Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jetgraphics, are we to assume that you don't pay taxes or pay attention to your behavior as it relates to the laws of your town, county, state, nation?
Jetgraphics, are we to assume that you don't pay taxes or pay attention to your behavior as it relates to the laws of your town, county, state, nation?
Which revenue taxable activities do you refer to?
No government instituted to secure rights can tax said rights.
As the Declaration of Independence reminds us, governments are instituted to secure rights. They were never delegated power to infringe, tax or diminish those rights it was created to secure.
"The individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege of existing. The corporation is an artificial entity which owes its existence and charter powers to the state; but, the individual's rights to live and own property are NATURAL RIGHTS for the enjoyment of which an excise [tax] cannot be imposed."
Redfield vs Fisher, 292 P. 813, at 819.
" The right to labor and to its protection from unlawful interference is a constitutional as well as a common-law right. Every man has a natural right to the fruits of his own industry."
48 Am Jur 2d, Section 2, p. 80
‘The right to follow any of the common occupations of life is an inalienable right…’ And ‘It has been well said that ‘the property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable. The patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his owns hands, and to hinder his employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property.’’
U.S. Supreme Court, Butcher’s Union Co. v Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746 (1883)
‘Included in the right of personal liberty and the right of private property- partaking of the nature of each- is the right to make contracts for the acquisition of property. Chief among such contracts is that of personal employment, by which labor and other services are exchanged for money or other forms of property.’
Coppage v Kansas, 236 U.S. 1 (1915)
" Any claim that this statute is a taxing statute would be immediately open to severe constitutional objections. If it could be said that the state had the POWER TO TAX A RIGHT, this would enable the state to DESTROY RIGHTS guaranteed by the constitutions through the use of oppressive taxation. The question herein, is one of the state taxing the right of travel by the ordinary modes of the day, and whether this is a legitimate object of state taxation. The views advanced herein are neither novel nor unsupported by authority. The question of the taxing power of the states has been repeatedly considered by the High Court. The right of the states to impede or embarrass the constitutional operations of the the U.S. Government or the Rights which the citizens hold under it, has been uniformly denied."
McCulloch v. Maryland 4 Wheat 316.
"A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution."
Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 US 105, at 113 (1943).
“The income tax is, therefore, not a tax on income as such. It is an excise tax with respect to certain activities and PRIVILEGES which is measured by reference to the income which they produce. The income is not the subject of the tax: it is the basis for determining the amount of the tax.”
- - - F. Morse Hubbard, Treasury Department legislative draftsman. House Congressional Record March 27th 1943, page 2580.
‘When a court refers to an income tax being in the nature of an excise, it is merely stating that the tax is not on the property itself, but rather it is a fee for the PRIVILEGE of receiving gain from the property. The tax is based upon the amount of the gain, not the value of the property.'
John R. Luckey, Legislative Attorney with the Library of Congress, ‘Frequently Asked Questions Concerning The Federal Income Tax' (C.R.S. Report for Congress 92-303A (1992)).
‘The terms ‘excise tax' and ‘privilege tax' are synonymous. The two are often used interchangeably.'
- - - American Airways v. Wallace 57 F.2d 877, 880
‘Excises are taxes laid upon the manufacture, sale or consumption of commodities within the country, upon licenses to pursue certain occupation and upon corporate PRIVILEGES.’ ‘…the requirement to pay such taxes involves the exercise of a PRIVILEGE…’
- - - U.S. Supreme Court, Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107
"The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers, and not to nontaxpayers. The latter are without their scope. No procedure is prescribed for nontaxpayers, and no attempt is made to annul any of their RIGHTS and remedies in due course of law. With them Congress does not assume to deal, and they are neither of the subject nor of the object of the revenue laws..."
- - - Economy Plumbing & Heating v. U.S., 470 F2d. 585 (1972)
If you've been paying taxes to live, work, travel, buy, sell, and own, perhaps you should inquire as to which revenue taxable privilege is the basis for the tax. You may have waived / surrendered your endowed rights.
