NEW HAMPSHIRE- Feds Want Browns' Huge Weapons Cache

[MaineCWPtraining]

Couple's friend got them from storage

By Margot Sanger-Katz
June 15, 2009 -

The 30 guns Ed and Elaine Brown handed over to federal marshals after their arrest for tax crimes in 2006 were picked up from storage by a Weare man who told the gun shop holding them that Ed Brown had signed over ownership.

Now federal prosecutors want to investigate whether Bernie Bastian, a close friend to the Browns who visited them often during their months-long Plainfield standoff, should be allowed to keep the weapons.

READ MORE

 

[Prepper]

Why wouldn't he be able to keep them? Did the court order the gun-related possessions turned over as part of punishment? If not, then the Browns can give them to whoever they want. It is not as if he is in MA or something.

 

[terraformer]

If you read it you will see it is about money. This isn't about guns, but why their property was released when they owe a boatload of back taxes. The government is saying they should have the ability to recoup some of the back taxes.

 

[Erebus]

Apparently the guns were transferred prior to the conviction and sentencing. IANAL so I don't know if the government can retroactively go after property that is no longer yours after your conviction. Now I would assume that the taxes and penalties were owed prior to the transfer so maybe that's the grounds they are using to go after them.

 

[pdm]

They'd argue it was a fraudulent transfer to avoid paying. Same theory used against men when they divorce their wives, etc.

 

[Smiles1014]

Dirtbags don't pay their taxes, and dirtbags shouldn't have guns. The government should take them for partial payment on money owed.

 

[Bob P]

They'd argue it was a fraudulent transfer to avoid paying. Same theory used against men when they divorce their wives, etc.

+1. If they can show the sole reason they did it was to bury the asset then they can prevent the transfer.

 

[ScottS]

If you read it you will see it is about money. This isn't about guns, but why their property was released when they owe a boatload of back taxes. The government is saying they should have the ability to recoup some of the back taxes.

This is the way I read it, too. It would be the same if they gave away anything of value, and Uncle wanted some of his money back.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Am I the only one finds it difficult to reconcile "30 guns" with "huge weapons cache". The term "nice collection" would be more descriptive.

 

[JRyan]

Am I the only one finds it difficult to reconcile "30 guns" with "huge weapons cache". The term "nice collection" would be more descriptive.

I agree.

 

[Underwhere]

Dirtbags don't pay their taxes, and dirtbags shouldn't have guns. The government should take them for partial payment on money owed.

I don't consider them dirtbags. Most of Obama's administration has had problems with the IRS...some of them not filing or paying taxes. (I'm not saying they aren't dirtbags either) You don't see them getting their homes raided by tanks.

I'm on Ed and Elaine's side.

Is it really necessary to waste millions of dollars laying siege to someone's house when we have a drug war going on, sex trade occurring, homeless people on the streets and couples continuing to produce ugly children?

We have bigger battles to fight and more dangerous people to incarcerate.

 

[Smiles1014]

I don't consider them dirtbags. Most of Obama's administration has had problems with the IRS...some of them not filing or paying taxes. (I'm not saying they aren't dirtbags either) You don't see them getting their homes raided by tanks.

Tax evaders are thieves in my book. The residual effects of them not contributing their share in part raises taxes for those who do pay.

 

[bostonasphalt2]

+1. If they can show the sole reason they did it was to bury the asset then they can prevent the transfer.

which would be tough to do since they were told they could have the guns back after their prison time, whatever. Then they could argue they arent hiding an asset, they are avoiding storage fees.

 

[Underwhere]

Tax evaders are thieves in my book. The residual effects of them not contributing their share in part raises taxes for those who do pay.

I happen to think that federal taxes are unjustly levied and the govt requiring you to pay them is illegal.

You're probably right that it results in raising taxes for the rest of the people who pay them.

The way I see it:
If everyone is on a boat and the captain says he wants you to pay an additional $100 each (on top of your ticket) in order to arrive at your destination...and you decide against paying what you consider an "illegal" fee then then the others may have to cover the difference. However the blame should not go to the person who declined to fund or partake in an illegal act, but should be placed upon the captain who initiated the act.

But again that's just me.

There are a lot of people who never file...and they don't get their homes raided. Ed and Elaine happened to have paid taxes before which is better than millions of people living in the US.

I wonder why we sometimes treat our own citizens much worse than illegal citizens.

 

[Gadsden]

Tax evaders are thieves in my book. The residual effects of them not contributing their share in part raises taxes for those who do pay.

Agreed! Same goes for folks that don't give up their money to armed robbers.. it makes it harder for the folks that do, as the robbers will just want more to make up for the folks that don't want to give their hard-earned cash up. As a matter of fact, we should send MORE agents with guns out there to ensure those thieving bastards pay their fair share. (Sure, we may have to raise the taxes more to fund said agents, but I am sure they can provide a good ROI collecting more then they cost.)

I personally pay *MORE* than my share to make ensure the government does not go underfunded due to those that do not pay taxes or just leech off the system. After all.. if people did not pay plenty of taxes society would fall apart, just look at New Hampshire.. they pay much less in taxes and society is practically in chaos compared to the frugal spending of MA and RI.

 

[Gadsden]

I wonder why we sometimes treat our own citizens much worse than illegal citizens.

Easy.. there is more money in it.

 

[Smiles1014]

Agreed! Same goes for folks that don't give up their money to armed robbers..

Not a relevant analogy.

 

[dwarven1]

There are a lot of people who never file...and they don't get their homes raided. Ed and Elaine happened to have paid taxes before which is better than millions of people living in the US.

I wonder why we sometimes treat our own citizens much worse than illegal citizens.

Because if you stomp HARD on the ones who are restive under our Federal Government's benevolent rule, you'll scare the others into behaving like nice meek, mild sheep... and THEY won't give you trouble.

Agreed! Same goes for folks that don't give up their money to armed robbers.. it makes it harder for the folks that do, as the robbers will just want more to make up for the folks that don't want to give their hard-earned cash up. As a matter of fact, we should send MORE agents with guns out there to ensure those thieving bastards pay their fair share. (Sure, we may have to raise the taxes more to fund said agents, but I am sure they can provide a good ROI collecting more then they cost.)

I personally pay *MORE* than my share to make ensure the government does not go underfunded due to those that do not pay taxes or just leech off the system. After all.. if people did not pay plenty of taxes society would fall apart, just look at New Hampshire.. they pay much less in taxes and society is practically in chaos compared to the frugal spending of MA and RI.

I'm really glad I read through to your last sentence before giving your post a neg rep point. You had me going there for a while.

 

[TomH]

The Feds should have "froze" all assets pending the outcome of the trial if they were so concerned. And Underwhere, great posts, +1 I agree.

 

[KMaurer]

Am I the only one finds it difficult to reconcile "30 guns" with "huge weapons cache". The term "modest start of a collection" would be more descriptive.

Fixed it for you.

Ken

 

[drgrant]

Tax evaders are thieves in my book.

Who are they stealing money from, themselves?

That notional is funny, considering the government essentially is allowed to point a gun at us and demand a portion of whatever we earn, even before
any services are rendered with that money.

Is the government really the victim of theft here? Maybe I'm just a layperson, but when I grew up I always thought that theft was stealing things that belonged to someone else- which is exactly what the government is doing when it conducts income taxation.

The residual effects of them not contributing their share in part raises taxes for those who do pay.

The effect the Browns have on the revenue stream is no different than whats caused by any of the millions of welfare layabout types that pay little to no
tax every year, yet they're somehow or another subject to a different set of rules, and they're "legal".

Further, what exactly is "their share"? Right now it's an arbitrary number based on how much money one makes- and has nothing to do with the
actual load that, you, the citizen, actually place upon the government for whatever services (perceived and otherwise) it provides.

If people want the system to be even remotely "fair" it needs to be restructured. Until that happens, this notional of "fair share" is nothing
more than "let's pretend..." Even if we agree that some taxation is a necessary evil, the current system is not really fair in any respect.

Now, having said all this, I realize that "the rule of law" makes the government actions legal, at least in the eyes of the law.... but that doesn't
make it "right".

ETA: I won't even get into the fact that the feds prosecution of the Browns is a "net monetary loss" for the taxpayer, that one is too easy to defend.

-Mike

 

[calsdad]

Dirtbags don't pay their taxes, and dirtbags shouldn't have guns. The government should take them for partial payment on money owed.

Nice to know your opinion on the founding fathers of this country.

 

[calsdad]

Tax evaders are thieves in my book. The residual effects of them not contributing their share in part raises taxes for those who do pay.

Thieving from who? So we are all "obligated" to pay our "fair share" of taxes. For what and why? To pay for foreign aid? To pay for bailouts for bankers? To pay for bridges to nowhere and more airports for John Murtha?

Hows your socialism doing?

 

[Jesse]

Am I the only one finds it difficult to reconcile "30 guns" with "huge weapons cache". The term "nice collection" would be more descriptive.

I saw the "fixed it for ya" to "modest" but I would call it a "starter" collection.

 

[ShadeWPI]

Sorry, I have to agree that Tax Evasion is theft. Not theft from the government, because I don't believe "The Government" owns anything. Tax Evasion is theft from every single tax payer since the failure to pay taxes requires additional tax revenue from every other tax payer to cover it.

However, before the government goes after individuals for failure to pay taxes, they need to go after "Tax Negotiators" who are constantly advertising, "If you owe 10,000 or more in Taxes, we can help you negotiate for pennies on the dollar" There are thousands of lawyers making their living on "negotiating" with the government on behalf of wealthy clients (because most of us couldn't afford to pay the lawyer) to steal money from all tax payers by "negotiating" with a government agent with no vested intrest in the negotiation.

 

[Gadsden]

Unfortunately, the mentality of "By Gawd, I have to pay taxes, so should everyone else!" seems to be the norm with many people, and many folks will gladly throw others under the bus if they see someone getting beat less than themselves. I, for one, pay my taxes because it is not gotten to the point of it being worth the life-altering hassle of refusing. I can honestly see why folks get fed up with it and say "enough is enough!"... when I owned a small business I got reamed so badly from taxes I closed up shop. It was not worth my effort anymore.

If someone has the testicular fortitude to peacefully make a stand on a bad law, god bless them.. they have my support, not my damnation.

 

[calsdad]

Who are they stealing money from, themselves?

That notional is funny, considering the government essentially is allowed to point a gun at us and demand a portion of whatever we earn, even before
any services are rendered with that money.

Is the government really the victim of theft here? Maybe I'm just a layperson, but when I grew up I always thought that theft was stealing things that belonged to someone else- which is exactly what the government is doing when it conducts income taxation.



The effect the Browns have on the revenue stream is no different than whats caused by any of the millions of welfare layabout types that pay little to no
tax every year, yet they're somehow or another subject to a different set of rules, and they're "legal".

Further, what exactly is "their share"? Right now it's an arbitrary number based on how much money one makes- and has nothing to do with the
actual load that, you, the citizen, actually place upon the government for whatever services (perceived and otherwise) it provides.

If people want the system to be even remotely "fair" it needs to be restructured. Until that happens, this notional of "fair share" is nothing
more than "let's pretend..." Even if we agree that some taxation is a necessary evil, the current system is not really fair in any respect.

Now, having said all this, I realize that "the rule of law" makes the government actions legal, at least in the eyes of the law.... but that doesn't
make it "right".
ETA: I won't even get into the fact that the feds prosecution of the Browns is a "net monetary loss" for the taxpayer, that one is too easy to defend.

-Mike

One of the best summaries I have seen about this little fact is that people need to be reminded that everything Hitler did was LEGAL, whereas everything the Founding Fathers of this country did was ILLEGAL.

So the next time somebody uses the bullshit excuse that "it's illegal not to pay taxes" they should be reminded of this little fact. Right before you give them a good swift kick in the nuts.

 

[Smiles1014]

Sorry, I have to agree that Tax Evasion is theft. Not theft from the government, because I don't believe "The Government" owns anything. Tax Evasion is theft from every single tax payer since the failure to pay taxes requires additional tax revenue from every other tax payer to cover it.

Bingo. You can spout all your libertarian ideals you want, but the fact remains we as Americans are obligated to pay taxes. I have not and will not debate whether this in itself is right or wrong. Mark, if you feel so strongly about it, as your post suggests, then why do you pay your taxes?

'To pay for bridges to nowhere and more airports for John Murtha?

Yes, exactly amongst other things. And so by me thinking it is important for people to pay their taxes, I am somehow a liberal? I disagree as much as the next guy on this forum about where that money goes, nonetheless, there are things it goes to that are important, such as the rehabilitation of America's infrastructure. I also debate the amount of taxes we pay, we pay too much!...As a result of frivolous spending on welfare, useless programs, etc. But someone has got to pay for the roads and bridges you travel on everyday. Guess not you though...

calsdad, why do you pay taxes? You certainly have the internet fortitude to not. Actions speak louder than words my friend.

 

[vellnueve]

I'm offended by this story.

Horrified, even.

Since when is 30 a "cache"?

 

[calsdad]

Let's have a good Founding Father beatdown on the concept that we are all "obligated" to pay taxes:

An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation.

John Marshall, McCullough v. Maryland, 1819



Besides, to lay and collect internal taxes in this extensive country must require a great number of congressional ordinances, immediately operation upon the body of the people; these must continually interfere with the state laws and thereby produce disorder and general dissatisfaction till the one system of laws or the other, operating upon the same subjects, shall be abolished.

Federal Farmer, Antifederalist Letter, October 10, 1787


Government, in my humble opinion, should be formed to secure and to enlarge the exercise of the natural rights of its members; and every government, which has not this in view, as its principal object, is not a government of the legitimate kind.

James Wilson, Lectures on Law, 1791


He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

Are things really so different today?


How prone all human institutions have been to decay; how subject the best-formed and most wisely organized governments have been to lose their check and totally dissolve; how difficult it has been for mankind, in all ages and countries, to preserve their dearest rights and best privileges, impelled as it were by an irresistible fate of despotism.

James Monroe, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 10, 1788

I would like to see anybody make the argument that our country - and especially our government is not in a state of decay. I would be willing to bet that the same people who DON'T think we are suffering from decay - are the ones who would make the argument that we "all have to pay our fair share of taxes". There is more than ample evidence that as more and more of our wealth is consumed by the federal government - our lives, our society, and our freedoms all decay. The founding fathers knew this. Therefore - in order to restore this country to what it once was it should logically follow that removing money from the hands of the federal government could be seen as the supreme act of patriotism.


In a general sense, all contributions imposed by the government upon individuals for the service of the state, are called taxes, by whatever name they may be known, whether by the name of tribute, tythe, tallage, impost, duty, gabel, custom, subsidy, aid, supply, excise, or other name.

Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833



It is necessary for every American, with becoming energy to endeavor to stop the dissemination of principles evidently destructive of the cause for which they have bled. It must be the combined virtue of the rulers and of the people to do this, and to rescue and save their civil and religious rights from the outstretched arm of tyranny, which may appear under any mode or form of government.

Mercy Warren, History of the Rise, Progress, and Termination of the American Revolution, 1805

....... A principle a good many "Americans" seem to have completely forgotten. Seeing as how they now argue that "everybody should pay their fair share of taxes" - instead of even admitting that the founding of this country was based on a tax revolt - and the level of taxation we have now is far over what made our forefathers risk their very lives to resist.


Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors; and capacity, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence.

Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833


Well guess what - they have forgotten. Because now what they argue for is "I am getting screwed - so I think everybody else should get screwed too".



Even the goddam communists have figured out that massive taxation is not the way to build a prosperous society. Here is a commentary about what taxation is like in China now:

http://denisbinder.blogspot.com/2009/03/what-do-chinese-communists-know-about.html

Friday, March 6, 2009
What Do the Chinese Communists Know About Capitalism That the United States Does Not?
Communist China, once a pillar of the international communist movement, is now capitalist in all but name. Chairman Deng Xiaoping’s reforms started China on the path to capitalism and unleashed one of the greatest industrial revolutions in economic history. He encouraged foreign investment.

His successors built upon his lessons. They encouraged capitalists, even capitalists from Taiwan, to invest. They preserved Hong Kong.

And most of all they encouraged private initiative. They understand that the essence of capitalism is the individual and not the state.

The tax on capital is zero. Zero on long term capital gains. Zero on short term capital gains. Zero on same day trades. All the Communist Party asks is that the capitalists stay out of politics.


The Chinese believe in real capitalism – not the state sponsored capitalism of Russia, nor the capitalistic socialism of Western Europe.

Chairman Deng learnt the lesson from the disastrous Cultural Revolution.

We though have forgotten our lesson from Plymouth Rock. The earliest Pilgrims practiced socialism, owning the land in common. The harvests were distributed to each family in accordance with their needs. The result was starvation as no incentive existed to work hard. The common was to provide for all so no one had to provide for the common.

When President Obama was told during the campaign that raising capital gains tax rates results in a reduction of tax revenue, he replied that raising the capital gains tax rate is a question of fairness. Taxing the rich is a matter of fairness. Squeezing insurers and medical providers is a matter of fairness. Limiting salaries and bonuses is a matter of fairness.

Fairness to the Chinese is economic growth and employment. Fairness to President Obama is equality and class warfare.

How ironic the Communists became capitalists and the Democrats became statists!

Even the goddammed Communists understand not to tax the crap out of everybody if you want to build a prosperous society. Again - there are far too many people here who would like to call themselves Americans who seem to have forgotten this basic lesson that was supposedly learned at the founding of this country.

Last but not least: I find it amusing that ANYBODY who frequents a gun forum could espouse the view that "we all need to pay our fair share" - seeing as how this country was born in a tax revolt, and that revolt was made possible by the fact that the colonists had retained their rights to arm themselves. The Constitution enshrined that right to bear arms - with the intent that the right was protected so the people could defend themselves against a tyrannical government - which historically speaking has always been one that taxes the living shit out of the people ( exactly what we have today).

But somehow we have ended up with a sizable portion of our population who see guns as just another toy or just another hobby - because they shit all over the very rights those guns were meant to protect - and yet still enjoy the use of those guns without recognizing the very serious purpose those guns were meant to serve.

What we essentially have is an almost total loss of all the rights those guns were supposed to preserve - and people who constantly argue for even more loss of rights - and even more strengthening of the federal government that has run roughshod over those rights. Therefore making gun ownership increasingly irrelevant.

Guns are becoming increasingly irrelevant to preserving our rights - because people like ShadeWPI make arguments about "fairness" in making all the rest of us pony up and "pay our fair share" - instead of recognizing that we are so far over and above "fair share" at this point as to make the entire argument ridiculous - and quite frankly I believe just a bit cowardly.


The best slaves are the ones who don't even know they are enslaved - or even argue for their re-enslavement as soon as even the concept of freedom is brought up.

From the road-to-serfdom dept: “Historically, the definition of a free person is a person who owns his own labor. Serfs were not free, because they owed their feudal lords, the government of that time, a maximum of one-third of their labor. Nineteenth century slaves were not free, because their owners could expropriate 50 per cent of their labor. Today, no American is a free person. The lowest tax rate, not counting state income, property tax and sales tax, is 15 per cent Social Security tax and 15 per cent federal income tax. The ‘free American’ starts off with a 30 per cent tax rate, the position of a medieval serf. In medieval Europe, when tax rates reached beyond 30 per cent, serfs rebelled and killed their masters.”

Total US tax burden:

The National Bureau of Economic Research has concluded that the combined federal, state, and local government average marginal tax rate for most workers to be about 40% of income.[1][2] The Tax Foundation concluded that government at all levels will collect 30.8% of the nation's income for 2008.[3] Tax Day, the day by which tax returns are due, is usually April 15.

"If you love [STRIKE]wealth[/STRIKE] tax fairness more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." [Samuel Adams]