I need your help, and to help yourselves! *2A Battle*

[alan226]

I have a sneaking suspicion this is not going to end well for Dr. Lu.

I wish him well and good luck, but I fail to see the wisdom of coming on a public forum and bragging that you haven't paid a dime in State or Federal income taxes in 6 years....

 

[fshalor]

It could be an excellent legal argument but that would require the gov to not move the goal posts when you beat them at their own game.

My concern at the time is the same now. This challenge has merit, but at what cost.

There are some loops and bloops I could see this impacting OTHER laws and privileges (rights?).

 

[weekendracer]

I have a sneaking suspicion this is not going to end well for Dr. Lu.

I wish him well and good luck, but I fail to see the wisdom of coming on a public forum and bragging that you haven't paid a dime in State or Federal income taxes in 6 years....

If he's representing himself, he's going to get tore up on procedural issues. He'll probably be in jail for contempt longer than the firearms charge.

 

[Parker Schreiber]

then I’m gonna stand up for the truth, come hell and high water.
and yeah, I got the best lawyer I can find — me.
when I prevail I’m throwing a party with guns and hookers,

Who’s coming?!

David Dunning and Justin Kruger, cleanup in Aisle 3, please.

 

[42!]

Hey Doc, lets run your approach through what will happen. We can even assume you are technically correct.

Long before any jury comes into play, you present your argument to the Judge. The Judge will either A. agree and dismiss the case, or B. think you're crazy and continue to the next step. But doing this does have the advantage that you can bring it up on your appeal, after you're found guilty.

Now your argument is with the Jury, I assume you will want a jury trial, I mean the judge isn't going to listen to your BS so it's a jury trial or an easy guilty. The Jury will receive instruction from the Judge on what constitutes a crime under the law. What those instructions are is for the most part already established. He might tweak it a little for your circumstances but it's not getting the complete rewrite that your position requires.

I'd be surprised if the judge allowed you to present any of this in your opening or closing arguments, but even if he does it'll be clear in the jury instructions to consider the evidence and arguments aren't evidence. But like I said, you probably won't be allowed to present your theories. You're going to need them entered as evidence or testimony.

So you print it all out. But you still need testimony to validate it. You could do it yourself (ha ha ha) Ya, that's not going to be seen as credible, you're the accused you'll say anything to get off. You need an expert witness. This will need to be a credible person, a lawyer with a long standing history, a professional that will be acceptable to the court. Good luck with that, you know how you can't find a lawyer to take on this crazy approach, Ya, you won't find one that will testify for you either.

So you'll be found guilty. and now on to the appeal process. We don't need to go over this because no matter the outcome one side or the other will continue the appeal all the way to SCOTUS, or until one side runs out of money (hint, the gov never runs out of money).

Good luck. If you make it to SCOTUS you'll have the chance to throw out a huge volume of establish laws, it would be historic.

On a side note. You should consider that you did have an LTC. So at one point you understood and participated in the law as applied. Even if you disagreed with it, you understood it and followed it. It wasn't until you lost the LTC and was charged with possession that you decided the law did not apply. This will be brought up as you knew the law as applied, and chose to violate it, and now you are only trying to weasel out of it. If it gets to the jury, that is how they will disregard yout theories. And the prosecution is a professional at picking juries that will rule in his favor.

Now if you want to fight this battle and server the jail time, well go for it. Personally I'm not going to jail, and I'd fight on whatever terms I need to to stay out of jail. Yes this brings up a major flaw with our system, someone's life has to be ruined before there is a challenge in court.





Yes, I'm a little bored this Sunday afternoon.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I fought the IRS, and won.

I see your IRS win and raise you two federal court cases in which the State of MA paid my team's legal fees and was compelled to increase the pool of persons eligible for an LTC. Not only that, but we indirectly force execution of an SQL alter table statement on the MA licensing database. (I was a small part of the team, real attorneys and Comm2as in house think tank did the heavy lifting).

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I'd be surprised if the judge allowed you to present any of this in your opening or closing arguments, but even if he does it'll be clear in the jury instructions to consider the evidence and arguments aren't evidence. But like I said, you probably won't be allowed to present your theories. You're going to need them entered as evidence or testimony.

The judge will say something like "The defendant is accused of carrying a firearm without a license and possessing a high capacity magazine. It is your job to decide if he knowingly did so, and the court's job to interpret the law. You are not to consider any arguments about what the law means, only if the defendant did or did not commit the act for which he is accused".

Anyone informing the jury of their right to find non-guilty notwithstanding the evidence will be sanctioned by the court. You, or your defense attorney, will not be allowed to make that argument.

 

[AHM]

... each statute, regulation or code that defines a term invariably begin with an "As used in" statement of application, which confines the definitions to a specific purpose established by the legislature. For example, MGL 140 § 121 defines "firearms" and other like items to mean only those "As used in sections 122 to 131Y, inclusive, ..."

Contrary to your repeated and explicit statements in this thread,
Ch. 140 §121 does not constrain its definitions to only be used in Ch. 140 §§122-131Y.
A counterexample:

MGL Ch. 265 §15E: Assault and battery by discharge of firearm, large capacity weapon, rifle, shotgun, sawed-off shotgun or machine gun; penalty

(a) Whoever commits an assault and battery upon another by discharging a firearm, large capacity weapon, rifle, shotgun, sawed-off shotgun or machine gun, as defined in section 121 of chapter 140, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 20 years or by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than 21/2 years or by a fine of not more than $10,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment.​

Underscoring mine.