Answer the question. Your posts have the tone of a believer in the sovereign citizen methodology, which I do not argue with as to its morality and adherence to natural law. But, as I am sure you know, such thinkers are a main target of the government that exists on the ground. In my own state and many others, the state and other police forces are trained at the academy that a sovereign citizen is likely the greatest threat to their safety, which sets the tone for their engagement with such people before they ever meet the first one. All the paper and words in the world does a man no good when his opponent is willing to resort to force in order to impose something on him. You fail to pay income tax, you end up in prison, or a pauper, or both, as Peter Schiff did. He did not go to jail for skipping tax payments, though, he went for showing others that they could legally refuse to. You fail to pay property rent to the county, the sheriff (shire reef in old terminology) will come with force to take your possessions. You refuse to pay sales tax, the vendor won't sell you the product. At the base of all taxation is the threat of force. We are peasants, working the shire for the lords. It has been remodeled so the peasants are more comfortable and the dynamic is harder to see for the ignorant, but it is indeed the same dynamic. And the Declaration of Independence does not stop bullets. Government is at its most basic, force. Until you figure out how to outmatch that, words are just words. So answer the question. Are we to assume that you don't pay taxes or pay attention to your behavior as it relates to the laws of your town, county, state, nation?
Answer the question. Your posts have the tone of a believer in the sovereign citizen methodology, which I do not argue with as to its morality and adherence to natural law. But, as I am sure you know, such thinkers are a main target of the government that exists on the ground. In my own state and many others, the state and other police forces are trained at the academy that a sovereign citizen is likely the greatest threat to their safety, which sets the tone for their engagement with such people before they ever meet the first one. All the paper and words in the world does a man no good when his opponent is willing to resort to force in order to impose something on him. You fail to pay income tax, you end up in prison, or a pauper, or both, as Peter Schiff did. He did not go to jail for skipping tax payments, though, he went for showing others that they could legally refuse to. You fail to pay property rent to the county, the sheriff (shire reef in old terminology) will come with force to take your possessions. You refuse to pay sales tax, the vendor won't sell you the product. At the base of all taxation is the threat of force. We are peasants, working the shire for the lords. It has been remodeled so the peasants are more comfortable and the dynamic is harder to see for the ignorant, but it is indeed the same dynamic. And the Declaration of Independence does not stop bullets. Government is at its most basic, force. Until you figure out how to outmatch that, words are just words. So answer the question. Are we to assume that you don't pay taxes or pay attention to your behavior as it relates to the laws of your town, county, state, nation?
Oh, this is rich. The self-proclaimed "outlaw" calling out the sovereign citizen. Let the purse swinging begin!
Answer the question. Your posts have the tone of a believer in the sovereign citizen methodology.
There is no such thing as a sovereign citizen. That is an oxymoron. Since that is the first principle of your retort, it voids the remainder.
FYI
. . .
American people are "sovereigns without subjects". They have powers and rights.
American citizens are subjects of sovereigns. They have privileges and immunities.
. . .
". . . at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves. . ."
- - - Justice John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 2 Dall. 419 419 (1793) https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremec...CR_0002_0419_Z
"The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different states in this union, the free inhabitants of each of these states, ... shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states ..."
[Article IV of the Articles of Confederation (1777)]
“Free inhabitants” = sovereigns who did not consent to be subject citizens
“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion. . .”
- - - United States Constitution, Article 4, Section 4.
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the PEOPLE.”
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the PEOPLE.”
- - - Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution
What rights and what powers?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- - - Declaration of Independence, 1776
Note: PEOPLE (sovereigns) have rights and powers (endowed by our Creator).
Citizens (subjects) have privileges and immunities (granted by the government).
__ Citizens are NOT sovereigns __
CITIZEN - ... Citizens are members of a political community who, in their associative capacity, have established or SUBMITTED themselves to the dominion of government for the promotion of the general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as collective rights.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed. p.244
"... the term 'citizen,' in the United States, is analogous to the term "SUBJECT" in the common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government. ... he who before was a "subject of the King" is now a citizen of the State."
- - - State v. Manuel, 20 N.C. 144 (1838)
SUBJECT - One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws.
...Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1425
(Note: there is only one country with a "republican form" of government, where the people are sovereign.)
Article 4, Section 2 - State citizens
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
. . .
Please note: citizens have mandatory civic duties that void endowed rights. By definition, a citizen is a subject. In America, citizenship cannot be imposed at birth without violating the Declaration of Independence, the republican form of government, and the 13th amendment barring involuntary servitude.
. . .
REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT. . . The fourth section of the fourth article of the constitution, directs that "the United States shall guaranty to every state in the Union a republican form of government." The form of government is to be guarantied, WHICH SUPPOSES A FORM ALREADY ESTABLISHED, and this is the republican form of government the United States have undertaken to protect.
- - - Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 6th edition, 1856
. . .
The republican form existed BEFORE the USCON, thus it cannot be a “constitutional republic.”
. . .
Under the subsection:
CONSTITUTION, Art. 4, Sec. 4. The guarantee of a republican form of government to every "state" means to its people and not to its government: Texas v. White. 7 Wall. (U. S.) 700, 19 L. Ed. 227.
- - - Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 8th ed. (1914), P.635
The republican form is guaranteed to the PEOPLE (sovereigns) not to the state governments (oath bound subjects of the U.S. government).
= = = = <<>> = = = =
• In America, if you have endowed rights and powers, you’re under the republican form of government.
• If instead of endowed rights, you have "constitutional rights" (privileges and immunities), and mandatory civic duties, you’re under the constitutionally limited indirect democracy that serves the people in the republican form of government - by your consent.
• If you have socialist obligations (in exchange for “entitlements”), you’ve volunteered into the socialist democratic form, via FICA - again, by your consent.
Do not believe me. I am not infallible. Go read the law - available in any county courthouse law library.
When I investigated such claims [like SCHIFF], I invariably find evidence of consent.
Let me refer you to George Washington:
“It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency.”
- - - George Washington; "Sentiments on a Peace Establishment" in a letter to Alexander Hamilton (2 May 1783); published in The Writings of George Washington (1938), edited by John C. Fitzpatrick, Vol. 26, p. 289.
[... Every citizen ... owes a portion of his property ... and services in defense ... in the militia ... from 18 to 50 years of age... ]
IN SHORT,
The American citizen has no endowed right to life, nor liberty, nor absolute ownership because, as a subject, he can be ordered to train, fight, and die, on command (militia duty), and was obligated to give up a portion of his property (taxes, etc).
However, that does not negate the endowed rights of the American people (noncitizens) who did not consent to be governed.
. . .
Make no mistake!
• The Declaration says : YOU have an endowed right to life.
• But citizens have no inalienable (endowed) right to life.
• The Declaration says : YOU have an endowed right to natural and personal liberty.
• But citizens have only civil and political liberty.
• The Declaration says : YOU have an endowed right to absolutely own private property (upon which you can pursue happiness without permission of a superior).
• But citizens have no private property, absolutely owned... a portion can be claimed by the government.
If you've consented to be a citizen, you have NO ENDOWED RIGHTS.
Zip. Nada. Bumpkiss. Empty Set. Nought.
Any presumption to the contrary is an error not supported by law nor court ruling.
The government can order you to train, fight, and die, on command.
The government can take a portion of your property -or wages - or whatever - as it sees fit.
All authorized by your consent to be a CITIZEN (state or U.S.).
(The USCON complies with this, too. People have rights and powers. Citizens have privileges and immunities. And they’re mutually exclusive.)
. . . . . . . . . .
The Supreme Court has held, in Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328 (1916), that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prohibit "enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, MILITIA, on the jury, etc." In Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), the Supreme Court ruled that the military draft was not "involuntary servitude".
Since the militia only include male CITIZENS, and not all people (who apparently retain their rights), citizenship must be voluntary. But once one volunteers, those civic duties become mandatory.
Now that we know it is our consent to be citizens that waives our right to life and liberty, it is futile to argue over the loss of other inconsequential rights.
Complaining about consent already given is as useful as a volunteer on a suicide mission, blurting out "They want me to do WHAT?! - That could get me KILLED!"
The law that is in harmony with the REPUBLICAN FORM is still on the books. The sovereign American, free inhabitant, domiciled upon private property within the boundaries of these united States of America retains his endowment of rights (inalienable and natural) and liberties (natural and personal), and oath bound government is his servant, not his master.
I have not read all law, but I have yet to find a law that trespasses upon those who are under the REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. However, if one consented to be in the democratic form, there are volumes and volumes of laws, rules and regulations that are applicable.
He who consents should shut up, sit down, pay and obey.
Any so-called "Sovereign Citizen" who has consented to be a citizen yet seeks to avoid his civic duties, is a FRAUD and a SCOUNDREL. Either withdraw consent and be free (or sovereign, if domiciled) or perform to the terms agreed to.
This is not something new. The Declaration of Independence required all who seek to defend endowed rights as part of the government to - “mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.” That's why the Founders ceased to be sovereigns, having surrendered their endowed rights in order to serve the people and the government they created. All subsequent citizens are presumed to have made the identical pledge, hence the duty to serve in the militia (train, fight, and die, on command), surrender a portion of one's property (via taxes), and be held to a higher standard of behavior (obey rules) than the free people (whose endowment is protected).
