You might want to hand this to that census taker

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Oatka

New member
Print out and keep handy. ;)
http://www.guntruths.com/Resource/public_servant_questionnaire.htm

THE PUBLIC SERVANT QUESTIONNAIRE

Key Points:

An American does not have to speak with a government agent unless the citizen has been arrested.

Americans have a right to privacy, to be left alone.

The PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 (Public Law 93-579), empowers citizens to require full, written disclosure from a government official who seeks information.

You may insist on complete disclosure as a precondition to speaking with any government official.

The Limits On Federal Power:

Law-abiding citizens are sometimes visited by agents of the Federal government for no apparent reason. It is helpful, at the time of these visits, to recall that unless a citizen has been placed under arrest (either because a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe the citizen has committed a crime or because the officer has in his possession an arrest warrant issued by a judge who believes there is probable cause the citizen has committed a crime, a citizen does not have to entertain the company of government agents.

Citizens also have the right, guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, not to testify against themselves. Thus, when "the government" comes knocking on one¹s door, you have the right to simply say, "Please go away." Unless the government officer places you under arrest (there must be probable cause, or an arrest warrant based on probable cause), the officer must obey your wishes.

Be Helpful.... On Your Terms

Of course, citizens also have a vested interest in assisting "the
government" in its role of crime-solver. Most of us understand the need to help "the government" to apprehend criminals. But it is also helpful, when "the government" arrives at your place of employment or at your home, to know how to find out why government agents have appeared on YOUR doorstep.

A handy little questionnaire that I came across years ago will do the trick. It¹s called the "Public Servant Questionnaire." A version
accompanies this article. The "PSQ" was developed by Lynn Johnston, author of Who's Afraid of the IRS? (Libertarian Review Foundation: 1983, ISBN 0-930073-03-7).

The PSQ is based on the requirements placed upon the government by the Privacy Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-579), an amending law to Title 5, United States Code, Section 552, and is included as Section 552a.

If a citizen chooses to cooperate with government officials who are seeking information, BEFORE questioning begins, the citizen should politely inform the government agent or agents that a prerequisite for the citizen's cooperation with "the government" is the agent¹s cooperation with the citizen.

Do It Right, The First Time

The questions should then be put to each agent, and the citizen should enter the answers onto the questionnaire. Copies should be provided to each agent, either at the time of the questioning or by mail to the agent after the visit. The questionnaire informs the government agent that the citizen knows his rights and knows which limited powers the government agent has been granted by the people.

Most probably some government agents will not want to fill out or sign the PSQ. That¹s fine. They can then be sent on their merry way. They may need to explain to their superiors, and a court of law, and a jury, on another day, why they refused to cooperate with the reasonable questions of the highest officeholder in the land, a citizen.

PUBLIC SERVANT'S QUESTIONNAIRE

Public Law 93-579 states in part: "The purpose of this Act is to provide certain safeguards for an individual against invasion of personal privacy requiring Federal agencies... to permit an individual to determine what records pertaining to him are collected, maintained, used or disseminated by such agencies...."

The following questions are based upon that act and are necessary for this individual to make a reasonable determination concerning divulgence of information to this agency.

1. Name of public servant ____________________________________________

2. Residence address _________________________________________________

City ___________________________________ State _________ Zip __________

3. Name of department of government, bureau, or agency by which public servant is employed __________________________________________

Supervisor¹s name __________________________________________________

4. Office mailing address:____________________________________________

City ____________________________________ State _________ Zip _________

5. Will public servant uphold the Constitution of the United States of America? Yes ______ No _______

6. Did public servant furnish proof of identity? Yes _____ No _____

7. What was the nature of proof? ID No. _____________________
Badge No. _________________ Driver¹s License No. ____________

8. Will public servant furnish a copy of the law or regulation which
authorizes this investigation? Yes _______ No __________

9. Will the public servant read aloud that portion of the law authorizing the questions he will ask? Yes __________ No _________

10. Are the citizen's answers voluntary? _____ Or Mandatory? ____

11. Are the questions to be asked based upon a specific law or regulation? ___________ or are they being used as a discovery process? ________

12. What other uses may be made of this information?
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

13. What other agencies may have access to this information?
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

14. What will be the effect upon me if I should choose to not answer any part of these questions?
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

15. Name of person in government requesting that this investigation be made? __________________________________________

16. Is this investigation "general?" ______ or is it "special?" ________

Note: By "general" is meant any kind of blanket investigation in which a number of persons are involved because of geography, type of business, sex, religion, race, schooling, income, etc. By "special" is meant any investigation of an individual nature in which others are not involved.

