So I had A Talk With Some Arrogant Census Bureau Guy..

This is a discussion on So I had A Talk With Some Arrogant Census Bureau Guy.. within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Precisely why the founders gave us the judicial branch....

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 67891011 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 159

Thread: So I had A Talk With Some Arrogant Census Bureau Guy..

  1. #136
    Distinguished Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    1,987
    Precisely why the founders gave us the judicial branch.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #137
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,570

    re: Pistology-- I think we are getting somewhere now

    Quote Originally Posted by Pistology View Post
    Precisely why the founders gave us the judicial branch.
    Not sure what you were responding to, but I think it was my comment:

    "Laws don't need to be part of the constitution, they need to be constitutional. Big difference."

    So, yes, that is precisely the reason the founders gave us the judicial branch as you have correctly written.

    But, something must now follow logically. Have any of these Census laws been found unconstitutional by any of the circuit courts of appeal or by The Supremes, and have folks even been finally convicted for violating the law requiring honest answers to census question. The latter I know has occurred. People have been fined. Perhaps a few have been jailed.

    Have these laws been reviewed by The Supremes? I have no idea. If not, that doesn't mean they are unconstitutional. It just means the justices didn't think the issues raised were profound enough to bother with.

    In any case, unless the census laws have been found unconstitutional (which apparently is not the case or they wouldn't be asking the questions) by the appeals courts or the supremes, we are bound by them. It doesn't matter that our constitution doesn't give specific authority for a particular question. It gives the broad scope authority necessary.

  4. #138
    Senior Member Array AlexHassin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    the North East
    Posts
    552
    No problem at all from my perspective. I was pleasantly surprised to learn a new word from my mistake.

  5. #139
    Distinguished Member Array AutoFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Arid Zone A
    Posts
    1,561
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    See, but, NO, you DON'T. How is this still not getting through? It is the law - and not a "new" law or something snuck in there by liberal-pinko-commie-socialists - a specifically enumerated REQUIREMENT in the Constitution. You DON'T get to pick what the govt. asks (well, yes, you do - vote in a President and Congress that will ask the Census questions you want them to ask, or amend the Constitution to do away with it entirely), just as you don't get to decide that you don't like the laws against murder because the govt can "murder" you (through capital punishment, compulsory military service, etc) and so on.

    And if you're so keen on "reciprocity" with the govt, why don't you provide them with good and sufficient reasons why you should be allowed to vote, speak freely, practice your religion, bear arms... Oh, wait, those things are in the Constitution, so you can do them all, right? That same Constitution that says you'll answer the Census? That one?....

    Seriously, hypocrite much?
    The enumeration in the Constitution was put there to determine the number of seats in the US Congress, not the number of flush toilets in the country because some Representative from Wisconsin was doing a favor for a big contributor.

    Our government was founded on limited powers, granted by the governed (or God, depending on your viewpoint). Therefore the Constitution is a contract between the government and the governed (since we can't talk directly with God). I have the freedoms to speak, practice religion (or not), bear arms, etc., because those rights are inalienable and exist independently from the Constitution and the laws of the US government. I shouldn't need to demonstrate anything to the government to exercise my rights.

    The 4th Amendment implies a right to privacy, and the US Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled explicitly that US citizens have a right to privacy. The government has not demonstrated a widespread need to violate the privacy of its citizens to know their race or sex since the voting laws were changed. Do the terms "racial profiling" and "sexual discrimination" mean anything to you?

    We also have a tradition of civil disobedience and jury nullification of laws we consider wrong. So no, I am not a hypocrite, since I obey laws I consider right and just (or at least tolerable), and accept punishment for those I violate.

  6. #140
    Member Array alfack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Marysville, Washington
    Posts
    320
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    You can not be in favor of our constitution and still advocate against the census. We as individuals don't get to pick and choose which parts of our constitution we are going to follow.
    Says who? You? Thanks letting me know what I can and can't be for.

    I can be against the census and for the rest of the constitution. I have my reasons for not turning in the census and I don't have to justify them to you or anybody else. And they have nothing to do with paranoia, only simple truths.

    If everyone thought like you, we would still be bowing to the queen. I am fairly certain that the founding fathers included language in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence to prevent such circumstances like indentured servitude to an oppressive regime. Was there a law that said the first Americans weren't supposed to rebel against the queen?