And again you fail to answer the question. Or address the real issue I bring up. Which is, a government not of laws, but of force, such as we currently tolerate, is in no way restrained by anything you offer as evidence in your case. Try using the Declaration of Independence, the writings of Locke, or any other literature you like when the sheriff comes to evict you for nonpayment of taxes to the county. Or when the state officer detains you for no license plates on your vehicle. Or when the treasury agents show up with federal marshals to seize your belongings and/ or throw you into prison for failure to pay income taxes. The only language an organization run by force understands is force. And your version of it must be smarter and more vicious than theirs, or you become just more ground meat amongst the gears of the machine. Soylent green for the media to feed the masses so that others fear to try anything remotely displeasing to the lords of the manor. Look, I already know everything you have posted. My point is, that while all of that sounds good, there is a very big boot stomping on the face of this society, and opening your mouth to reason with it will only get your teeth knocked down your throat. Best have a plan for twisting that booted foot until it snaps if you want the bully wearing it to listen to your ideas.
And again you fail to answer the question. [Because it was worded incorrectly.] Or address the real issue I bring up. Which is, a government not of laws, but of force, such as we currently tolerate, is in no way restrained by anything you offer as evidence in your case. [NO, it is NOT]
Try using the Declaration of Independence, the writings of Locke, or any other literature you like when the sheriff comes to evict you for nonpayment of taxes to the county. Or when the state officer detains you for no license plates on your vehicle. Or when the treasury agents show up with federal marshals to seize your belongings and/ or throw you into prison for failure to pay income taxes. [All those situations are based on consent of the governed.]
The only language an organization run by force understands is force. And your version of it must be smarter and more vicious than theirs, or you become just more ground meat amongst the gears of the machine. Soylent green for the media to feed the masses so that others fear to try anything remotely displeasing to the lords of the manor. Look, I already know everything you have posted. [Does your knowledge extend to application? Did you withdraw consent from citizenship, FICA, and banking? Did you establish a domicile upon private property? Are you now an American national, free inhabitant?]
My point is, that while all of that sounds good, there is a very big boot stomping on the face of this society, and opening your mouth to reason with it will only get your teeth knocked down your throat. Best have a plan for twisting that booted foot until it snaps if you want the bully wearing it to listen to your ideas.
All your objections arise from consent of the governed.
That you may not know HOW and WHEN you consented is not the fault of the law or the enforcers.
It's ALL in the public record.
Try and find evidence where a sheriff evicted a person from "NOT" real estate (aka private property).
NO state nor municipality taxes private property - only ESTATE (real estate). The property clerks only record estate, not private property (it's PRIVATE!).
Also try and find a state that licenses and registers automobiles of NON-RESIDENTS (i.e. "inhabitants").
I can't find any. All state codes exempt NON-RESIDENTS.
Try and find an IRS prosecution of someone who has NO taxpayer ID (SSN) nor open, interest bearing bank account (with its "signature card" wherein one agrees to the "rules of the bank").
Part of the problem is due to the State of Emergency (since 1933) and the lack of lawful money with which to alienate title - which changes the assumption of public servants. But people who did properly establish title to their PRIVATE AUTOMOBILES were not hassled by Officer Friendly.
I personally know of one gentleman who, upon advice of a judge, put in a legal notice requesting all claimants to his automobile to come forth within 30 days or forever waive their claims. After 30 days, the newspaper issued an affidavit attesting that no one responded to the ad. He then filed, ex parte, for a court order that his automobile was PRIVATE PROPERTY (despite not having used lawful money). He taped the court order to the side window of his private vehicle, and when pulled over, directs the officer to said document, and gently reminds the officer of the hassle of trespassing on his liberties and being in contempt of a court order. Net result : never hassled again.
I have yet to find one instance where an American national, free inhabitant, domiciled upon private property who did not consent to be a citizen / subject, nor participate in socialist insecurity, nor have any interest bearing accounts, was hassled by the government, local, state or federal. Unfortunately, there are very few Americans who bother to read their own laws, and learn of their endowment, or how they surrendered it.
