So I had A Talk With Some Arrogant Census Bureau Guy.. - Page 9

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; Originally Posted by OPFOR Don't know how we got on the President's citizenship We got there because unhappy individuals are looking for justification to promote ...

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 567891011 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 159

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

  1. #121
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,720

    re: OPFOR How we got on ....

    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    Don't know how we got on the President's citizenship
    We got there because unhappy individuals are looking for justification to promote rebellion and overthrow. They know they won't get any broad public support for their illegal anarchic ideas, so they put up straw-man issues (the false idea that our president is somehow illegitimate) in the hope of winning people to their side.

    It is a pretty transparent ploy, and the routine stuff of propagandists and rabble rousers.

    My wish for DC is that we somehow manage to keep promotion of ideas about rebellion completely off of here. It does the cause of good guy gun owners no good whatsoever. And of course, as noted in the US code I provided, posts of that sort violate forum rules against promotion of illegality.


  2. #122
    Senior Member Array tbrenke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Alex,

    Question for you.

    "Gremial" is a real word, but my quick look up of the definition doesn't help me understand what you meant.

    The word seems to mean, "pertaining to the bosom."

    I can see where that might also be used to mean the "bosom" of our nation; as it (the census) is done for foundational reasons based on the constitution.

    I just need a little help with my vocabulary. "Gremial" is a new word to me. HELP!!
    I can agree or disagree with going after someones argument. This is more of a personal attack. I expected more of you Hopyard.
    "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -1792, James Madison
    There are always too many Democratic, Republican and never enough U.S. congressmen.

  3. #123
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,720

    re: Oneshot, on Declaration

    Quote Originally Posted by oneshot View Post
    ^^^How do you figure?^^^^^^^^


    when it states right here in the Declaration of Independence we have a "right, a duty"
    The answer is that the Declaration of Independence is not part of our law, and it was a document directed at the British Monarch.

    We are bound by our nation's law, and our constitution makes ample room for amendation, but no room for rebellion. All the governors who moan and groan about their lot in our federal system, could if they weren't mere demagogues, ask their legislatures to participate in a constitutional convention to change things. No rebellion needed.

    Again, the great rebel himself, our first President George Washington, had no compunction about putting down The Whiskey Rebellion.

    While you may point to The Declaration and say "it says right here,"
    I have already pointed to our Federal laws, and I can easily and equally (but with more justification) say to you, it says right here:

    " US Code TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > 2385. Advocating overthrow of Government "

    "Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing... the government... or the government of any political subdivision therein shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both,"

    Tell me truthfully, which way do you think you (and the rest of us) will come out better? Your way or the lawful way?

  4. #124
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,720

    re: tbrenke ???? for you

    Quote Originally Posted by tbrenke View Post
    I can agree or disagree with going after someones argument. This is more of a personal attack. I expected more of you Hopyard.
    My question to Alex was about the meaning of a word I had not seen before. There was not personal attack on Alex and looking at his response I don't think he took it that way.

    Why do you think asking Alex the meaning of a word was a personal attack? I wasn't making fun of him, or criticizing him. I thought he had used a fancy word in an interesting way. It actually never entered my mind that he had mistyped the word "grammar." I wasn't trying to bring attention to that at all, because I had not realized that was what occurred. Quite the opposite. I was impressed by what seemed to be his superior vocabulary.

    Alex, if you see this, I enjoy your posts and in no way was I trying to give you a hard time. I think your response indicates that you know that, but just in case, I thought I would restate that again. There was no personal attack on you, Alex H, intended.

    Hope that straightens that part out.

  5. #125
    Member Array carry ok's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    388

    Alfack....

    [quote=alfack;1638417]and how is this bad news for me? Bad news for everyone, the current regime is unconstitutionally over-stepping its bounds in too many areas to list.



    How dare i? It's called the first amendment.



    Wrong once again. Everybody has the right and duty to question the actions of govt. And overthrow an oppressive one. Too few people question these days. Think how this country was founded.

    You can keep your sanctimonious, melodramatic, think inside the box attitude, mr. Hopyard. While your at it, why don't you turn me in for not sending my census? It seems like that's the type of person you are. A real hard core follower.[



    THANK YOU!
    Extremism in the Defense of Liberty is No Vice--Moderation in the Pursuit of Justice is No Virtue. - Senator Barry Goldwater

  6. #126
    Senior Member Array tbrenke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,006
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    My question to Alex was about the meaning of a word I had not seen before. There was not personal attack on Alex and looking at his response I don't think he took it that way.

    Why do you think asking Alex the meaning of a word was a personal attack? I wasn't making fun of him, or criticizing him. I thought he had used a fancy word in an interesting way. It actually never entered my mind that he had mistyped the word "grammar." I wasn't trying to bring attention to that at all, because I had not realized that was what occurred. Quite the opposite. I was impressed by what seemed to be his superior vocabulary.

    Alex, if you see this, I enjoy your posts and in no way was I trying to give you a hard time. I think your response indicates that you know that, but just in case, I thought I would restate that again. There was no personal attack on you, Alex H, intended.

    Hope that straightens that part out.
    point taken and cleared. Thanks Hopyard.
    "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -1792, James Madison
    There are always too many Democratic, Republican and never enough U.S. congressmen.

  7. #127
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,124
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    That doesn't in any way alter your citizenship obligations to obey the law, serve on juries, register with Selective Service, and so on.

    You were either born here into our society or you were naturalized, and either way, you have had benefits conferred upon you, and obligations as well. Yup, no one asked you for your partnership, but neither did your parents ask you if you wished to be born. Stuff happens. You are here. Make the most of it.

    I can't believe the level of alienation from broad society that gets expressed in these forums. Funny how folks will gladly drive on interstate highways paid for by all of us, conceived of by government, but declare government illegitimate. Its even funnier how some (many really) moan and groan about too much government, but when the dang corporations mess the life out of our Gulf of Mexico, everyone screams, "where's the government." Can't have it both ways folks.
    We may have a rational discussion when you finish with that straw man.

    A citizen's duty to law doesn't make one a partner with government. Your use of the term is invalid. It is why I posted. And it has nothing to do with my parents or my birth.

    It is true that we are a nation of laws but also a nation of heritage.

    That the Declaration was specific to KGIII's monarchy does not detract from its universality or the probability that its principles surface occassionally as we humans progress. The signers' legacy to us is a marvel of strength and flexibility: the right to redress our government - yes, by orderly means (elections and peaceful public forums). There is a direct force for liberty from independence from England through all of the values that make us the Constitutional Republic that we are.

    Your citing US Code TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > 2385. "Advocating overthrow of Government" is interesting. I appreciate that kind of good research. But the moderators don't need to be looking for subversives behind every keyboard, now do they? I sleep well knowing that they keep our government safe from the members of this forum.

    Private highways are facts of life in Asia and Europe. They are proof that infrastructure does not depend on a government monopoly. I commend your perception of my opposition to any goverment monopoly.

    Although government doesn't have the technology to rescue us from this spill, it has a legitimate function to protect us from environmental catastrophes. That means a moratorium on oil drilling expansion while industry and government take stock of safeguards. Unfortunately, there is a lot at stake and more slick in the water than oil - but that is the nature of the political beast.

    If you're finished with that straw man feel free to rejoin the rational discussion, already in progress.

    So even though there are bureaucratic failures,
    1) answer the census questions,
    2) don't overthrow the government, but
    3) speak openly, honestly and eloquently of better government
    because, you never know, even on the alien internet, someone may be listening. In doing so, you honor those whose lives we celebrate tomorrow.
    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)

  8. #128
    Ex Member Array JOHNSMITH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    somewhere
    Posts
    1,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    You bet. It is the document which contains the requirement that a census be done every ten years.

    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: and certainly our sworn elected officials don't have that option either.

    So yes, this entire thread is about paranoia, because the one thing it isn't about is obeying our constitution.
    Well my point was that yes, the Census is in the Constitution, but that's it. You are only constitutionally required to answer the "how many people in this household" question. Anything else is completely optional.

    Whether people who refuse to answer the other questions are "paranoid" is besides the point, because the Constitution makes no provision for those questions. They have no place in the Census.

  9. #129
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,124
    But Paul, there are people in jail and (rightfully) disgraced for advocating that citizens don't have to pay income tax because it's not in the Constitution, etc.
    Law built on the constitution:
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR
    Today, the controlling law for the.... decennial census is provided for at 13 USC 141.

    There are fines for non-response and for false response as well, though the amount has risen from the 1790's $20. Today failure to respond can result in a $100 fine; providing false answers is a more severe offense, and carries a $500 fine. Recent news reports, however, indicate that punishment for failure to respond is not usually enforced. The controlling section of the Code is 13 USC 221.