    Oh yeah, I noticed you moved to a red state. Good call.

  7. #141
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,570

    re: alfack, one last final try

    Quote Originally Posted by alfack View Post
    Says who? You? Thanks letting me know what I can and can't be for.

    I can be against the census and for the rest of the constitution.
    The constitution provides for the collection of an income tax.

    So, let's say you hold the position, "I'm against the income tax but for the rest of our constitution. Therefore, since its my right to be against the income tax I won't pay." Well, we all know where that will lead you. Big fine, and possible jail.

    Our country functions on the basis that the entire document is valid, not just the portions some people might wish to agree with.

    I have my reasons for not turning in the census and I don't have to justify them to you or anybody else.
    That is fine to a point realizing of course that you have admitted publicly to a willful violation of the law.

    Maybe you will get away with it. Maybe you will end up telling your various reasons to a judge during the punishment phase of your trial---oh, forgot, the Feds use mandatory sentencing guidelines; you won't get a chance to explain anything. No one will care what your reasons are, not anymore than anyone cares why a bank robber did his thing.

    If everyone thought like you, we would still be bowing to the queen.
    And if everyone thought as you say you do here, we would live in a chaotic anarchy. Your positions is that everyone can pick and choose which laws they will obey. I'm sure you realize it can't and doesn't work that way.

    I am fairly certain that the founding fathers included language in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence to prevent such circumstances like indentured servitude to an oppressive regime.
    Indentured servitude was at the time the document was prepared, considered a form of private contract -- a person became indentured because some sort of debt was owed. It had little or nothing to do
    with government. It was outlawed for the very same reason we don't allow you to enter into any contract you might wish if doing so runs against public policy.

    I don't know why I even bother responding, because your posts repeatedly contain assertions that you have willfully broken the law and encourage others to do so.

    Was there a law that said the first Americans weren't supposed to rebel against the queen?
    Sorry the situations ---poor excuse of an analogy-- between our pre-Revolutionary relationship with the King of England and our present relationship with OURSELVES, We The PEOPLE govern, is entirely different.


    What so many who think as you do fail to understand is that while you may be unhappy with very many aspects of how we are governed, or unhappy with specific provisions of specific laws, all
    were created by us, by our neighbors, and by our friends in deliberative processes which tend over time to balance everyone's best interests.

    It isn't perfect. It doesn't always work well. Injustices happen. But we ain't got better, and we have nothing whatsoever that could possibly replace what we do have.

    So fantasize all you want about rebellion, or about refusing to obey a particular law, but consider the utter chaos that would befall us all if your sad viewpoint prevailed.
    Last edited by Hopyard; June 1st, 2010 at 10:56 AM.

  8. #142
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,709
    I can be against the census and for the rest of the constitution.
    So I suppose you have no issue at all with those who are against the 2nd Amendment but are "for" the rest of the Constitution? As a military officer, what if I was "against" the 3rd Amendment? How would you feel if I decided my unit needed to use your house for a few months? It would be ok, right - I'm "for" the rest of the Constitution, so what does it matter if I'm against that particular tid bit?

    I'm sorry, but you simply don't get to pick and choose - that is called anarchy, and is pretty far from the representational democracy that the Constitution defines as our government.

    As always, you are free to vote in like minded anti-Constitutionalists and have them alter our founding document to the way you'd like to see it, but until then you're stuck with the entire thing (assuming you don't want to dissolve the Union and decend into anarchy).
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  9. #143
    Member Array i10casual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    297
    haha you guys are funny. Fight the census!

  10. #144
    Member Array alfack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Marysville, Washington
    Posts
    320
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    So I suppose you have no issue at all with those who are against the 2nd Amendment but are "for" the rest of the Constitution? As a military officer, what if I was "against" the 3rd Amendment? How would you feel if I decided my unit needed to use your house for a few months? It would be ok, right - I'm "for" the rest of the Constitution, so what does it matter if I'm against that particular tid bit?

    I'm sorry, but you simply don't get to pick and choose - that is called anarchy, and is pretty far from the representational democracy that the Constitution defines as our government.

