Scientific American article on sovereign citizens

Moderators: Prof, Judge Roy Bean

Lambkin
Warder of the Quatloosian Gibbet
Posts: 1206
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:43 pm

Scientific American article on sovereign citizens

Post by Lambkin »

I saw this in the November print issue of Scientific American. Much of it focuses on the prosecution of Miles Julison, apparently an OID scammer, but his name hasn't come up on Quatloos as far as I know.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... -tax-scams
A Tale of Tax Returns and Tax Scams
How weird beliefs can land you in jail

By Michael Shermer

When I was in college, my friend and I attended a tax seminar in which we were told that paying taxes was unnecessary because the Sixteenth Amendment—empowering Congress to levy an income tax—was never legally ratified. After a long and detailed history of the irs, we were advised not to file a tax return and given instructions on what to do and say when the feds come a-knockin'. The slick presentation seemed internally coherent and logically plausible in the room, but later, after some reflection, I figured it couldn't possibly be true because no one would pay taxes if it were.
LightinDarkness
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1329
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 3:40 pm

Re: Scientific American article on sovereign citizens

Post by LightinDarkness »

Thanks for sharing this, its a great article. What I find interesting is how the series of events reminds me *exactly* of Kelby Smith, RuSA Chief Propagandist and architect of "His Advocates" mortgage scam website. Its uncanny really. Kelby started to embrace these delusions after nearly bankrupting himself house flipping during the recession. Kelby uses the same language about being a "bond servant of Jesus Christ" and thinks they are magic words. Make me wonder if the guy in the article was influenced by Kelby, as the soverign citizen lines are eerily similar.

Theres also a soverign citizens in the comments babbling on....not 1, not 2, but 3 of them.

What gets me is how no amount of proof seems to satisfy these people. By the time you wind up before a court with charges of tax fraud for requesting fake refunds, you would think the bells would go off that something is not right about what you believe.
Lambkin
Warder of the Quatloosian Gibbet
Posts: 1206
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:43 pm

Re: Scientific American article on sovereign citizens

Post by Lambkin »

LightinDarkness wrote:What gets me is how no amount of proof seems to satisfy these people. By the time you wind up before a court with charges of tax fraud for requesting fake refunds, you would think the bells would go off that something is not right about what you believe.
That feedback loop has clearly reversed course in the sovereign citizen: every setback becomes reinforcement of his paranoia and victimhood.
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Scientific American article on sovereign citizens

Post by notorial dissent »

LightinDarkness wrote:What gets me is how no amount of proof seems to satisfy these people. By the time you wind up before a court with charges of tax fraud for requesting fake refunds, you would think the bells would go off that something is not right about what you believe.
True, but if you are prepared and willing/wanting to believe that something that has resulted from a very public constitutional amendment, and laws passed, acted on, and defended for nearly 100 years, then the rest is simple. Real logic and discernment have long since been tossed out the door, and internal logic is now bent towards perpetuating the illusion, and anything that contradicts that is either outright ignored or a covering excuse is found, having nothing to do with reality.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
Number Six
Hereditary Margrave of Mooloosia
Posts: 1231
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:35 pm
Location: Connecticut, "The Constitution State"

Re: Scientific American article on sovereign citizens

Post by Number Six »

The American culture was perfectly ripe for the sales pitches of the Irwin Schiffs, Lynn Merediths, Conklins, etc.. When much of self-employment and buying and selling can be done without honest tax filings and without hearing from state or federal governments for years, it is not that much of a leap for the untaxing crowd to try to ply their wares on those working for companies, with self-employed also showing up to see what all the excitement is about. We live in a 95% plus sales culture, with an inverted economic system as it is, so who is doing the debunking, the hard educations, the tough case studies on economic ruin following aggressive anti-tax measures, and the milder effects of less public or upfront methods? Not many and those are the ones the Becrafts, etc. regard as "@$$*****".
'There are two kinds of injustice: the first is found in those who do an injury, the second in those who fail to protect another from injury when they can.' (Roman. Cicero, De Off. I. vii)

'Choose loss rather than shameful gains.' (Chilon Fr. 10. Diels)
AndyK
Illuminatian Revenue Supremo Emeritus
Posts: 1591
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:13 pm
Location: Maryland

Re: Scientific American article on sovereign citizens

Post by AndyK »

Irrespective of the sovereignoramus / Tax Denier rhetoric, is there some reasonable way to invite Mr. Shermer to join us?

I believe he will be a valuable addition to the usual suspects.
Taxes are the price we pay for a free society and to cover the responsibilities of the evaders
User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 4287
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am

Re: Scientific American article on sovereign citizens

Post by grixit »

He's a big star in the skeptical and atheist communities so i don't know how much time he could spare but you can contact him through his website.
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4