Why are people scared of taxes? - page 26.

TheButterZone

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 1032

RIP Mommy

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 03:25:47 PM

Quote from: TheButterZone on October 25, 2012, 03:19:54 PM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:11:09 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:48:04 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:44:52 PM

Then you become a threat to yourself and others. You will be taken without lethal harm if at all possible. If you provide a significant threat to officers, they are entitled to shoot you in self defense.

So, we have arrived at the threat of death. From not paying taxes.

No. From threatening the police.

Which means holding a cellphone, a hose nozzle, or nothing more than a 10-month-old baby and them "mistaking" it for a lethal threat to get away with shoot-on-sight murder, and the courts protecting their own perjuring fellow government agents.

So, if you felt threatened by someone, and had no clue what they are holding, would you shoot them in self-defense if you felt you were in danger?

I could not feel in danger if I had no clue what someone was holding. Only government agents are given so much benefit of the doubt that it is absolutely unreasonable, to the point where they can kill someone who never saw them to begin with, commit perjury and claim they felt threatened from their hidden vantage points, and get away with it with impunity. At the same time, "civilians" who shoot patently obvious violent criminals in self-defense are forced to prove their innocence in criminal and civil courts, in utter violation of due process and any measure of justice other than kangaroo courts'.

Quote from: Kontakt

PMCs that you all suggest as a replacement for the police have even itchier trigger fingers.

Ah, the "you all". Shove your gross generalizations up your ass.

Quote from: Kontakt

You are living within their sovereign territory, using their services and being protected by them. That, frankly, couldn't be clearer. Even if the government were replaced by private companies, you would pay just as much and receive less.

I reject their services and law enforcement is 100% legally exempt (both by Supreme Court precedent, and the government's own laws) from protecting anybody, anyway (and at the same time, "qualified immunity" means they can infringe upon your inherent human right to self-defense and get you murdered, raped, and maimed while defenseless, and not suffer any punishment whatsoever for their complicity). And I just love your Ipse dixit.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 03:54:21 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 03:52:17 PM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:50:17 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 03:37:24 PM

You say that "governments have the right to tax you." Why?

I have written many posts explaining that. Go back and ask about the specifics you don't understand, and I may be able to explain them to you again. I understand it can be difficult when you lack basic logic knowledge and don't believe in the right to property. (Because it is evident to anyone with a basic understanding og property and logic.)

But I do believe in the right to property. I just want to know why the government thinks it's OK to take mine.

What makes you think it is yours?

Because it is the fruits of my labor.

Kontakt

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 03:52:17 PM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:50:17 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 03:37:24 PM

You say that "governments have the right to tax you." Why?

I have written many posts explaining that. Go back and ask about the specifics you don't understand, and I may be able to explain them to you again. I understand it can be difficult when you lack basic logic knowledge and don't believe in the right to property. (Because it is evident to anyone with a basic understanding og property and logic.)

But I do believe in the right to property. I just want to know why the government thinks it's OK to take mine.

What makes you think it is yours?

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:50:17 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 03:37:24 PM

You say that "governments have the right to tax you." Why?

I have written many posts explaining that. Go back and ask about the specifics you don't understand, and I may be able to explain them to you again. I understand it can be difficult when you lack basic logic knowledge and don't believe in the right to property. (Because it is evident to anyone with a basic understanding og property and logic.)

But I do believe in the right to property. I just want to know why the government thinks it's OK to take mine.

sturle

legendary

Activity: 1437

Merit: 1002

https://bitmynt.no

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 03:37:24 PM

You say that "governments have the right to tax you." Why?

I have written many posts explaining that. Go back and ask about the specifics you don't understand, and I may be able to explain them to you again. I understand it can be difficult when you lack basic logic knowledge and don't believe in the right to property. (Because it is evident to anyone with a basic understanding og property and logic.)

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 03:39:22 PM

You are living within their sovereign territory, using their services and being protected by them. That, frankly, couldn't be clearer.

Well, I'll agree that I do live within the borders of the US. I do occasionally use their "services", but I am not being protected by them. Do I need to provide the "no duty to protect" links again?

Here's a question: Why am I paying for services I don't use, and why does merely living here grant them the right to extort money from me?

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 03:39:22 PM

Even if the government were replaced by private companies, you would pay just as much and receive less.

On the contrary, in every market where a monopoly has been removed, the service has improved, and prices have decreased. I could show you examples, but you can research them yourself, if you'd like.

Kontakt

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 03:37:24 PM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:31:07 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 03:15:33 PM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:11:09 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:48:04 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:44:52 PM

Then you become a threat to yourself and others. You will be taken without lethal harm if at all possible. If you provide a significant threat to officers, they are entitled to shoot you in self defense.

So, we have arrived at the threat of death. From not paying taxes.

No. From threatening the police.

Who would not be there trying to kidnap you if you had payed the tax. And I'd hardly call defending oneself from being kidnapped "threatening."

The police wouldn't be there in the first place if you paid your tax.

Which is exactly what I said.

So what makes their demanding payment, backed up by the threat of force, moral when if I were to do that, it would not be?

You say that "governments have the right to tax you." Why?

You are living within their sovereign territory, using their services and being protected by them. That, frankly, couldn't be clearer. Even if the government were replaced by private companies, you would pay just as much and receive less.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:31:07 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 03:15:33 PM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:11:09 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:48:04 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:44:52 PM

Then you become a threat to yourself and others. You will be taken without lethal harm if at all possible. If you provide a significant threat to officers, they are entitled to shoot you in self defense.

So, we have arrived at the threat of death. From not paying taxes.

No. From threatening the police.

