Gadsden Flag license plate

[level.eleven]

Another thought regarding tyranny/taxation/plating a vehicle....

Without doing a ton of research on the topic, don't different states asses excise tax differently? In Indiana, the cost for me to plate my 1972 C-10 pickup is not the same as the cost to plate a 2010 Audi A8. I believe because excise taxes are applied at the BMV instead of at the time of purchase. Either you pay a monster tax at purchase, or you pay deferred taxes over the life of the vehicle. Either way, you are paying to "own" property. My wife, a buckeye, paid $30 a year regardless of make/model/age. However, she was hit up front for owning her property. I guess this is mainly directed at dross. In Indiana, I don't see how you can call the amount I pay for a vehicle ID number a "legitimate use of government".

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Replace the word firearms/ordinances with firearms in your sentence. Still stand by it? That is a bit of a red herring (straw man?) point but why is it their business what I drive, other than perpetuation of the gaping maw of our hard earned money?

I would suggest that interstate roads have a truckload of a lot more to do with the Commerce Clause than firearms do... There's at least a decent reason there.

Now as far as how it is IMPLEMENTED.... I might agree that it's been VERY poorly done, overdone etc.


To equate roads with firearms in this case just doesn't fly imho... Red Herring indeed.

 

[dross]

Replace the word firearms/ordinances with firearms in your sentence. Still stand by it? That is a bit of a red herring (straw man?) point but why is it their business what I drive, other than perpetuation of the gaping maw of our hard earned money?

Even if a justifiable for communal possession of roads case can be built, the principle how much the public motorist is taxed for owning a car is pretty high. The taxes being generated for roads is exponentially higher than taxes collected for it.

The taxes on a gallon of gas is about 45 cents a gallon. Combine this with the tax you paid on the vehicle, the tax paid for your driver's license, the taxes spent on purchasing the car you own, the taxes on the title of your car. Can you claim ownership on it if you're truly continuing to pay tax on the car?

The Cato Institute has a pretty good write up about how much a $10,000 car costs due to taxes, fees, and licensing. This figure does NOT include any taxes, interest, fees and/or closing costs on a possible loan.

Their write up:

A Consumer Guide To Taxes: How Much Do You Really Pay In Taxes?

The sum of it:


Retail sales price of car 10,000
Taxes
Michigan sales tax $ 400
Michigan income tax 784
FICA payroll taxes 1,303
Federal income tax 4,551
Total taxes 7,038
Earnings required to purchase car 17,038

"Don't tread on me, unless it's transportation," wasn't part of the original statement nor does it represent the modern manifestation of what the Gasden Flag represents for the modern libertarian.

But I could be wrong about everything listed above. I dunno.

Thats the beauty of government. You can always find 51% of people that would see governments actions as legitimate. I bet I could go to any Republican stronghold and get the people's approval for the registration of 30 round Glock mags all couched nicely in a legitimate government interest. Do government's have a legitimate interest to register firearms and not allow them in public areas since we all "own them"? I am not entirely interested in some fairy tale talk about a constitution either.

How do you arrive at your conclusion that government has a legitimate interest in regulating traffic, the crux of consumer economies?

Putting all that aside....fine. The plating of a vehicle could be seen as necessary for policing society. A number linking the vehicle to the individual. Now, why do I have to pay hundreds of dollars a year to have a 1 inch sticker mailed to my house when absolutely nothing changed regarding my vehicle or my person?

A couple of things.

I don't see firearm ownership or possession as analogous to operating a vehicle on a public road.

I can't disagree if you argue that the taxes and regulations are too much, or too onerous. I think they probably are.

The central question is what are the legitimate powers of government. I think that regulating commonly owned and used properties and facilities is one of those legitimate powers. If your basic philosophy is anarchist, fine. I disagree, but I don't spend much time arguing with anarchists since our premeses are too disparate.

If you want to use firearms as an analogy, look at hunting laws. The government regulates hunting because the animals belong to us all. Do you guys disagree with hunting laws? Not particular specifics of some laws, but the principle of having hunting regulations at all.

Do you think we shouldn't have any traffic laws, or vehicle safety laws? If you don't, okay, we're too far apart to have a reasonable discussion. If you do, we agree in principle, we're just arguing about the specifics.

 

[IrishSon of Liberty]

Maybe it's just me, but it appears that there is a growing number of yellow bellied, basement bloggers on this site.

Two years ago I paid a handsome fee to have a custom Gadsden Flag made for the back window of my full size SUV. The entire back window is, and has been, the beautiful symbol of outspoken frustration. Likeswise, I've rotated a few different political stickers on the gate below the window. They currently read as follow:

"It's not Left vs Right - It's the State vs YOU"

"Dear Congressman, Perhaps your next term should be in Jail"

"I Made the DHS List"
(Includes symbol for Department of Homeland Security)

and finally, right smack dab in the middle, and just above where my Gadsden license plate will go, it reads....

"If my stickers offend you, then you're part of the problem"


Over the past few years, yes, I've had people shake their heads, and I've seen one guy really make a fool of himself getting irate while sitting at a stop light. In fact, I even had one young man, while driving his car at 70+mph, spin around in his drivers seat and using his hand, make the motions as those he was shooting at me. Regardless, I could care less. I refuse to be silent any longer, and will continue to express my views. Likewise, I have received overwhelming support in favor of my stickers. The positive reactions far outnumber the negatives. Now, before some of you start claiming that it's fine here in the heartland, but that's not true everywhere, allow me to set you straight.

Over this past July 4th weekend, I drove to, and spent the weekend in Detroit. I don't mean the rich subs of Detroit either. I was about seven miles from Dearbornistan, driving through UAW country, in my Toyota! I've also made numerous trips to Chicago, getting off at Stony Island, and driving up 41 to get to Wrigley Field. I've made trips into Ohio, all around Indianapolis, and will soon be heading to Nashville, Tennessee. I typically drive twenty to thirty thousand miles a year in my truck.

The incident where the driver threatened to shoot, was right here in Indiana, driving down highway 30, and yes, the other guy was from Indiana too.

 

[beararms1776]

If it's good enough for constituants, it's good enough for me.

 

[Pocketman]

Pardon me for being contentious, but I've yet to see anything that indicates this is a "Gadsden" license plate. Are we being presumptuous? "Don't Tread on Me" and the rattlesnake have deeper American roots than the artwork Christopher Gadsden used on his flag. There were several other "snake flags" used during the Revolution. Benjamin Franklin was the first to use the analogy in a political context. The rattlesnake and "Don't Tread on Me" is on the Navy Jack, which G.W. Bush resurected after 9/11 and flies on all U.S. warships.

The Tea Party movement's use of the flag is historically incorrect and IMO cheapens the flag's meaning. A Gadsden license plate will just appear to most as an endorsement of the movemment and be met with resistance.

 

[.45 Dave]

I have a tea party bumper sticker that I made myself. It says: Revolution is Brewing: The New American Tea Party. It look very nice by the way, very professional.
I also have a DTOM bumper sticker. These are both 4 X 8 inches in size.
And I also have a 3'per flag about 3X5 on the drivers side front bumper under the Ranger logo. So far no one has hassled me about any of them and I've had three people ask me where I got the Tea Party sticker and the DTOM sticker 'cause they'd like one too. So I don't think Police or even Liberals will hassle you about the license plate if you decide to get one.

 

[88GT]

Let's see...we've got people being searched because they had a gun related sticker on their car. I can only imagine what a Gadsden plate would result in. With the PTB being advised by DHS and other fusion centers (like the MIAC Report) it's not worth the potential hassles. Better to blend in with the rest of the masses.

OPSEC 101!

people will continue to convince themselves that theyre free and freedom will continue getting diluded

It's "diluted" and your presumptuous arrogance that only you are smart enough to see where we're headed is just farking annoying. Your pores probably exude condescension in liquid form, don't they? Crikey, for once could you pretend not to be such an arse and quit belittling everybody who doesn't worship from the same book of hate and bitterness?

Replace the word firearms/ordinances with firearms in your sentence. Still stand by it? That is a bit of a red herring (straw man?) point but why is it their business what I drive, other than perpetuation of the gaping maw of our hard earned money?

Even if a justifiable for communal possession of roads case can be built, the principle how much the public motorist is taxed for owning a car is pretty high. The taxes being generated for roads is exponentially higher than taxes collected for it.

It's also a red herring to equate registration with taxing. While practically I know the two go hand-in-hand, they don't actually mean the same thing. The tendency to equate all government regulation with unfair taxation and control is getting out of hand around here. Government has legitimate roles and obligations (and the tendency to overstep them by current governments does not negate the legitimacy), and administrative regulation kinda happens to be one of them. You wouldn't really argue that government doesn't have the right to set regulations involving the rules of the road (drive on the right side, left turners yield to right turners unless other wise indicated, etc.), would you? The only logical alternative is a system of privately owned roads. And then there'd be metric ton crapload of whining about having to pay to use it.


Whether or not registration alone falls under the scope of reasonable administrative regulation is up for debate. But at least let's be accurate in our language when we discuss things. Please and thank you.

 

[machete]

You wouldn't really argue that government doesn't have the right to set regulations involving the rules of the road (drive on the right side, left turners yield to right turners unless other wise indicated, etc.), would you?

why not??? free market theory says that people act to protect themselves,,,adam smith,,,why wouldnt people figure out customs to protect themselves on the road??? watch people walk around the mall,,,they dont knock each other over... the seed of big government and control got planted in you deep...

 

[theweakerbrother]

It's also a red herring to equate registration with taxing. While practically I know the two go hand-in-hand, they don't actually mean the same thing. The tendency to equate all government regulation with unfair taxation and control is getting out of hand around here. Government has legitimate roles and obligations (and the tendency to overstep them by current governments does not negate the legitimacy), and administrative regulation kinda happens to be one of them. You wouldn't really argue that government doesn't have the right to set regulations involving the rules of the road (drive on the right side, left turners yield to right turners unless other wise indicated, etc.), would you? The only logical alternative is a system of privately owned roads. And then there'd be metric ton crapload of whining about having to pay to use it.


Whether or not registration alone falls under the scope of reasonable administrative regulation is up for debate. But at least let's be accurate in our language when we discuss things. Please and thank you.

You're adventure in missing the point of my post is egregious. I realize that taxation is here to stay. I realize that the collective usage of government projects (owned by the people) may be reasonable to charge for their usage. The difference between what I'm saying and what you're misreading is pretty stark.

If you're not upset at the nickle and dime-ing of your wallet (purse?) from Uncle Sugar at every opportunity, I don't suppose you'll ever empathize with the justifiable griping that comes with being overtaxed. Did you bother to even read the linked article from the Cato Institute? My guess is no. If not, you owe it to yourself to read the words of someone much smarter than myself regarding taxation and public road usage.

Again, the simple question is asked but unanswered:

Should government have the ability to charge one cent more for roads (and maintenance therein) than what their actual cost is?

The government is constantly and consistently taking in more revenue for revenue's sake and continually burdening the tax payer. I'm not asking to be uncharged while I cruise away enjoying all the perks and benefits of things I didn't pay for; I'm asking to be charged fairly for my road usage. From the Cato Institute's sources, it doesn't look like we're getting a fair deal out of how we're currently being taxed but some people are okay with it?

The modern interpretation of what the Gadsden flag stands for and its assimilation into popculturelukewarmconservativism will continue with a collective "meh" if people think they are sticking it to .gov by waving their black flag of individualism by "flying" this symbol on their license plate. All the while, the irony is lost on nearly everyone.

All the while, Napolitano will continue send out Homeland Security memos to Wal-Mart televisions asking all patrons who have Gadsden Flag license plates to report themselves to management for cultural re-education.

 

[level.eleven]

It's also a red herring to equate registration with taxing. While practically I know the two go hand-in-hand, they don't actually mean the same thing. The tendency to equate all government regulation with unfair taxation and control is getting out of hand around here.

Vehicle registration based on the value of the vehicle is a deductible personal property tax. Surtax, wheel tax, axle tax...these all get assessed when you register your vehicle. Registration of the vehicle is a secondary aspect of this process. One side of this discussion wouldn't have a very solid point if plating your vehicle was limited to just that, getting the vehicle, the plate, and the person in a database. Like every single program in the histories of governments, it has bloated well beyond its initial purpose and has simply turned in a way to extract cash from citizens.

 

[level.eleven]

You're adventure in missing the point of my post is egregious. I realize that taxation is here to stay. I realize that the collective usage of government projects (owned by the people) may be reasonable to charge for their usage. The difference between what I'm saying and what you're misreading is pretty stark.

If you're not upset at the nickle and dime-ing of your wallet (purse?) from Uncle Sugar at every opportunity, I don't suppose you'll ever empathize with the justifiable griping that comes with being overtaxed. Did you bother to even read the linked article from the Cato Institute? My guess is no. If not, you owe it to yourself to read the words of someone much smarter than myself regarding taxation and public road usage.

Again, the simple question is asked but unanswered:

Should government have the ability to charge one cent more for roads (and maintenance therein) than what their actual cost is?

The government is constantly and consistently taking in more revenue for revenue's sake and continually burdening the tax payer. I'm not asking to be uncharged while I cruise away enjoying all the perks and benefits of things I didn't pay for; I'm asking to be charged fairly for my road usage. From the Cato Institute's sources, it doesn't look like we're getting a fair deal out of how we're currently being taxed but some people are okay with it?

The modern interpretation of what the Gadsden flag stands for and its assimilation into popculturelukewarmconservativism will continue with a collective "meh" if people think they are sticking it to .gov by waving their black flag of individualism by "flying" this symbol on their license plate. All the while, the irony is lost on nearly everyone.

All the while, Napolitano will continue send out Homeland Security memos to Wal-Mart televisions asking all patrons who have Gadsden Flag license plates to report themselves to management for cultural re-education.

Good post. Like I said, this conversation wouldn't be occurring if plating a vehicle were about joining a number with a car with an owner.