17. Have you consulted, questioned, interviewed, or received information from any third party relative to this investigation? Yes ______ No _____

18. If yes, the identity of all such third parties?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

19. Do you reasonably anticipate either a civil or criminal action to be initiated or pursued based upon any of the information which you seek? Yes ________ No ____________

20. Is there a file of records, information, or correspondence relating to me being maintained by this agency? Yes ________ No _________

21. Is this agency using any information pertaining to me which was
supplied by another agency or government source? Yes _____ No ____

If yes, which agencies and/or sources? _____________________________

22. Will the public servant guarantee that the information in these files will not be used by any other department other than the one by whom he is employed? Yes ___________ No ____________

AFFIRMATION BY PUBLIC SERVANT

I swear (or affirm) that the answers I have given to the foregoing
questions are complete and correct in every particular.

______________________________________________________________________
(Must be signed in ink. This signature should be witnessed by two people. Citizen may administer an oath if he or she so desires.)

Witness ____________________________________________________________

Witness ____________________________________________________________


This questionnaire was written by Daniel J. Schultz. Daniel is a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York and a practicing attorney in Los Angeles, California. He is the President, and a co-founding member of ³The Lawyer¹s Second Amendment Society (LSAS), a nationwide network of pro-right to keep and bear arms attorneys.

Inquiries to the LSAS may be made to 818-734-3066 or by writing to the LSAS, 18034 Ventura Blvd, No. 329, Encino, CA 91316. The email address for the LSAS is: LSAS3@aol.com



------------------
The New World Order has a Third Reich odor.
 
My sister is one of the census field workers and we had a discussion about this. What it all boiled down to is this: Majority of the workers could care less if you want to fill it out or not. That is their job to get you to answer at least the basic questions. She and the others that work with her will not keep bugging you, they will give you a quick rebuttle but do respect your privacy. She ran into an old man that started yelling things at her, she respectfully said thank you for your time and walked away. Don't be too hard on these people, if you don't want to answer just simply say that, most of them will leave you alone. Remember they are not offical governement workers they are regular people like you and I just trying to make some extra money, and believe me they pay well $16 an hour here! I wish I would have signed up :D
 
Sandy's right. These people are doing this temporarily, they're not "Feds." I told the census lady who came to my house that I didn't want to answer any questions regarding race and she said, "That's fine, you don't have to." BTW, Sandy, did your sister receive any training/instuction regarding people who refuse to answer, etc? Just curious. :)
 
Reports from the field:

1. "All they want is the race, and they get that with one look, so they'll not be back. That's why I claim to be the house painter. "I no seeeee nothing, Seen-yor Ceensus man. They pay me to paint, I no see the boss, only he call to tell me what color to paint the rooms."

2. "The form we received in the mail was the 'long' form, and even asked for S.S. numbers! We replied with only the number of people in residence, and so got a visit last night. So solly, no one home."

3. "They visited my "compound" yesterday, also. The lady was very nice, and I stressed that I had no quarrel with her, as I told her that 2 members of the human race lived at this address. She kept reading off her questions, and I just stood there without saying another word. Finally, she got a bit irritated, and said that her supervisor would be paying us a visit. I said fine, but you might tell her to save her time and energy, as no other information would be forthcoming."

4. "We returned the form with just the number of people filled in. Saturday, the Census guy showed up and said he wanted to finish completing the form. I told him I sent it in and he showed me the form I sent with only the number of people filled in.
I told him "According to the Constitution, it looks complete to me". He started to go into the reasons for filling out the form.
I cut him short and told him the form was complete and he thanked me a left. He was an older guy, he was polite and seemed understanding of my position. I also saw him go to two of my neighbors, spent less than a minute with each. Looks like he didn't get much from them either."

See related thread on the Political Board: http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=26724

At $16 an hour, this old timer was tempted to apply, but since I answered the "How many people live here" question, and put
"American" for race, I didn't think it would be right to ask others to open up.

Do we all act like "good Germans" and go along with this just because the people are nice?

My gripe isn't with these nice people who show up, it's with the divisive race and intrusive personal questions.

On second thought, maybe I should have taken the job and just entered "American" on those forms people refused to answer.

Yes, I am expecting a visit, and yes, I have the form ready and waiting.



[This message has been edited by Oatka (edited May 11, 2000).]
 
And here they still haven't gotten around to me. Sigh. ;)

One the one paw, it's good to see people finally discovering their spines, but I have to wonder how many sent in their form with one question answered, then caved when the nice census worker actually showed up...
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oatka:

Do we all act like "good Germans" and go along with this just because the people are nice?

My gripe isn't with these nice people who show up, it's with the divisive race and intrusive personal questions. [/quote]


Claire Wolfe covered this one pretty nicely, even if it's not directly about the census...sorry if it's long.

Evil Came to my Door
by Claire Wolfe

Evil came to my door today. It arrived in a most mundane disguise.

It came in the form of a tiny, slender middle-aged woman -- a woman whose undistinguished face I've already forgotten, though she left only an hour ago. She said she was running for state legislature and wanted my vote.

I looked at the brochure she'd handed me, scanning for a party affiliation. I didn't immediately see one, but her list of qualifications -- wife and mother, advocate for children, schoolteacher, lobbyist for school funds, promoter of infant immunizations, organizer of the state's breastfeeding taskforce -- told her story.

I could see at a glance that, under the various issue listings, from Economy to State Lands, every bit of text was actually concerned, one way or another, with education.

"How do you recommend improving the schools?" I asked.

"Well..." she stumbled, as though the question were unexpected. "Well...class size is very important. We have to have smaller class sizes. That will be expensive, of course. But if teachers get more one-on-one class time, children will grow up to be better citizens and taxpayers."

"How much more will that cost than we're spending now?"

"Well..." The pause again. "Well...I don't know exactly. But smaller classes are _very_ important. We just have to have however much more money it takes. I think of it an investment. Better educated children will grow up to pay more taxes."

She looked up at me earnestly, as if, yes, all Baby Boomers would be delighted to know their children would someday pay even more taxes to support an even bigger government for their sake.

"Where would the money come from?"

"Well, you know, we'll just have to find it somehow if we want our children to grow up to be better citizens and taxpayers. Teaching children to write and things like that is very labor-intensive, you know, and there's no possible way to do it without more taxes of some sort."

I wished her luck and sent her on her way. I was stunned -- though not really surprised -- by her lack of depth in her alleged specialty and by her ignorance of the realities she intended to force on everyone. It was clear she had never given a thought to the consequences of her ideas. Perhaps she didn't even grasp that ideas, put into action, have consequences.

Confidently, she already possessed, or believed she had a right to take by force, everything needed to run the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. Begin with a magical incantation -- "smaller class sizes." Add other people's money. And poof! she would in one swell foop govern an entire state and cure educational problems that a hundred years of other people's money has only exacerbated.

Above all, I was chilled by her assumption -- which she obviously expected me to share -- that the primary purpose of education is to mass produce efficient taxpayers.

My disturbance sent me to the computer to write this article. When the first sentence spilled out, I thought it was far too strong. Evil? Surely not evil, not this small bundle of earnestness. Impractical, yes. Shallow, yes. But ignorant, at worst.

Yet when ignorance seeks to rule, what results?

We know, intellectually, that great evils don't always come from ranting demagogues. We know they come, often as not, from earnest lawyers, bookkeepers and school teachers, who wish only to make us do what's "good for us," regardless of facts, regardless of logic, regardless of cost, regardless of our individual wishes and needs. This isn't news to most of us.

Yet, faced with such people, seeing their friendly expressions, hearing their mellow voices, observing the laugh lines crinkling around their eyes, we seldom allow ourselves to think, "This is the face of evil."

Just as we tend to like our own lawyer while saying lawyers in general should be shark bait, we like the politician at our doorstep, and in our district. We imagine it must be some evil "other" -- some bloated Kennedy; some dour, deal-making Dole; some smug Feinstein; some drooling Schumer -- who's destroying our country. We simply don't want to acknowledge that evil often wears a friendly, familiar, neighborly face.

So it felt strange to hear my own mind saying just that. Yet it's true. That woman -- whom I might have liked, had I met her at party -- was evil because she sought to rule me -- and you, and you, and you -- with the power of her vast, earnest ignorance.

It drives home C.S. Lewis' observation that all evil is ultimately banal. And it reminded me never to give any slack to a politician just because he or she happens to be sincere, pleasant mannered, or honestly committed to a cause.

On the contrary; that's the worst kind. That's the politician to whom we should commit our most unrelenting -- and unforgiving -- vigilance.


© 1997 and 1998 Claire Wolfe. This article may be reprinted for non-commercial purposes, as long as it is reprinted in full with no content changes whatsoever, and is accompanied by this credit line. The article may not be re-titled, edited or excerpted (beyond the limits of the fair use doctrine) without the written permission of the author. For-profit publications will be expected to pay a nominal reprint fee.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




[This message has been edited by Gopher a 45 (edited May 11, 2000).]
 
My visit was last night. I was cutting the lawn and she pulled up in her car and indicated we didn't fill out our form. I was very nice and indicated that we did and had mailed in March. Well, we didn't get it and need to complete one and it will only take about 5 mins. Sure I say. How many people live here? Four. Now I need their names and SS#. Sorry maam, already answered all the Constitution requires. Resulting in the ? mark look on her face. But we need this information. Sorry thats all I am required to answer. But the info. only goes on a registry for 72 yrs and is private. Sorry, I have answered all I intend too. But,,, Sorry you have all the information I will give you. Then something I didn't care for but let it go. Well, will just have to ask your neighbors. Still very polite, fine, go right ahead. I live next to my uncle who will tell nothing so no big deal. But I wanted to ask her how she would feel if I went snooping around her neighbors asking questions about her.
 
I just talked with my sister about this and first let me say this If someone is asking your social security number they are NOT legit! If you are asked a SS# on a form that is NOT a legit form. My sister just showed me copies of the long form and short form there was NO question regarding social security numbers! If census takers are asking this on their own that would be considered fraud and you must report them. They take an oath to uphold the constitution, if they are found leaking any information or asking ss#'s or other questions that do not pertain to the actual questions they can face a $5,000 fine and up to three years in jail.

Cindy, yes she had 20 hours of training. Mostly teaching them what to say when people refuse. They explain to them that the reason for the census was started in 1776 which is part of the consitution that it would be held every 10 years (ok we all know that so I'll skip along here). Today the census is used for many purposes one is so that we can get the right amount of representitives for each district (meaning some areas may need more reps). A neighborhood with alot of children may not have enough parks, if they find that there are so many children living in the area and there is only one park they may decide to put more parks in. Same goes for seniors, if an area has more seniors than last census that area may need more senior programs and senior discounts. As for the race question they basically want to know how many people can't speak English, perhaps they will add more spanish (or whatever language) speaking teachers to schools. (which I dont agree I think if you live here you should speak the language). Someone in another post had mentioned that they took information from the census during the Vietnam war. Roosevelt ordered information from the census to round up Japanese Americans. The surpreme court found it unconstitutional and the information was NOT given out. A good point she made is that if the IRS wants to know what time of day you shampooed your hair, they could do it no problem. Point is they don't care about 'peon' people. I think there are alot of false accusations going around about the census and I hope those that believe it will take a better look at what they are trying to accomplish. I do understand many don't trust the government, I don't either, but some of these questions may be vital to what goes into your neighborhood. When you go to buy a car you give out more personal information than this census, which the government can obtain at anytime. You give your credit card to the foreigner who gets $5 an hour at the store, he/she can write down that information no problem. Of course you do have the right to answer just that one question of how many people live at your home, the workers respect that but they do want to help you understand that this information will go into your neighborhood.

I'm not saying because they are nice to act like good Germans and give them the info LOL, I am just saying try to be polite they are only doing this as a temp job, trying to make some extra money for thier families. Don't take your frustrations about the government out on them.

FWIW , I only answered the first question on my census form. Now that I think about it I think I should have at least answered the kids ages, we do need more parks in our neighborhood. Remember the gov't can get your info even if you don't answer the questions.

Also about these forms going around to give census takers (for what its worth), they have to fill out a form similar to that before they take their oath.

Hope this helped a little. If you have any questions I would be happy to ask my sister for you.

------------------
Sandys' Homepage
RKBA forums
We are as one as we all are the same fighting for one cause -Metallica
 
As a "duly appointed government employee (agent)" I will put this as concisely as possible:

IT SUCKS!

Rules and guidelines change almost daily, absolutely no pay for over-time. Advance of termination date (last day to ask questions) moved from June 30th, to June 23rd, to June 17th.

People's distrust (and WHO can blame them!). If I get any guff after the "How many people lived here on April 1, 2000?" I just thank them and walk away. My supervisor can handle that one if they like.

I take my oath to uphold and defend the Constitution seriously, and I will educate people as I talk to them.

But, I still feel like I have prostituted myself for that money to pay toward our debts...

...it's only a few more weeks...it's only a few more weeks...it's only a few more weeks...

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

[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited May 11, 2000).]
 
Obviously, this job is just like any other. You have all different types of people doing it. You can go to the store and get the Express Line Nazi who won't let you bring 11 items thru the 10-item line, even though you're the only person there, or you can get the one who has his/her own brain and lets you go.

John, as long as you let it go when people refuse to give anymore info, you haven't prostituted yourself. You are upholding the Constitution, so you can be proud of yourself. Aparently, there are others who take their "mission" in a very different way and that's too bad. These people have no respect for the individual and they can't think for themselves. Someday this will come back and bite them in the a$$, regardless of how much info. they intimidated people into giving them. ("It *only* stays on a registry for 72 years????" :confused: )

Sandy, that's very good information you got from your sister. Thanks. :) Like I said, the lady who came to my place didn't even argue when I refused to answer the race questions; she was very polite and professional and just moved on. I admire people like John...that can't be an easy job and if you need the money, you need the money. When they started hiring, I had been laid off for three weeks and i seriously considered it myself. (but I would not have been and "Information Nazi" ;) )

------------------
"...you gotta ask yourself one question...do I feel *lucky*?"
 
answers to questions become public information after 72 years.

sarge83,

you're 'fudging', or someone was pulling a very weird con.

the short form questions have existed essentially sense the first census.


[This message has been edited by 6forsure (edited May 11, 2000).]
 
6forsure,

As a (very) relaxed geneologist, the answers you provide become public record after 72 years (I guess the govt. assumes that you are dead after that time and won't complain). That is why you see lots of people in the history section of the library trying to trace their dead ancestors through the census. Also that is why I said that there were five people living in my house and gave their names. Other than that my decendents can figure out that "Gramp" (hopefully not for MANY MANY years) was a cantankerous old coot.

Greg
 
A neighborhood with a lot of children may not have enough parks, if they find that there are so many children living in the area and there is only one park they may decide to put more parks in.

Local parks are made by city and county governments. The feds aren't involved.

Same goes for seniors, if an area has more seniors than last census that area may need more senior programs and senior discounts.

Senior "programs" are unconstitutional. If there need to be senior programs, they should be provided by the state and local governments, not by the feds. Let the local governments gather this info.

As for the race question they basically want to know how many people can't speak English, perhaps they will add more Spanish (or whatever language) speaking teachers to schools.

The Constitution does not permit the federal government to be involved in education. Besides, knowing a persons "race" does not suggest what languages they speak.

I think there are a lot of false accusations going around about the census and I hope those that believe it will take a better look at what they are trying to accomplish.

The only accusation most of us are making is that the questions being asked are not authorized by the Constitution.

some of these questions may be vital to what goes into your neighborhood.

Then let the city government ask those questions.

When you go to buy a car you give out more personal information than this census

But that is a business transaction. I can avoid many of the questions by paying cash.

The bottom line is that the feds are trying their hardest to get the people to allow them to overstep their authority as outlined in the Constitution. No matter how noble their intentions are, they cannot be permitted to do this.
 
First, off, I'm an enumerator,and some info given here is, well erroneous.

First,there's no place on the questionairre where SS#s are asked for. NO PLACE.....

Second, IMO there's a lot of aggression against the govt being forced on us enumerators.IOW we're scapegoats.

Third, while the long form is a pain in the $%^&*, have you ever filled out the app for a credit card, mortgage, or CCW? That's where they want to know what color TP you use and your Great Granma's politics.

Here's what I think about the long form. Various agencies wanted to gather info and the census mechanism was in place, so adding those questions was cost effective. Info about minorities speaking other langueages than English means knowing what interpreters might be needed for court, how many English classes for adults,etc.

Here's what we DON'T ask, questions about:

Political affiliations

Sexual orientation

Guns

and so on.

Last night I did an interview with a crusty old type kinda like me. He answered the door wearing a Ruger T shirt, and this was the third attempt by me to do the interview. This time it worked out, he had turned his form in late, and I just took the short form info to make sure.

Now I've got a local gun club to join, and I bought some tickets for a raffle on a Les Baer custom 45. The raffle is named after the Md pol, K Hoffman, that introduced legislation banning such raffles. I like that...

Finally, as an amateur genealogist tracing my own family, I can say I'd never have gotten as complete a picture w/o census info.
If Daughter wanted to, she could join the DAR 5 times over, partly based on census info from as early as the first one in 1790.Of course, if she wanted to, I'd consider myself a failure as a parent(G).

Any questions?
 
There are some pieces of information that I'll give out to almost anyone.

Name, Address, Telephone Number, Race.

The first three are available from billions of sources, and the forth is obvious. Heck, 90% of the time, it's even real info.

That's what I put on my census form.
 
My dad walks around collecting census information. He said his supervisor wants the name, the date of birth, and an address. I am unsure why this would be a problem to provide.

My dad really could care less about the information. It is just something for him to do in retirement.
 
Dave McC -

First, off, I'm an enumerator,

I'm sorry. Aside from the basic Constitutional "how many people" question, what persuaded you to get a job going around demanding people to tell you private information (like "how many toilets?") with the legal threat of a $100 fine if they don't answer?

and some info given here is, well erroneous.

Probably so. A lot of what the gov't says about this subject is confusing, like "it's confidential" vs. "past info has been used to throw innocent Americans in concentration camps".

Second, IMO there's a lot of aggression against the govt being forced on us enumerators. IOW we're scapegoats.

The government is going over the line, and you're acting as an agent of the government.

Third, while the long form is a pain in the $%^&*, have you ever filled out the app for a credit card, mortgage, or CCW?

Sure - as a contractual exchange. The bank needed the info to give me a credit card or mortgage. The state needed the info to verify my lack of criminal history. I got something in return. Similarly, Wal-Mart demanded irrelevant personal info when I wanted a simple oil change, and I told them they'll only get my business if they don't ask those questions (I want four quarts of oil and a filter; they don't need to know where I live) and walked out.

On the other hand, the current census tells me I'll get fined $100 if I don't answer all the questions, and I DON'T GET ANYTHING OUT OF THE DEAL.

Various agencies wanted to gather info and the census mechanism was in place, so adding those questions was cost effective.

Convenient, yes. And over the line. They don't need to know how many toilets I have, or my phone number, or ... .

Info about minorities speaking other langueages than English means knowing what interpreters might be needed for court, how many English classes for adults,etc.

And that info has also been used to force tens of thousands of innocent Americans into concentration camps. Look: we trusted the government with this info once before, and they used it to systematically destroy the lives of people of the "wrong" ethnicity.

<snip>Now I've got a local gun club to join,

Gee, ya coulda done that on your own time. Meeting people is nice, but it's no excuse for using MY tax money to line YOUR pockets while hassling people, under penalty of fines, for private information.

Finally, as an amateur genealogist tracing my own family, I can say I'd never have gotten as complete a picture w/o census info.

Some good usually does manage to come from evil.

Any questions?

Yeah: where does the government get the right to spend my tax money to ask me how many toilets I have, and threaten me with a $100 fine if I don't answer? (Yes, the fine has been, um, suspended, but the questions are still asked, the tax money still spent, the harrasment continues, and the forms all threaten a fine and there's no formal mention of the fine suspension.) I'm asking for a coherent legal answer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top