Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 01/06/2012 8:50:29 AM PST by matt1234
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: matt1234

I’ve received them in the past and did receive one this year as well. It has already been duly processed by my paper shredder as were my past ones. Only once did anyone come knock on my door - they were immediately told to leave and did (it was a contractor similar to what the census used).

The maximum fine for non-compliance is $100.00 - they can KMA. Even if they wanted to fine me, which they haven’t, I wouldn’t pay.


62 posted on 01/06/2012 10:03:59 AM PST by RobertClark ("Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234
During the great depression 12 million Americans DIED OF STARVATION.

They can't have we serfs having the audacity to be self sufficient enough to NOT DIE during their next planned kill off.

They've not kept it a secret that they want to drastically reduce the world's population.

NWO Commandment #1 from the Georgia Guidestones

66 posted on 01/06/2012 10:08:17 AM PST by SENTINEL (Romney is to Conservatism what Mormonism is to Christianity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

I’ve gotten it many times over the course of the past 9 years and each time I get it I do the same thing - file it in the round file. Ignore it.


68 posted on 01/06/2012 10:10:03 AM PST by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234; JustaDumbBlonde

JustA, have you seen this thread yet? Take a look if you haven’t!


74 posted on 01/06/2012 10:27:22 AM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

Chuck it.

If they call, hang up on them.

If they personally visit your property, pick up the phone and dial the business number of the Sheriff’s dept. and while on the line, tell the gov’t person to please leave your property.

If they refuse to leave immediately, tell the Sheriff’s office person on the line that you’ve asked them to leave and they’ve refused and to send a deputy over to arrest the person for trespassing.

Handle subsequent personal visits similarly and any continued phone calls as harassment.

They can always make an appointment to talk with you at your lawyer’s office. [ grin ] If they can get a hold of you via registered mail each time.


75 posted on 01/06/2012 10:32:58 AM PST by hadit2here ("Most men would rather die than think. Many do." - Bertrand Russell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: LucyT

Off topic but interesting and may pertain to many of us.


76 posted on 01/06/2012 10:38:09 AM PST by azishot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

Do they have proof-positive that you even received the document?


77 posted on 01/06/2012 10:46:03 AM PST by Excellence (9/11 was an act of faith.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

We just had a 2 record freezes here in south FL(22 degrees) . I would have to mark NOTHING! It’s all dead or well on it’s way.. Time to replant!

I had heard about this last year... Why do they need to know whats in my garden, If they show up make them help you weed the garden! My dog would never let them in the gate!


99 posted on 01/06/2012 12:19:45 PM PST by satan69 (garden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234
Sounds like the USDA is extending its reach, trying to justify its existence.

There probably aren't enough "farmers" left to keep the current staff busy, so now they bother people that grow tomatoes in the back yard.

104 posted on 01/06/2012 12:48:35 PM PST by ken in texas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

I bet you bought supplies with a credit card...with the new financial bill they can track what you purchase...they get your card billing address and sent that to you.

ITS SICK!!!


105 posted on 01/06/2012 12:52:01 PM PST by surfer (To err is human, to really foul things up takes a Democrat, don't expect the GOP to have the answer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

Just write on the survey that you would have filled it out but you already sealed it in the return envelope...

The agricats will get it.


106 posted on 01/06/2012 12:57:47 PM PST by surfer (To err is human, to really foul things up takes a Democrat, don't expect the GOP to have the answer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All

The Census Bureau operates many surveys for many different depts, including the agricultural one you are talking about. How do you think you get the unemployment rate? The health statistics to monitor cancer clusters, etc... The fishing and wildlife to find out if there is a need for more rangers/parks and such. And on and on.

Being paranoid of surveys that have been around since the 40’s and 50’s is just asinine. And the purpose of the Census conducting is the privacy that the constitution affords you. Not even the IRS can access your data from these surveys. Hell, you don’t even have to give your real name.


107 posted on 01/06/2012 12:57:56 PM PST by autumnraine (America how long will you be so deaf and dumb to the tumbril wheels carrying you to the guillotine?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234
“Do you own, rent, or operate cropland, pastureland, or land with the potential for agricultural production?” Ponder that.

Answer yes, they might give you a farm subsidy........

108 posted on 01/06/2012 1:02:07 PM PST by Hot Tabasco (Naugahyde is no longer available due to the Naugas being hunted to extinction.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234
For example, one of these questions is “Do you own, rent, or operate cropland, pastureland, or land with the potential for agricultural production?” Ponder that. Doesn’t all “land” have “the potential for agricultural production”? If so, a landowner or renter cannot answer “No” and thereby opt out. (Even a lot covered completely by a building has “the potential for agricultural production” because you can grow food on the roof or windowsills, or you can tear down the building.) So, the way I read this, if you own or rent land, you cannot opt out. Moreover, according to another of the first four questions, if you own one or more livestock animals, even a chicken or a horse, you cannot opt out.

All land does not have the potential for agricultural production as the term is used by the USDA. Throw the thing in the trash. If somebody calls you, tell them no and hang up on them. If somebody visits your house, tell them that you do not wish to participate in any survey and close the door.

How do I know these things? My husband and I DO have a farm. We cultivate approximately 2,000 acres of row crops. I also do quite a large garden and sell some produce locally.

My husband, in the past, always participated in the survey -- sometimes by mail and other times via a phone call we received. A couple of years ago, a USDA representative showed up at the house to do some "follow-up" to the paper survey. I was working in the kitchen which joins our den via an open bar area. Some of the questions were getting creepy. Like, do you own your home? How much do you have in the bank? Do you finance it yourself or get a crop loan every year? Stuff that had nothing to do with agriculture or the crops we were planting.

I had to step in and excused myself into the conversation. Why do you need this information, I asked. Didn't get a good answer. She proceeded with another question. By this time my husband is looking at me with a half go-get-em look and half quizical. I asked the lady if we were required by the USDA or any other agency to provide this information. Oh, no, she said.

At that point I told her that we were on our way out to eat and pardon me if I go ahead and show you back to the door.

Right before Christmas, the lady from the local USDA office called my husband to do the survey by phone and he told her that he did not want to participate. She said goodbye. The survey that came in the mail got thrown away.

109 posted on 01/06/2012 1:07:46 PM PST by JustaDumbBlonde (Don't wish doom on your enemies. Plan it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

Write in BIG BOLD letters “ALL UNALIENABLE RIGHTS RESERVED”
and send it back to them...


UCC 1-103 & 1-207

UCC 1-207 is “Remedy” from Colorable Statutory Law and UCC 1-103 is your
“Recourse”!!! Use UCC 1-207 to reserve your right and 1-103 to argueyo ur
rights, under the Common Law, in court. State must produce a “flesh and blood” damaged party!!

U.C.C. 1-207:4 Sufficiency of reservation.
Any expression indicating any intention to preserve rights is sufficient, such as
“without prejudice,” “under protest,” “under reservation,” or “with reservation of
all our rights.”

The Code states an “explicit” reservation must be made. “Explicit” undoubtedly
is used in place of “express” to indicate that the reservation must not only be
“express” but it must also be “clear” that such a reservation was intended.
The term “explicit” as used in U.C.C. 1-207 means “that which is so clearly
stated or distinctively set forth that there is no doubt as to its meaning.”.. ..

U.C.C. 1-207:7 Effect of reservation of rights.
The making of avalid reservation of rights preserves whatever rights the person
then possesses and prevents the loss of such right by application of concepts of
waiver or estoppel....

U.C.C. 1-207:9 Failure to make reservation.
When a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a reservation
thereof causes a loss of the right and bars its assertion at a later date....

U.C.C. 1-103:6 Common law.
The Code is “Complementary” to the common law which remains in forceexcept where displaced by the Code.. ..
A statute should be construed in harmony with the common law unless there is a clear legislative intent to abrogate the common law.... “The Code cannot be read to preclude a common law action.”

EXAMPLE
My use of “Without Prejudice UCC 1-207” near my
signature on this document indicates that Ihave exercised
the “Remedy” provided for me in the Uniform Commercial
Code in Book 1 at Section 207, whereby I have reserved
my Common Lawright not to be compelled to perform
under any contract, and/or agreement, or bankruptcy that I
have not entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and
intentionally. And, that reservation serves notice upon all
administrative agencies of government — national, state and
local — that I do not, and will not, accept the liability
associated with the “compelled” performance of any unrevealed
commercial agreement, and/or contract, or
bankruptcy.

Perhaps some experts here can educate us on this:

Article III, section 2 of the organic Constitution defines the kinds of judicial power the courts have:
1. common law
2. equity
3. admiralty
4. maritime
At the common law - a crime exists only when there is a victim with actual damages like a broken arm.

In equity - otherwise known as civil law a private contract is or agreement is involved. For an action to be brought there must be a breach of contract and damages.

Maritime - or commercial contract law originates in the rules of trade upon the high seas between international merchants and is enforced by military organizations.

Admiralty - is armed enforcement of the laws of commerce(the law merchant)

All birth certificates, licenses, registrations, insurances, bank accounts, permits, titles, deeds, etc. are commercial contracts created under the UCC - (Uniform Commercial Code) and this is where the confusion begins. Most people do not know that commercial law cannot regulate private dealings between civilians much less where to draw the line.

Where does one draw the line?

The Uniform Commercial Code

The Uniform Commercial Code was adopted by all states in 1964 making it the supreme law of the land. Take a look in the first part of every Federal and State code books and you will the find the Uniform Commercial Code consistent throughout.

UCC 1-103.6 defines how contract law must be in compliance with the rules of the common law providing there is made a knowing reservation of common law rights.

“The Code is complimentary to the Common Law, which remains in force, except where displaced by the code. A statute should be construed in harmony with the Common Law, unless there is a clear legislative intent to abrogate the Common Law.” (UCC 1-103.6)

What’s the remedy?

“The making of a valid Reservation of Rights preserves whatever rights the person then possesses, and prevents the loss of such rights by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel.” (UCC 1-207.7)

It is important to remember when we go into a court, that we are in a commercial, international jurisdiction. If we go into court and say. “I DEMAND MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!”, the judge will most likely say, “You mention the Constitution again, and I’ll find you in contempt of court!” Then we don’t understand how he can do that. Hasn’t he sworn to uphold the Constitution? The rule here is: you cannot be charged under one jurisdiction and defend yourself under another jurisdiction. For example, if the French government came to you and asked where you filed your French income tax of a certain year, do you go to the French government and say “I demand my Constitutional Rights?” No. The proper answer is: “THE LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO ME. I AM NOT A FRENCHMAN.” You must make your reservation of rights under the jurisdiction in which you are charged, not under some other jurisdiction. So in a UCC court, you must claim your Reservation of Rights under UCC 1-207.

UCC 1-207 goes on to say...

“When a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a reservation thereof, causes a loss of the right, and bars its assertion at a later date.” (UCC 1-207.9)

You have to make your claim known early. Further, it says:
“The Sufficiency of the Reservation: any expression indicating an intention to reserve rights is sufficient, such as “without prejudice”. (UCC 1-207.4)

Whenever you sign any legal paper that deals with Federal Reserve Notes, write under your signature: “Without Prejudice (UCC 1-207.4).” This reserves your rights. You can show, at UCC 1-207.4, that you have sufficiently reserved your rights.

It is very important to understand just what this means. For example, one man who used this in regard to a traffic ticket was asked by the judge just what he meant by writing “without prejudice UCC 1-207” on his statement to the court? He had not tried to understand the concepts involved. He only wanted to use it to get out of the ticket. He did not know what it meant. When the judge asked him what he meant by signing in that way, he told the judge he was not prejudice against anyone... The judge knew that the man had no idea what it meant, and he lost the case. You must know what it means!
Without Prejudice UCC 1-207
When you use “without prejudice UCC 1-207” in connection with your signature, you are saying, “I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial agreement that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally. I do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement.”
UCC 1-207. Performance or acceptance under Reservation of Rights.
A party who, with explicit reservation of rights, performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved. Such words as “WITHOUT PREJUDICE”,” UNDER PROTEST” or the like are sufficient.

Like this:
“WITHOUT PREJUDICE” UCC 1-207”
First-Middle:Last

Your autograph is among your most valuable assets. It is not a good idea to autograph a contract without reserving your rights. If you must carry a driver’s license you should get a new one with a reservation of rights above your autograph on the license itself. As a matter of fact it is wisest to reserve your rights in any agreement, just in case there is some small print that suggests waiver of your God given freedom.

NOTE:

UCC 1-308 now replaces UCC 1-207

More here:
http://www.energeticforum.com/general-discussion/2504-common-law-ucc-1-308-a.html

http://www.dailypaul.com/78775/does-anyone-sign-their-name-without-prejudice-ucc-1-308

Does anyone sign their name “Without Prejudice UCC 1-308”?
Submitted by juliusbragg on Sat, 01/10/2009 - 22:41
in
• Daily Paul Liberty Forum


111 posted on 01/06/2012 1:41:37 PM PST by phockthis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

Bump


112 posted on 01/06/2012 2:06:24 PM PST by tutstar (Want pings to Aaron Klein articles and OWS nonsense?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

Bookmark.


117 posted on 01/06/2012 3:24:38 PM PST by Trillian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

I have had these surveys (if it’s the one I’m thinking of) that are broad ag interest data collectors. I used to run a number of bee hives for commercial purposes and they were on me like a duck on a junebug. IIRC, they were snooping into gardens, produce production, etc. In short, anything to do with agriculture - no matter at what scale.

Tell them you raised petunias for a sick aunt and swear to never do it again.


118 posted on 01/06/2012 3:52:02 PM PST by WorkingClassFilth (Soon to be a man without a country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234; aMorePerfectUnion; ottbmare; JustaDumbBlonde; Drumbo

I’m getting a huge laugh out of the humorous/facitious answers to your question!

But as you’ve acknowledged, matt1234, the info in post #28 has good details from others who’ve received the form.

I’ve never received this myself, tho certainly folks in my area must. Gotta go with ottbmare’s #20 in advising you not to overthink it. Do you envision yourself mass-production factory farming on that spot? ‘Cause that’s how I read it. So ‘no’ to question one.

Now me, I’d ignore the thing altogether. If followed up in person: “You’re threatening legal action over that? Preposterous! I thought it was a scam and threw it away! Still do.”

Which is the position I’d stick with if they push.

Look at how low-key the face to face confrontation was handled by JustaDumbBlonde (not!) in #109. Nothing personal, no need to take it out on the contractor dispatched to your home. Just a polite refusal that doesn’t stand out from all the other refusals they surely must get.

Last census, I got a door knocker. Informed up front that I would answer only the single Constitutionally required question, she made a half-hearted attempt at getting my answers to the rest of the short form. Nothing I could do to hide my race, but we went thru the motions so she could feel like she was earning the paycheck honest. I chuckled all the way thru and we parted on a friendly enough note.

Oh, and as to how you were chosen to receive this survey in the first place? There’s little trust in the gov’t in this house, but paranoia should be tempered by the amount of scam mails that come bearing tidings of one’s having been chosen due to some special, unlisted trait to qualify for “this rare offering.” As possible as any of the other theiories, your address may have been plucked by a computer from a particular demographic area.

Remember the big swine flu panic a couple of years ago? Apparently my unlisted, nonpublished, never-divulged phone number was conjured by a computer and printed on a CDC phone survey call list. As I later learned from CDC’s website, they were checking pubhlic perceptions to the flu panic & availability or not of vaccinations. The callers didn’t have a clue who I was, but by God and by damn my number was on THE LIST and I was downright expected to comply with their questionare. That is, until I came up with the magic words, “Add my number to your Do Not Call List, and immediately ceast and desist calling me.” The guy tried to argue but I refused the bait & hung up. That’s when the calls stopped.


122 posted on 01/06/2012 4:59:59 PM PST by Titan Magroyne (What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: matt1234

I am on the mailing lists of several seed companies, and I haven’t yet gotten a letter like that.

Are they looking at vegetables grown directly in the ground or are they including the potted tomato plant on the patio?


134 posted on 01/06/2012 8:34:55 PM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson