Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Objections to Fingerprinting at Governmnet Offices

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by John Booth View Post
    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 ....

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Rock Anthony View Post
    Also, I'm glad you found this site, somebody. I remember you from SJC.
    That's not me. I had a different handle on SJC.

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by John Booth View Post
    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
    Can you please expound on this.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    Me thinks the poster already has his mind set and is simply looking for supporters ....
    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.

    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?

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Rock Anthony View Post
    Please name at least one of the states that require fingerprinting.

    Also, I'm glad you found this site, somebody. I remember you from SJC.
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post

    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.
    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 somebody View Post
    That's not me. I had a different handle on SJC.
    Ahh, my mistake. There was a guy at SJC that used the handle 'nobody'. Your handle here is 'somebody'.

    What was your handle at SJC?
    Last edited by Rock Anthony; 07-12-11 at 01:47 AM.

  6. #16
    Somebody, two words; conditional acceptance

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by somebody View Post
    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.
    Then if you need case law, you need to go to the law library.
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by somebody
    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.
    I know you aren't listening. I understand your mind is made up and unable to take in substantive information.
    "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.

    Quote Originally Posted by somebody
    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?
    This hardly qualifies as a proper sentence let alone a substantive inquiry.

    Persons who desire welfare benefits aren't typically sojourners to a board such as this.
    Last edited by shikamaru; 07-12-11 at 01:23 PM.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    Then if you need case law, you need to go to the law library.
    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 am not interested in your opinion - that's why I asked for other people to weigh in.


    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    I know you aren't listening. I understand your mind is made up and unable to take in substantive information.
    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 View Post
    "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.
    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 View Post
    You need to make a choice: benefits or rights. You can have one or the other, but not both.
    This concretely proves that you do no know what you are talking about when you post on this thread.

    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    I'm not blocking anyone from posting.
    I didn't say you were.



    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    Persons who desire welfare benefits aren't typically sojourners to a board such as this.
    1. Did you do an investigation into this or is this yet another one of your opinions? This is rhetorical - don't bother answering.
    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.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by EZrhythm View Post
    Somebody, two words; conditional acceptance
    EZ, good to see you man. Can you please expound on this.

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by somebody View Post
    I am not interested in your opinion - that's why I asked for other people to weigh in.
    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.
    Not opinion. There is case law to support the position I am taking and expressing on this thread.
    Since you fail to understand the essence of what is shared, I'll keep it to myself.


    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:

    This concretely proves that you do no know what you are talking about when you post on this thread.
    Only thing it concretely proves is that you are good at twisting words while failing to consider what was offered.

    Quote Originally Posted by somebody
    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.
    Don't twist my words. If you attorn what I say, you shall be corrected immediately.

    Quote Originally Posted by somebody
    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.
    Well then either clarify your position for me or stop responding to my posts.
    Those are your options.

    Quote Originally Posted by somebody
    1. Did you do an investigation into this or is this yet another one of your opinions? This is rhetorical - don't bother answering.
    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.
    Yep, I've did enough to know that he who accepts the benefit suffers its burden.

    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by somebody
    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.
    I conditionally accept your offer provided you provide my evidence "3. Food Stamps are not considered welfare benefits."
    Did you see what I did there? No twisting of your words either. That was verbatim by the way.
    Last edited by shikamaru; 07-13-11 at 12:01 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •