Printable View
Are there legal and/or lawful objections to getting fingerprinted at Government Offices? When one is applying for Food Stamps for example?
There appears to be only a handful of states that require one to be fingerprinted in order to receive food stamps.
Any way to get out of this requirement and still get the benefits?
NopeQuote:
Originally Posted by somebody
He who accepts the benefit suffers its burden.
You have a right to decline as do they.
You aren't going to find freedom under guardianship or as a beneficiary of a trust ....
Have you looked deeply into this matter prior to replying. Finding freedom under guardinship or as a beneficiary of a trust has nothing to do with this.
Food Stamps is a Federal Program from what I understand. But it gets implemented at the state level. Now more than 40 states DO NOT REQUIRE fingerprints in order to get benefits.
There must be a way to get the benefits in the remaining states that do require it without having to provide them as well.
You might want to reconsider my words again.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
He who accepts the benefit suffers its burden.
If an applicant is applying for welfare, it is implied the applicant is unable to take care of himself or herself and is incompetent.
The applicant is looking for someone to take care of them ... a daddy ... a guardian.
Government is willing to be your guardian so long as you waive rights in the process.
Protection draws subjugation near to it.
Then why not you test the waters by refusing to supply fingerprints?Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
If you really want some gusto, take them to court after refusal to see what the courts decide.
I could supply some court cases to underscore all that I stated, but it appears you already have your mind set.
If you want constitutional rights, you have to come out of the programs.
1. I wasn't talking about welfare.
2. The benefit (food stamps) does not have a burden (fingerprinting in 45 states or so). Thus it should be possible to avoid this burden in the 5 states as well.
You seem to have overlooked this when you were reading my opening post.
I would like to hear from someone else besides you at this point.
Thanks
Unless I am mistaken, food stamps are a form of welfare.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
Why don't you move to a State that doesn't have fingerprinting requirements?
I think you are going to get the same from anyone else here.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
You need to make a choice: benefits or rights. You can have one or the other, but not both.
Please name at least one of the states that require fingerprinting.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
Also, I'm glad you found this site, somebody. I remember you from SJC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
Let's pretend it was a knee-jerk response.
What you would do here is tell us the Statute (State) that is cited at the Food Stamp distribution center (or whatever they call it). Then look at that, and it will likely cite the US Code, that allows states to utilize the SSN. In other words the SSA has propriety "ownership" of all SSNs but has consented that States may use it for the purposes of identification even when the SSA cannot.
Very likely you will not find any verbiage about fingerprinting.
Good luck convincing the Food Stamp clerk though.
I came across something like this regarding fishing licenses. I only fish for survival purposes so my thought was Search and Rescue only costs $1.25 like an insurance policy if you keep a current fishing license.
42 U.S.C. §408
C.R.S. §33-6-107Quote:
(a)(7)(B) with intent to deceive, falsely represents a number to be the social security account number assigned by the Commissioner of Social Security to him or to another person, when in fact such number is not the social security account number assigned by the Commissioner of Social Security to him or to such other person; or
I do not have a Social Security Number. But look at that notice at Sports Authority. If the employee costs that storefront its licensing franchise with the State, he will be fired. The Notice is directed around two tangential subjects - 1) that the store will lose its franchise to sell licenses, and 2) the offense of providing false information.Quote:
(2) (a) Any person who makes a false statement or provides false information in connection...
It is not about Social Security or being required to provide a SSN.
I suspect that if you look into it, and show what you discover to a supervisor at the Food Stamp outlet you might be able to get by without giving fingerprints. But then again, getting the benefit is subject to policy, law or not - usually.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. Meanwhile I will simply treat Search and Rescue like an extension of the municipal eleemosynary corporation and simply accept my inheritance.
It is, however, possible to have a private lien on a social security account or entity.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
***
Regarding fingerprinting, there is a helpful perspective that takes in a larger span of time just at the moment of fingerprinting (whether its associated with a 'jail booking' or Foodstamp issuance)..it involves sending written communication that the fingerprint is one one whose intent to neither assume liability nor culpability for the DOE JOHN H entity. So many seem content and taught to rattle of their state of mind at some clerk when its often best to be cool to the clerk and share your piece of mind IN WRITING with, say, a Secretary of State or an Attorney General or the like.
Furthermore, I've issued my own fishing license. I suspect that State of Colorado knows that those who are exempt don't need licenses anyway--at least not ones issued by the State of Colorado. I agree, that the Search & Rescue is just an extension of further State services.
P.S. Fortunately fishing for survival isn't necessary a commercial activity.
finger printing
instrument under hand??
a lateral thought I had
DEEDs being in the background of the mind at the time of reading the post
...and as to attempting to label a food stamp as not a benefit - who holds titles to the objects in question? praps that could aid you
Me thinks the poster already has his mind set and is simply looking for supporters ....Quote:
Originally Posted by John Booth
That's not me. I had a different handle on SJC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rock Anthony
Can you please expound on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Booth
I have not made my mind one way or the other. I do think however that there is a way to get these benefits, being that they are facilitated by USDA (at the federal level) but given out at the state level. There has to be a way to state one's objection to fingerprinting solely based on the fact that they are not required in 45 states or so, and have this objection held up. I do need some case law on this though.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
I know you cannot be of help, hence I asked for some other people to respond. I understand that it makes you feel good to state things like "You can't get both benefits and rights" and other things commonly used by freedom loving people, but I think it is out of place here. That is not to say that generally speaking that is not true or should be taken into consideration.
Thus, I would appreciate it if you let other people with more substantive information to weigh in.
Or are you just trying to post as much as possible and be involved in almost every thread and be the #1 poster as you were on SJC?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rock Anthony
It would help if you'd provide the State in question so that anyone here may search through that State's statutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
Ahh, my mistake. There was a guy at SJC that used the handle 'nobody'. Your handle here is 'somebody'.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
What was your handle at SJC?
Somebody, two words; conditional acceptance
Then if you need case law, you need to go to the law library.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
Also if it means that much to ya, take it to court, but make sure to suffer the injury first.
In my opinion, you'll waste your time, but hey I can't fault someone for fighting for their beliefs.
I know you aren't listening. I understand your mind is made up and unable to take in substantive information.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
"You can't get both benefits and rights" is not what I typed. If you are going to cite me, at least cite me verbatim.
If you cite like the above in documents, expect to be shot down quickly.
I'm not blocking anyone from posting.
This hardly qualifies as a proper sentence let alone a substantive inquiry.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
Persons who desire welfare benefits aren't typically sojourners to a board such as this.
I am not interested in your opinion - that's why I asked for other people to weigh in.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
I am not listening to you - on this thread yes, that is why I asked for you not to respond any more. But I am listening to everyone else who responded.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
WOW! This is why I cannot listen to anything you say. This is what you stated earlier on this thread:Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
This concretely proves that you do no know what you are talking about when you post on this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
Moreover my cite above was not intended to be a cite as one usually cites in a document prepared for legal purposes. This is a forum - not a legal document. Anyone with even a 6th grade education can see that what I said you said and what you actually said is almost the same and is absolutely the same considering the purpose.
You not seeing this clearly is why I do not want to hear from you anymore. How many more times do I need to say this.
I didn't say you were.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
1. Did you do an investigation into this or is this yet another one of your opinions? This is rhetorical - don't bother answering.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
2. Hardly anything discussed on this board is "typical" when it comes to dealing with the issues that face truly freedom loving people out there.
3. Food Stamps are not considered welfare benefits.
Finally, please do not post on this thread anymore as you are cluttering it with your unneeded opinions, not paying attention to the essence of what is being posted and asked.
EZ, good to see you man. Can you please expound on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by EZrhythm
Not opinion. There is case law to support the position I am taking and expressing on this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
Since you fail to understand the essence of what is shared, I'll keep it to myself.
Only thing it concretely proves is that you are good at twisting words while failing to consider what was offered.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
Don't twist my words. If you attorn what I say, you shall be corrected immediately.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
Well then either clarify your position for me or stop responding to my posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
Those are your options.
Yep, I've did enough to know that he who accepts the benefit suffers its burden.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
As to #3, you will need to provide me a evidence where it states, "Food stamps are not considered welfare benefits".
Without proof, it is merely an unsubstantiated claim and your opinion.
I conditionally accept your offer provided you provide my evidence "3. Food Stamps are not considered welfare benefits."Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
Did you see what I did there? No twisting of your words either. That was verbatim by the way.
Refute this if you can:
Quote:
WELFARE
The welfare system in the United States began in the 1930s, during the Great Depression. After the Great Society legislation of the 1960s, for the first time a person who was not elderly or disabled could receive a living from the American government.[18] Aid could include general welfare payments, health care through Medicaid, food stamps, special payments for pregnant women and young mothers, and federal and state housing benefits.[18] In 1968, 4.1% of families were headed by a woman on welfare; by 1980, the percentage increased to 10%.[18] In the 1970s, California was the U.S. state with the most generous welfare system.[19] Virtually all food stamp costs are paid by the federal government.[20] In 2008, 28.7 percent of the households headed by single women were considered poor.[21]
Quote:
Welfare Information
Types of Welfare Available
The type and amount of aid available to individuals and dependent children varies from state to state. When the Federal Government gave control back to the states there was no longer one source and one set of requirements. Most states offer basic aid such as health care, food stamps, child care assistance, unemployment, cash aid, and housing assistance.
Quote:
Welfare - A Brief History of Welfare Reform
During the 1960s President LYNDON B. JOHNSON's administration declared an ostensible "war on poverty" with its GREAT SOCIETY programs: Head Start, the Job Corps, food stamps, and MEDICAID funded education, job training, direct food assistance, and direct medical assistance. Although the poverty rate declined in the 1960s, more than 4 million new recipients signed up for welfare.
2002 Indicators of WELFARE dependence
And what does that government report talk about? Could it be the Food Stamp program?
If you are unable to grasp that food stamps are apart of welfare, you may want to forgo failing to provide fingerprints until you can get to square 1.
While you are on this fingerprint kick why not throw in failing to provide an SSN for good measure?
First you need to understand this:
ig·no·ra·mus
[ig-nuh-rey-muhs, -ram-uhs]
–noun, plural -mus·es.
an extremely ignorant person.
If you do, then you need to reread everything and understand that I did not misquote you because I was not trying to quote you in the first place. I said what you said. The fact that you said it in slightly (really really slightly) different words irrelevant and further proves my point that you did not read my opening post or anything thing that I posted properly.
Stop offering your opinions when you fail to understand the essence of what is being asked.
Stop bringing peripheral issues such as food stamps being considered welfare (it is according to your article but it is not according to various different sources that I have, which I will not get into now) as it moves the thread away from the questions that were asked and clutters it for those that have read through everything to see what is really being discussed and what the real questions are.
You can't refute my posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebody
You can't support your claims.
I can't reason with one lacking reason.
Good luck, son.