence the reason it is a standoff. and they arent actually dropping bombs.

1/21/2007 9:25:08 PM

"next murder"

yeeeaaaaaah....

1/21/2007 9:28:14 PM

well there isnt a law saying you have to pay the tax so whats the big deal?

as the guy says, "show us the law"

[Edited on January 21, 2007 at 9:42 PM. Reason : i wanna see it also, the law that is]

1/21/2007 9:41:09 PM

Quote :

"but the whole point is that government does not have a monpoly on the use of force and power."

Yes, it does. All legitimate and sovereign governments, by definition, have "monopoly on coercion." We may have given them that monopoly, but they undoubtedly have it.

Quote :

"Woah dude, due process ring a bell?"

Sure it does. These guys have gotten all the due process they can before they're actually arrested, which is the point we seem to be hung up on.

Quote :

"If he shoots first, by all means, light the old man up, but until he does, they can't just bust a cap in his ass because he refuses to pay his taxes or leave his house."

So even though it's his obvious (and perhaps stated, though I missed that) intention to resist entry with firearms, we can't act accordingly until he actually has shot someone. Sorry, I'm not buying it.

They're not shooting him for refusing to pay or leave, they're shooting him for threatening people and general and LEO's in particular with firearms. If a crackhead draws a gun on a cop and gets shot before he's actually fired, nobody bats an eye.

This is the situation:

1) These guys must be arrested. You can't just throw up your hands and say, "Well, they're holed up pretty good, I guess they win!"
2) They have an obvious intention to resist arrest by the use of firearms.
3) Their use of firearms will and in fact must be met with overwhelming deadly force.

You're basically telling me that we have to let him shoot first before we can shoot him back, and I just think that's wasteful and irresponsible.

Give them a deadline to leave, and if they haven't met it, burn the motherfucker to the ground and shoot anybody who comes out doing anything short of waving a white flag and begging for mercy.

1/21/2007 9:46:55 PM

^^ 16th amendment

1/21/2007 9:50:14 PM

well i meant a real law

1/21/2007 9:53:07 PM

oh....so a law passed by 51% of congress is less than an amendment. ok.....

1/21/2007 9:53:43 PM

No, these guys make up ridiculous arguments about how the 16th Amendment wasn't properly ratified by the states.

I like the one involving a claim that Ohio wasn't a state until the 50's, and therefore couldn't have really ratified the Amendment.

1/21/2007 9:58:50 PM

The 16th Amendment only gave Congress the power to creat an income tax. The amendment did not create the tax...Congress had to pass a law later actually imposing the tax.

Reading this reminds me how silly it is for the IRS to keep claiming the income tax is voluntary. If you don't pay it voluntarily, you will be imprisoned or killed.

And keep in mind that John Hancock was a tax evader
...and George Washington was a member of a militia.

1/21/2007 11:57:35 PM

Quote :

"If you don't pay it voluntarily, you will be imprisoned or killed. "

wow

Quote :

"And keep in mind that John Hancock was a tax evader ...and George Washington was a member of a militia."

okay we'll all keep your fallacies in mind

or not

[Edited on January 21, 2007 at 11:59 PM. Reason : .]

1/21/2007 11:58:45 PM

Holy shit, what is it with the people in this thread...

1/22/2007 12:13:50 AM

i'm trying to figure out how the BATF would be involved in this guys case since i haven't seen anywhere that he has done anything illegal involving firearms, alcohol, or tobacco. now the US marshals and the IRS i know are involved, but just care to enlighten me how the BATF got invovled?

1/22/2007 2:06:22 AM

^ BATF is department of the Treasury if I'm not mistaken, so they're just pulling from their other assets.

Quote :

"1) These guys must be arrested. You can't just throw up your hands and say, "Well, they're holed up pretty good, I guess they win!" 2) They have an obvious intention to resist arrest by the use of firearms. 3) Their use of firearms will and in fact must be met with overwhelming deadly force."

I agree with all of this in principle. But given BATF's track record I'm not even slightly interested in giving them any free rein when they could simply wait this guy out. Cut his power, quarantine the place, and sooner or later he'll come out.

Quote :

"If a crackhead draws a gun on a cop and gets shot before he's actually fired, nobody bats an eye."

Big difference between someone who is in the middle of a rapidly changing situation where you have to make a split second decision that will effect your life, and having a compound surrounded by trained snipers who are constantly monitoring the area.

If he does come out shooting, drop him, if not don't. Yes the burden is on the government to act in a restrained and responsible manner.

1/22/2007 8:42:14 AM

Quote :

"Tax Fugitive Barricaded in House: 'Show Us the Law, and We'll Pay'"

The English language can be tricky at times.

1/22/2007 12:59:31 PM

He should have tossed the fucking tea in the harbor.

1/22/2007 1:12:53 PM

while the guy is "breaking the law" by not paying income taxes ect..., he is protesting non-violently to something he sees as unjust.....whether you agree with him or not, he's not killing or hurting anyone, yet still drawing awareness to his plight.

I say gg, man.

1/22/2007 2:11:09 PM

Quote :

"Woah dude, due process ring a bell?"

Quote :

"After the pair were convicted Thursday on 17 felony counts, Brown and a group of supporters sequestered themselves in his home in Plainfield, N.H."

He was convicted of 17 felonies. He is resisting arrest.

If this guy knocked over 17 liquor stores and was convicted in a court of law on all counts, nobody would give a shit if the police ran up in his house.

Quote :

"In all aspects this guy appears to be in the wrong, but the whole point is that government does not have a monpoly on the use of force and power."

The government DOES have a monopoly on force. That's how it works. The cops can shoot you. You can't shoot the cops. The cops can arrest you. You can't arrest the cops. That's how it works.

[Edited on January 22, 2007 at 2:21 PM. Reason : ]

1/22/2007 2:19:05 PM

You twat, he's not "non-violently protesting" anything. MLK, Jr. and Ghandi didn't have a bunch of guys with guns when they did their thing. The moment he picked up a firearm, he made it something else entirely. This isn't chaining yourself to a redwood tree, son.

Quote :

"Cut his power, quarantine the place, and sooner or later he'll come out."

With a regular criminal I would agree. But this guy has coupled the standoff with a political agenda, which to me represents a situation of much higher potential danger nationwide and which must therefore be resolved with a quickness.

Quote :

"Yes the burden is on the government to act in a restrained and responsible manner."

And I think giving them an ultimatum shows restraint, and that permitting them to continue with this bullshit -- or to force ourselves to wait until he fires before we can do anything -- is irresponsible. So I have no problem.

1/22/2007 2:22:03 PM

Quote :

"If this guy knocked over 17 liquor stores and was convicted in a court of law on all counts, nobody would give a shit if the police ran up in his house. "

but he didn't.....

people can sympathize with him b/c everyone pays taxes....most people don't go robbing liquor stores.....terrible comparison.

1/22/2007 2:23:27 PM

No, it's decent, because like you say, everybody does pay taxes, and should be righteously pissed off when some other douchebag tries to get away with not paying his share.

If you had said, "everyone criminally avoids to pay taxes," your post would have made sense, but it would still have been wrong.

1/22/2007 2:24:47 PM

Quote :

"MLK, Jr. and Ghandi didn't have a bunch of guys with guns when they did their thing."

How the hell do you know? I bet people associated with MLK were packing, whether he knew/condoned or not.

1/22/2007 2:27:02 PM

Quote :

"No, it's decent, because like you say, everybody does pay taxes, and should be righteously pissed off when some other douchebag tries to get away with not paying his share. "

nope, b/c if i thought i could get away with it, i wouldn't pay either. Most people are this way....he just thought he could get away with it.

1/22/2007 2:36:37 PM

Quote :

"With a regular criminal I would agree. But this guy has coupled the standoff with a political agenda, which to me represents a situation of much higher potential danger nationwide and which must therefore be resolved with a quickness."

Yeah, because randomly commiting crimes is more acceptable than a man making a (misguided) stand on political principal is obviously dangerous. His decision to excercise his first ammendment rights in conjunction with criminal behavior makes this sooo much worse

Quote :

"That's how it works. The cops can shoot you. You can't shoot the cops. The cops can arrest you. You can't arrest the cops. That's how it works."

I'm not arguing that this isn't the case, but all these powers are "derived from the consent of the governed." The cops cannot shoot or arrest you without just cause.

Quote :

"He was convicted of 17 felonies. He is resisting arrest."

again, not a capital crime.

Admittedly, the posession and expressed intent for him to use firearms makes this a complicated decision, and I'm not supporting this guy, but so long as other options are open going in blazing is not justifiable.

1/22/2007 2:43:34 PM

im pretty sure express intent to use a firearm against any agent of the government is a felony.

but i could be wrong

1/22/2007 2:58:44 PM

Quote :

"Bernie Bastian, a Brown supporter who said he was carrying two guns, said he and about two-dozen supporters would stand with their friend"

i might be missing something, but this is the only direct reference to firearms in the whole article, and it's a different guy.

1/22/2007 3:07:40 PM

If only they would spend half as much effort capturing an illegal alien.

1/22/2007 3:12:37 PM

my experience with the ATF has never been good. as far as law enforcement goes, these guys are at the bottom of the barrel

1/22/2007 3:14:54 PM

^i would say any experience with ATF is by default a bad experience.

1/22/2007 3:15:52 PM

would that be direct experience?

1/22/2007 3:15:57 PM

yes it was a direct experience.....not pleasant at all.

1/22/2007 3:44:55 PM

Quote :

"What Benson proved was that there were multiple violations of due process in the ratification process such that not one of the 48 States properly ratified the Amendment. Errors were made by both the states and U.S. Secretary of State Philander Knox. Among these errors are three States that are reported to have ratified the Amendment that had not (Kentucky, Tennessee and Wyoming); nine states where evidence of ratification was either missing or incomplete (in Minnesota there is no evidence in any Washington, D.C. archive that Minnesota ratified the Amendment); twenty-two states changed the wording of the Amendment and; 31 states changed its punctuation."

This is something I found on why these morons think the 16th Amendment was never properly ratified.

You need 36 states (of the 48 at the time) to ratify an Amendment.
31 of these are good-lord gimmies, as the punctuation is all that is changed, which presumably doesn't change the meaning of the amendment. The Minnesota information missing from D.C. should be easy to fix. Apparantly there are 8 others in that category. Twenty-two states changed wording, and I'm sure plenty of them were simple additions or omissions that could have been clerical errors.

Give it the fuck up and pay your taxes.

1/22/2007 5:11:30 PM