Who would not be there trying to kidnap you if you had payed the tax. And I'd hardly call defending oneself from being kidnapped "threatening."

The police wouldn't be there in the first place if you paid your tax.

Which is exactly what I said.

So what makes their demanding payment, backed up by the threat of force, moral when if I were to do that, it would not be?

You say that "governments have the right to tax you." Why?

sturle

legendary

Activity: 1437

Merit: 1002

https://bitmynt.no

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 03:15:33 PM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:11:09 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:48:04 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:44:52 PM

Then you become a threat to yourself and others. You will be taken without lethal harm if at all possible. If you provide a significant threat to officers, they are entitled to shoot you in self defense.

So, we have arrived at the threat of death. From not paying taxes.

No. From threatening the police.

Who would not be there trying to kidnap you if you had payed the tax. And I'd hardly call defending oneself from being kidnapped "threatening."

The police wouldn't be there in the first place if you paid your tax. Stop whining like a baby and pay your tax like a grownup.

I doubt the police would make arrests in anything but property, unless you threaten them. Your property is more valuable than you when the tax is to be paid. Kidnap you!? To demand ransom? You sure have a child's fantasy. The government has the right to take back their property, and throw you out of it if necessary. Just like you have if someone live at your place without paying the the rent. If they don't like your rent, they are free to move to another place with a lower rent. And so are you when it comes to taxes.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 03:25:47 PM

So, if you felt threatened by someone...

The real question is why do they feel threatened?

Kontakt

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: TheButterZone on October 25, 2012, 03:19:54 PM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:11:09 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:48:04 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:44:52 PM

Then you become a threat to yourself and others. You will be taken without lethal harm if at all possible. If you provide a significant threat to officers, they are entitled to shoot you in self defense.

So, we have arrived at the threat of death. From not paying taxes.

No. From threatening the police.

Which means holding a cellphone, a hose nozzle, or nothing more than a 10-month-old baby and them "mistaking" it for a lethal threat to get away with shoot-on-sight murder, and the courts protecting their own perjuring fellow government agents.

So, if you felt threatened by someone, and had no clue what they are holding, would you shoot them in self-defense if you felt you were in danger? Your stance on gun rights is irreconcilable with police that won't use their guns.

Japanese policemen rarely carry guns, and even less rarely use them. This is possible because of the restrictions on gun ownership in Japan.

PMCs that you all suggest as a replacement for the police have even itchier trigger fingers.

TheButterZone

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 1032

RIP Mommy

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:11:09 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:48:04 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:44:52 PM

Then you become a threat to yourself and others. You will be taken without lethal harm if at all possible. If you provide a significant threat to officers, they are entitled to shoot you in self defense.

So, we have arrived at the threat of death. From not paying taxes.

No. From threatening the police.

Which means holding a cellphone, a hose nozzle, or nothing more than a 10-month-old baby and them "mistaking" it for a lethal threat to get away with shoot-on-sight murder, and the courts protecting their own perjuring fellow government agents.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 03:11:09 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:48:04 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:44:52 PM

Then you become a threat to yourself and others. You will be taken without lethal harm if at all possible. If you provide a significant threat to officers, they are entitled to shoot you in self defense.

So, we have arrived at the threat of death. From not paying taxes.

No. From threatening the police.

Who would not be there trying to kidnap you if you had payed the tax. And I'd hardly call defending oneself from being kidnapped "threatening."

sturle

legendary

Activity: 1437

Merit: 1002

https://bitmynt.no

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:48:04 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:44:52 PM

Then you become a threat to yourself and others. You will be taken without lethal harm if at all possible. If you provide a significant threat to officers, they are entitled to shoot you in self defense.

So, we have arrived at the threat of death. From not paying taxes.

No. From threatening the police.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:44:52 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:42:56 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:37:56 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:36:29 PM

What happens if you don't want to go to prison for not paying taxes?

Obviously, if you resist arrest, you will be compelled to go, not shot on sight.

And if you resist further?

Then you become a threat to yourself and others. You will be taken without lethal harm if at all possible. If you provide a significant threat to officers, they are entitled to shoot you in self defense.

So, we have arrived at the threat of death. From not paying taxes.

sturle

legendary

Activity: 1437

Merit: 1002

https://bitmynt.no

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:43:51 PM

Quote from: sturle on October 25, 2012, 02:40:08 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 01:45:35 PM

If threatening to kill someone is immoral, why is using that threat moral when "required by law"?

No law in my country will threaten to kill anyone.

The police in your country are unarmed, then?

Correct.

sturle

legendary

Activity: 1437

Merit: 1002

https://bitmynt.no

Quote from: TheButterZone on October 25, 2012, 02:30:41 PM

They have exempted themselves from all "gun control" laws and have all lethal weapons imaginable at their disposal, and use them with impunity (which means never worrying about being imprisoned, let alone prosecuted, for murder, civil rights violations resulting in death). "Not at all", my ass.

What country is this? In my country it is very common to own a gun, but the police do not carry guns. The police are allowed to arm themselves if the situation requires it, but the rules are very strict and it rarely happens. Violence involving firearms is very rare.

Kontakt

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:42:56 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:37:56 PM

Quote from: myrkul on October 25, 2012, 02:36:29 PM

Quote from: Kontakt on October 25, 2012, 02:33:06 PM

So you're in favor of hobbling the military?

You miss - intentionally, I think - the point. I say again, What happens if you don't want to go to prison for not paying taxes?

Obviously, if you resist arrest, you will be compelled to go, not shot on sight.

And if you resist further?

Then you become a threat to yourself and others. You will be taken without lethal harm if at all possible. If you provide a significant threat to officers, they are entitled to shoot you in self defense.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM