Census Threats

W

WGB38

New member
Posted by Grunt on May 24, 2000 at 21:16:18:
This a Constitutional issue so I 'm posting it in this forum.Please if yuo have knowledge of similar events let me know by posting or requesting my email.

Here in Alabama we are beginning to get confirmed reports of Census workers visiting people who didn't fill out completely the census form threatening them with jail if after five chances they refuse to cooperate. It works as follows.

After the initial contact in person the people have four more chances to provide the info. If they refuse on the fifth time the census people return with Law Enforcement who will arrest them if they don't fess up.

My source is a radio show hosted by Russ and Dee Fine here in Alabama. These guys are soon to be the proud possessors of a Paranoid Elite Certifica te of Achievement. I heard no less than 4 callers confirm this on air and I am in contact with Russ fine on this subject. When the time comes I'll be standing there in the breach at someone's house with Russ. He 'll be there as radio Host with commitment ,me I'll be the tactical support.Full blown they want a war let it begin here.

Any of you guys here, heard anything about this in your neck of the woods.
 
No....they did show up here two or three times before I was "home". I just happened to be out cleaning the kennels when she showed up. She pulled in the driveway, I went to meet her, she flashed a little plastic census id with picture, I told her there was one person living here and that all she needed, she inquired "you mean you dont want to fill the rest of this out?", I repeated that I had already sent in my reply and for her to have a good day. So far, no problems...fubsy.
 
WGB38,

I used to be an Enumerator (this year), and never heard a peep about such a thing in training or out on the job.

------------------
John/az
"When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
www.cphv.com
 
Fusby,

They asked for more than that in the first census. You don't have to be an *******.


[This message has been edited by p l i n k e r (edited May 25, 2000).]
 
Here is some info on U.S. Code Title 13
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/13/221.html (text follows)

Sounds to me as if some census
workers have dilusions of grandeur.

Best advice is to get their I.D. number and/or their name and report them.

Sgt.K
:::::::::::::
U.S. CODE
TITLE 13 - CENSUS
CHAPTER 7 - OFFENSES AND PENALTIES
SUBCHAPTER II - OTHER PERSONS
as of: 01/05/99
Sec. 221. Refusal or neglect to
answer questions; false answers

(a) Whoever, being over eighteen
years of age, refuses or willfully
neglects, when requested by the
Secretary, or by any other
authorized officer or employee of
the Department of Commerce or bureau or agency thereof acting under the
instructions of the Secretary or
authorized officer, to answer, to
the best of his knowledge, any of
the questions on any schedule
submitted to him in connection with
any census or survey provided for by subchapters I, II, IV, and V of
chapter 5 of this title, applying to himself or to the family to which he belongs or is related, or to the
farm or farms of which he or his
family is the occupant, shall be
fined not more than $100.

(b) Whoever, when answering
questions described in subsection
(a) of this section, and under the
conditions or circumstances
described in such subsection,
willfully gives any answer that is
false, shall be fined not more than
$500.

(c) Notwithstanding any other
provision of this title, no person
shall be compelled to disclose
information relative to his
religious beliefs or to membership
in a religious body.

[This message has been edited by Sgt.K (edited May 25, 2000).]
 
Well, p l i n k e r, they were wrong then also. fusby didn't indicate that he was a ******. The Constitution says "enumerate."

Look it up.

------------------
"Anyone feel like saluting the flag which the strutting ATF and FBI gleefully raised over the smoldering crematorium of Waco, back in April of ‘93?" -Vin Suprynowicz
 
Plinker, my email is available if you have a serious problem with my response or me....by all means avail yourself of it. By the spelling of my name it is obvious you dont read just react...fubsy.
 
plinker, welcome to TFL.

This is a popular discussion forum, mainly because of the civilized and intelligent conversation. Seems to me, people have a right to limit their interactions with government.

Besides, if you haven't seen the 'long form' census questionnaire, well then you haven't really lived. ;)

We gave them only the number of people living here. My interest in cooperation has slowly died, roughly in proportion to the power consolidation in Washington DC.

With regard to the topic of this thread, to be honest, I find these reports pretty hard to believe. For one thing, I think this news would spread quite rapidly if true. And, I'll bet attorneys would have a field day with such an action.

Regards from AZ

[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited May 26, 2000).]
 
I wouldnt mind getting arrested for not answering the stupid questions. I could really stand to retire at 31. Lets see: False arrest, flase imprisonment, harrassment, criminal tresspass, mental anguish... Heck me and my lawyer could probably retire.



------------------
"Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes."
-R.A. Heinlein
 
I am familiar with both forms. The short form questions are the only 'required' ones. I doubt any enforcement, as Sgt.K points out, will ever take place The short form has basically the same questions that they asked in 1790.

Being an ******* is everyone's perrogative. Refusing to give a name is being an ******* since giving a name has always been done in the enumeration process.
 
Well plinker one thing is for sure you are certainley exercising your perogative. If you had read and comprehended what I wrote you would have learned that I had already sent in the form.....the follow up was completely unnecessary. My response was to show that the experience that I had with the census was not threatening as the initial post on this thread asked......fubsy.
 
had 2 notices left on my door. never sent in the long form, even made wife tear it up after i noticed her actually answering the ? in it!!!(that ended real quick)
knew they would stop by as they said they would. called the census helper up. gave him address and number or people in the house. he then says let me get the form so you can answer the rest of the ?'s too. told him, and asked also to correct me if i was wrong, but are you not required to answer anything other than number of adults living there? he said "yes but" i told him to have a good night and hung up.i did my part for census 2000.
 
Refusing to give a name is being an ******* since giving a name has always been done in the enumeration process.

Just because something has allways been done one way doesn't make it right.

Kindly give us the legal & constitutional basis for requiring answers to any question beyond "how many live here". (Funny, I've asked that of several people and never got a response. Maybe you can be the first.)

To the contrary, there's plenty of backup for :
<UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI>the Constitutial intent (counting heads ONLY)
<LI>privacy rights (they'll fine you $100 if you don't tell how many toilets you have)
<LI>intended abuse of power (figuring out who to forcefully take money from and give it to)
<LI>potential abuse of power (with historical instances; see census-enabled "Japanese internment camps")
</UL>

The Constitutional basis for the census has no need for people's names. Why is it that _I'm_ the <bleep> if _I_ don't give more information than the valid law requires?
 
Read your constitution. It says in a manner prescribed by Congress. Therefore, congress decides what questions need asked. That's all I'm saying on this subject.
 
The information doesn't have to be all that accurate, after all. I ended up listed as "female"...next time the cats will get counted, too :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top