CONSENT OF THE CITIZENRY
“ Our theory of government and governmental powers is wholly at variance with that urged by appellant herein. The rights of the individual are not derived from governmental agencies, either municipal, state or federal, or even from the Constitution. They exist inherently in every man, by endowment of the Creator, and are merely reaffirmed in the Constitution, and restricted only to the extent that they have been VOLUNTARILY SURRENDERED BY THE CITIZENSHIP to the agencies of government. The people's rights are not derived from the government, but the government's authority comes from the people. The Constitution but states again these rights already existing, and when legislative encroachment by the nation, state, or municipality invade these original and permanent rights, it is the duty of the courts to so declare, and to afford the necessary relief. The fewer restrictions that surround the individual liberties of the citizen, except those for the preservation of the public health, safety, and morals, the more contented the people and the more successful the democracy.”
- - - City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944 https://casetext.com/case/city-of-dallas-v-mitchell-1
(OTHER RIGHTS)
"The right of holding state office is a civil or political right, which may be surrendered to the government or to society in order to secure the protection of OTHER RIGHTS ([State] Bill of Rights, art. 3), or the government may abridge or take away such rights for sufficient cause; for, though such rights may be considered natural rights (Bill of Rights, art. 2) yet they are not of the class of natural rights which are held to be inalienable, like the rights of conscience (Bill of Rights, art. 4)"
- - Hale v. Everett, 53 N.H. 9 (N.H. 1868)
. . .
Translation from legalese:
The exercise of the privilege to hold a state office involves the surrender of “other rights.” And to restore those “other rights,” one may need to surrender the government privileges (presumed to be “rights”). That is to say, withdraw consent.
. . .
" Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property...and is regarded as inalienable."
16 Corpus Juris Secundum , Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987.
- - - -
If I may reiterate the POINT. If one has a SACRED RIGHT to life, liberty, and absolute ownership of private property, then what is the situation of a citizen who has MANDATORY CIVIC DUTIES that violate his endowed rights to life, liberty and absolute ownership of private property?
Isn't it obvious?
One with endowed rights cannot be the one with mandatory civic duties. They are mutually exclusive.
No American sovereign is a citizen, and no citizen is a sovereign.
No American can be "born a citizen" within the united States of America, for an infant cannot consent. He would be a subject, bound to perform duties that void his endowment, at birth.
However, if one was born within the foreign jurisdiction of the United States [government], that's a different situation. 13th amendment only bans involuntary servitude in the United States and territories subject to THEIR (plural) jurisdiction... aka united States of America.
That modern Americans have no clue is evidence of the success of the world's greatest propaganda ministry.
But at one time, Americans knew the difference.
.................................................. ...............
ALIEN, n. An American sovereign in his probationary state.
- - - - “The Devil’s Dictionary” (1906), by Ambrose Bierce
(download available from gutenberg.org)
.................................................. ...............
His audience knew what an “American sovereign” was, to understand the joke.
...
Last edited by jetgraphics; 02-11-2017 at 07:20 AM..
Jetgraphics, are we to assume that you don't pay taxes or pay attention to your behavior as it relates to the laws of your town, county, state, nation?
Apparently some people do not comprehend English.
Let me rephrase the question so it makes sense.
Does the government impose taxes on any endowed right, liberty, power or immunity?
NO.
Only government privileges are subject to taxation.
So asking me if I don't pay taxes without first specifying which government privilege I am exercising is meaningless. It is in the same class as "When did you stop beating your wife?"
And a government instituted to SECURE RIGHTS (life, liberty, property) has the delegated power to prosecute those who deliberately injure the rights of another - or - adjudicate disputes arising over accidental injury. No endowment grants immunity from liability.
However, government grants limited liability to commit injuries to the person and property of another (ex: license to practice medicine grants limited liability to commit manslaughter).
As to laws based on consent of the governed, pay and obey.
Yes, we do live under a government of force, not law, and you still have not answered the question. It is not incorrectly worded, it is simply worded. A yes or no answer. Anyway, let me rephrase it to reflect your response. Are you saying that you do engage in all the things you speak of? Do you live on private property? Are you exempt from state codes? Do you eschew bank accounts and credit? How do you pay for your access to the internet that allows you to post here?
Understand that I am not arguing that most of what you post is incorrect, merely that it is not practical or workable for the average person in today's society, and that the lifestyle makes you likely to undergo constant harassment by the agents of the state. You know as well as I, that those who populate government agencies are generally every bit as ignorant of history and natural law as their average civilian neighbor, and human nature makes harassment of what is not understood nearly a given. Hence the questions. Are you practicing what you preach?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