    The law requires... that all households that get a form must fill it out in its entirety, under penalty. Generally speaking, the Census Bureau is not interested in levying the fine, and prefers to gather the data. If a survey is not returned, the Census can follow up by phone or with a personal visit. There is, however, the threat of a penalty for non-response. The current penalty is $100 for failure to fill out the census forms.

    The authority of the Congress to conduct the census in whatever way it wishes, and thus to require that the forms be filled out is found in the Constitution itself, which notes:

    [The Census] shall be made ... in such Manner as [Congress] shall by Law direct.

    The Congress is also authorized to ask various questions in the census aside from the basic headcount by virtue of this clause and by virtue of the Necessary and Proper Clause.
    So it looks like the government can ask anything on the census and press for answers until enough people point out what's right and what's too much and change the laws.
    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)

  10. #130
    Distinguished Member Array AutoFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Arid Zone A
    Posts
    1,563
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    AutoFan - Why do you care so much if someone in the federal govt knows if you're a man or a woman? Stats are important, for lots of reasons - none of them so the feds can rate your carcass for sale to the aliens based on age, sex, and race...
    If I can't use sex or race to make any decisions in my life per the federal government, I see no reason for the Federal government to make decisions on my life based on them either, do you? Now I personally don't make decisions (aside from the sex of who I dated and married) based on sex or race. But until the government can provide a necessary basis for needing to know my sex, race, religion, reading habits, etc., I have a right to privacy as a Citizen. It is just like the people who say "why do you care if the police search you without cause or a warrant if you have nothing to hide?"

    Hopyard, you raise the sedition law (not part of the Constitution) and President Washington putting down the so-called "Whiskey Rebellion" (which was really no different than the IRS sending US Marshalls to collect your taxes or put you in jail). Just because a law exists does not make it Constitutional in all cases. And if you read the writings of the Founding Fathers, the basis of the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with self defense from thugs on the street or hunting rabbits. It exists to insure that the People have the means to overthrow the Government if it becomes a tyranny (also why they favored militias and abhorred a standing army).

  11. #131
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,713
    Quote Originally Posted by AutoFan View Post
    If I can't use sex or race to make any decisions in my life per the federal government, I see no reason for the Federal government to make decisions on my life based on them either, do you? Now I personally don't make decisions (aside from the sex of who I dated and married) based on sex or race. But until the government can provide a necessary basis for needing to know my sex, race, religion, reading habits, etc., I have a right to privacy as a Citizen. It is just like the people who say "why do you care if the police search you without cause or a warrant if you have nothing to hide?"
    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?
    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.

  12. #132
    Senior Member Array tbrenke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,006
    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.
    this is another straw man.
    the Constitution requires you and all in your home to be counted. there is a law that states you are required to give true answers.
    you are not in anything I have read, required to answer any questions except how many people live at your address.
    "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -1792, James Madison
    There are always too many Democratic, Republican and never enough U.S. congressmen.

  13. #133
    Member Array Tint Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Sussex UK
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Bark'n View Post
    I dunno, maybe because it's only a temp job?

    You know, one of those thousands of new jobs the administration claims to have created.
    Ahhhh we had 13 years of these sort of jobs............Good Luck!!

    Tint Bob (UK)

  14. #134
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,713
    And yet again, here is the clause from the Constitution...

    [An] Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.
    There is no limit on the type of questions to be asked, no statement that says they can only ask how many people live in the house, nothing like that at all.

    "In such a Manner as they [Congress] shall direct." Seems pretty straightforward to me - if you want the Congress to only ask how many people, elect Congressmen that "shall direct" that only those questions be asked. As it stands, the Census is one of the most basic and clearly delineated Constitutional requirements is that august document...

    And AGAIN again, note that the first law on this, from 1790, states that the Census shall "distinguish... also the sexes and colours of free persons, and the free males of sixteen years and upwards from those under that age."
    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.

  15. #135
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,720

    re: AutoFan

    Quote Originally Posted by AutoFan View Post
    Hopyard, you raise the sedition law (not part of the Constitution) and President Washington putting down the so-called "Whiskey Rebellion" (which was really no different than the IRS sending US Marshalls to collect your taxes or put you in jail). Just because a law exists does not make it Constitutional in all cases.
    So, the sedition law is not part of the constitution. So what? Neither is the law that says you can't speed on the interstate. Laws don't need to be part of the constitution, they need to be constitutional. Big difference.

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 567891011 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.