Are forced taxes theft.

I never agreed too that. If someone leans against your car you don't have the right to shoot them.

 

It doesn't require moving to not use the roads. It simply requires not using the roads, and then you don't have to pay taxes, right?

 

Maybe they use government roads. But he doesn't.

You should lay off the whiskey at this point.

 

How do you prove you own your computer?

 

I never said you did have such a right to shoot them for leaning against your car. What I said was that the only legitimate use for force in in response the the violation of person or property.

 

You said wrongly I agreed with. I was explaining why your statement was incorrect.

 

What's "legal" got to do with anything?
Why are you hiding behind the law?

Learn right from wrong.
You know what is. It being legal to kill jews, doesn't mean you should do it.

We all interpret the law for ourselves. We are in control of our actions at all times, and a law enforcer, interpreter or judge is rarely there to explain the correct legal implications for us, enforce it on us or prosecute our infractions.
So first and most important legal expert in your daily activities is always you.
You yourself are the tip of that spear. Man on the ground. The very front line of the legal system.

It is you who self enforces the law. It is we who self enforce our laws.

I have no new system in mind. I am explaining the nature of the current one and indeed all legal systems.

 

So you disagree that if someone initiates a violation of person or property force may be used to stop that violation. How do you suggest stopping the violation, by saying please?

 

I pay "road tax". As I have previously explained. I pay it at the maximum rate.
It's not a tax I have ever sought not to pay.

If I travel to work in my taxed vehicle on my taxed roads using my taxed petrol.
And I use private bridges, and private roads too.
The state provision of such roads is not the only possible method by any means.


And sometimes, since I own my own farm and work often in a self employed capacity, I don't travel to work at all.
And indeed if push came to shove I never have to step foot on other peoples property or trade with another ever for the entire rest of my life.

Now, tell me of all the public services you use and lets see if Longshot uses them too and if not, how he feels about you freeloading and sponging off him.

 

If everyone has the authority to interpret the law for themselve, that's the consequence. Who has authority to say its wrong?

What does right or wrong have to do with anything since everyone can interpret the law for themselves?

OK. So if someone interprets the law to mean he can rape your wife and shoot you, that's OK, right?

Great system you got there.

Mob rule?

 

What about someone with 3/4 of a million?
What is the acceptable price to evade tax?
What is your wealth cap under which criminal tax evasion is OK?

 

We'd be so much better of if the only government service provided was roads and all we had to pay were town, county, state, and federal road tax. Although I think EZ Pass makes it very possible to fund highways completely with tolls, which would make those who use them the most pay the most, which seems fair.

I don't see any other service that needs to be provided by the government through taxes.

 

Personal responsibility.


Raping my wife.
Why are you still hiding behind the law? I don't give a **** about the legality of rape. Why do you care if it is legal or not?
Don't do it. It's wrong. You already know that is wrong. If you think it's legal or illegal I don't give a ****. You won't survive the experience.


Authority.
Who has authority to say it's wrong.
Firstly and most importantly, you yourself do.
You don't get to blame anyone else. It's on you.

In my daily life working with children, I get to say. Their parents defer that authority to me.
On my own property, I get to say. Law of the jungle. My jungle and I'm that gorilla.
On your property, you get to say. Deference to the person who puts the labour in. The owner.

Ultimately I'm quite a physically confident person and I typically feel that although I routinely defer to the judgement of others socially, if push comes to shove I am perfectly able to force them to defer to mine.

 

Why do I care if rape is legal or not?

Are you serious?

Thanks but I think we've moved past rule by the strongest.

Maybe others are impressed with your vision.

 

Within the last couple of days, trump raised taxes on us again. Twice.

Trumpkins okay with that?

 

You have not moved past the rule of the strongest.
From the bouncer on the club door to the spank of your father. To the Pitbull in your neighbours yard.

All the way to the biggest most powerful mafia in the land. The government.
Who's authority to tax me stems from nothing more than the threat to me it's policemen provide.

So if you are weak, sure you may wish to have moved past that rule.
But you have not.

Might is right and this is the root of a states power. It's authority.





I don't look to the law to explain right and wrong to me.
I do not look to the law to protect me.
Or punish people for me.
I don't give a **** what is legal.
It does not matter.

What kind of a sociopath hides behind the law?
Learn right from wrong. Be responsible.

 

It sounds to me as you don't want a landlord to be able evict a tenant who doesn't pay rent. Is that the case? Are you in favor of the tenant being allowed to stay as a trespasser with the landlord unable to do anything about it?

 

No, that is not the case at all.

 

Lots of questions lots of confusion. But let’s see what I can do for you.

I noticed.

Not exactly. Anyone with a reasonable command of the English language, reasonable intelligence and reasonable level of education certainly should. That means certainly highly trained and highly educated black robed lawyers should without a doubt. I’m sure even you would agree to that.

No. SCOTUS already has the constitutional authority to interpret laws, it’s called judicial review. The Constitution is the standard, the Supreme Law of the Land by its own mandate. Therefore all laws, legal procedures, acts, etc. must comply or they are void. Once ruled unconstitutional, such a law is void from inception. The Constitution is the goalposts if you will. If you keep moving the goalposts, there is no standard and review for compliance becomes illogical and worthless.

A committee made up of volunteers should be selected by The People much like a jury system and each member should serve a limited amount of time on the Committee. The requirement for each member is that they pass a rigorous constitutional test with let’s say a 90% grade.

All proposed legislation must be approved by the committee or rejected for editing or scapping.

So if the proposed legislation is rejected by the Committee it never becomes law and SCOTUS never gets to see it. Conversely if it is approved by the Committee and becomes law it is fully reviewable by SCOTUS upon grant of petition for Writ of Certiorari.

The above system is far superior to the current system for many reasons. Some of these should be immediately apparent even to you. But if not I can certainly list some for you.

1. This forum is not a court of law nor a legal venue, it’s simply a general discussion forum.

2. It doesn’t make sense “legally” because it isn’t legal, it’s just my proposal. Moi Bob. And I would never claim it’s perfect. I would certainly invite discussion on it to try to improve it as much as possible.

No it has nothing to do with that. It’s just my proposal that you didn’t know any details about and made several false ASSumptions.

You’re welcome.

PS: This proposal should work for all state and local legislatures as well.

 

Then why the rant against a landlord evicting a tenant who doesn't pay rent if you're not opposed to that?

 

Answered already. But show us all how you never use roads.

 

I don't. Irrelevant. For I may be on someone elses computer.
But dodge duly noted.
Prove how you own any property, given or purchased. Who the heck even knows you purchased a property.
My guess, you will dodge yet again, because you know you can't prove nothing without some agreed upon entity. Unless you agree to might makes right, for everything of physical property.

But, I bet you will DODGE AGAIN.

 

With receipts of sale.

 

What is personal property?
Who says its your personal property?

 

So you gladly pay taxes. Thanks.
Who pays your teacher salary? You failed to address you teacher status.