    As always, you are free to vote in like minded anti-Constitutionalists and have them alter our founding document to the way you'd like to see it, but until then you're stuck with the entire thing (assuming you don't want to dissolve the Union and decend into anarchy).
    If you think all that anarchy is going to happen because I didn't fill out the census, then let the anarchy begin. The census is pointless in todays' society. It misses all of the illegal aliens, they have the information already from taxes etc., etc.. The second amendment is NOT pointless. If you can't see the difference, well what can I say?

    The whole premise that you can't be against the census and for the Constitution is false. It would be true if the Constitution only enumerated one point. This is simply my way of peacefully protesting against the Constitutional violations being perpetrated against us by our elected officials who are sworn to uphold the Constitution. You think they are causing anarchy? And if they decide to fine me $100, then that money can go to paying back the trillions of dollars they have pilfered from the electorate in the last year alone.

    I don't know why I bother arguing with Obama zombies, either. This is the last I'll say on this issue. If you can't respect my opinion, why should I bother with yours?

  11. #145
    Distinguished Member Array morintp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    1,233
    I've been following this thread, and just couldn't contain myself any longer.

    First, what is the big friggin deal about filling out information that as most have admitted the government already has access to? Sure, I realize that with data mining they could gather similar if not better information than they get with the census. But it is the law until the constitution is amended.

    Second. Be honest. How many people currently complaining about the census had a problem filling out the last one? Or the one before that. I do not recall ever hearing this much uproar about taking 5 minutes (if you are slow) to obey the law. I admit that I am young (compared to some of you gentlemen here) and have only filled out 2-3 census forms, but the questions didn't seem any worse than before. Or is it the current administration that has you considering, if not already breaking the law?

    Third. Why has this thread been allowed to stay open as long as it has with members repeatedly breaking forum rules by advocating illegal activities?

    Edit: Oh yeah, the personal attacks have been a bit too much, even for my tastes, in this thread.
    64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.

  12. #146
    Member Array i10casual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    297
    this forum, outside the actual informational parts, had gone to crap.

  13. #147
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,045
    Just my 2 cents....

    While everyone talks about rights....did we forget about responsibility? Responsibility as a citizen of the United States?
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  14. #148
    Member Array Back 40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    402
    I have to agree this thing went south really quick and unfortunately got personal.
    We all have different opinions, but usually we all agree to disagree but this one really got drug out. Its amazing they let it run this long.

  15. #149
    Ex Member Array F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Rocky Mountain High in Colorado
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by morintp View Post



    Second. Be honest. How many people currently complaining about the census had a problem filling out the last one? Or the one before that. I do not recall ever hearing this much uproar about taking 5 minutes (if you are slow) to obey the law. I admit that I am young (compared to some of you gentlemen here) and have only filled out 2-3 census forms, but the questions didn't seem any worse than before. Or is it the current administration that has you considering, if not already breaking the law?
    As an old grey beard I have refused to answer extemporaneous questions on every census I have received; including 2 "long forms" nothing new here

  16. #150
    Distinguished Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    1,987
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    The constitution provides for the collection of an income tax.
    Actually, it was the 16th Amendment of 1913 that exempted income taxes from several Constitutional hurdles including apportioning among the states on the basis of population. [sarcasm on] It probably didn't get substantial oppossition because it was, after all, only 1% on annual income over $5000 - not something the common man had to budget for. [sarcasm off]
    It was a Constitutional process.
    Grumbling and defiance are as American as apple pie.
    Henry Ford refused to comply with the depression-era National Recovery Act mandate that he raise prices.
    However, refusal to answer a census and talk of bowing to queens doesn't merit much respect. Maybe you are just young and will avail yourself of sterner stuff.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 67891011 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. So I had A Talk With Some Arrogant Census Bureau Guy..
    By guardmt in forum Bob & Terry's Place
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 25th, 2010, 08:37 PM
  2. CHL -- Bureau Of Criminal Identification??
    By ccw9mm in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: November 23rd, 2008, 01:01 PM
  3. My run-in with a Bureau of Land Management officer
    By 762 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: July 17th, 2008, 10:04 AM
  4. Bureau Of Unclaimed Property
    By QKShooter in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: October 2nd, 2005, 10:14 AM

Search tags for this page

alex hassin

,
census arrogant
Click on a term to search for related topics.