Ch. 265 §15E is plainly not contained within Ch. 140 §§122-131Y,
and yet Ch. 265 §15E uses the definitions of "firearm", etc. of Ch. 140 §121
even though Ch. 140 §121 makes no cross-reference to Ch. 265 §15E.

Perhaps your defense does not depend on that false assertion.

I'm completely uninterested in its details.

But you have to ask yourself,
"self, does my legal defense depend upon any other false assertions?".

Non-existence proofs are difficult.

I know one thing. This trial is going to be LIT.

It's all fun and games until someone's bad case
generates bad case law which further disenfranchises us all.
(Shortened any shotgun barrels lately?)

 

[Dr. Kang Lu]

Hey Doc, lets run your approach through what will happen. We can even assume you are technically correct.

Long before any jury comes into play, you present your argument to the Judge. The Judge will either A. agree and dismiss the case, or B. think you're crazy and continue to the next step. But doing this does have the advantage that you can bring it up on your appeal, after you're found guilty.

Now your argument is with the Jury, I assume you will want a jury trial, I mean the judge isn't going to listen to your BS so it's a jury trial or an easy guilty. The Jury will receive instruction from the Judge on what constitutes a crime under the law. What those instructions are is for the most part already established. He might tweak it a little for your circumstances but it's not getting the complete rewrite that your position requires.

I'd be surprised if the judge allowed you to present any of this in your opening or closing arguments, but even if he does it'll be clear in the jury instructions to consider the evidence and arguments aren't evidence. But like I said, you probably won't be allowed to present your theories. You're going to need them entered as evidence or testimony.

So you print it all out. But you still need testimony to validate it. You could do it yourself (ha ha ha) Ya, that's not going to be seen as credible, you're the accused you'll say anything to get off. You need an expert witness. This will need to be a credible person, a lawyer with a long standing history, a professional that will be acceptable to the court. Good luck with that, you know how you can't find a lawyer to take on this crazy approach, Ya, you won't find one that will testify for you either.

So you'll be found guilty. and now on to the appeal process. We don't need to go over this because no matter the outcome one side or the other will continue the appeal all the way to SCOTUS, or until one side runs out of money (hint, the gov never runs out of money).

Good luck. If you make it to SCOTUS you'll have the chance to throw out a huge volume of establish laws, it would be historic.

On a side note. You should consider that you did have an LTC. So at one point you understood and participated in the law as applied. Even if you disagreed with it, you understood it and followed it. It wasn't until you lost the LTC and was charged with possession that you decided the law did not apply. This will be brought up as you knew the law as applied, and chose to violate it, and now you are only trying to weasel out of it. If it gets to the jury, that is how they will disregard yout theories. And the prosecution is a professional at picking juries that will rule in his favor.

Now if you want to fight this battle and server the jail time, well go for it. Personally I'm not going to jail, and I'd fight on whatever terms I need to to stay out of jail. Yes this brings up a major flaw with our system, someone's life has to be ruined before there is a challenge in court.





Yes, I'm a little bored this Sunday afternoon.

That's a pretty good summary of what routinely happens.
I can't go into my strategy for now, but lemme assure you that's not the path I intend to follow!
You have to have some faith, that I've thought this through and through...
I'm betting on me, and I'm betting on my Constitution, and the rule of Law!

F*ck all, let's go to court and see what happens!

The next Hearing is currently scheduled for ~09:00 on Monday May 16th, 2022, at the Hampden Superior Court.

Y'all are invited.

 

[Dr. Kang Lu]

Contrary to your repeated and explicit statements in this thread,
Ch. 140 §121 does not constrain its definitions to only be used in Ch. 140 §§122-131Y.
A counterexample:

MGL Ch. 265 §15E: Assault and battery by discharge of firearm, large capacity weapon, rifle, shotgun, sawed-off shotgun or machine gun; penalty

(a) Whoever commits an assault and battery upon another by discharging a firearm, large capacity weapon, rifle, shotgun, sawed-off shotgun or machine gun, as defined in section 121 of chapter 140, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 20 years or by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than 21/2 years or by a fine of not more than $10,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment.​

Underscoring mine.

Ch. 265 §15E is plainly not contained within Ch. 140 §§122-131Y,
and yet Ch. 265 §15E uses the definitions of "firearm", etc. of Ch. 140 §121
even though Ch. 140 §121 makes no cross-reference to Ch. 265 §15E.

Perhaps your defense does not depend on that false assertion.

I'm completely uninterested in its details.

But you have to ask yourself,
"self, does my legal defense depend upon any other false assertions?".

Non-existence proofs are difficult.

It's all fun and games until someone's bad case
generates bad case law which further disenfranchises us all.
(Shortened any shotgun barrels lately?)

I'm aware of that, but that doesn't prove an MGL 140 § 121 "firearm" is an "arm for personal use" under MGL 62C § 55A, or "military arms, uniforms and equipment" under MGL 60 § 24, does it?

So the question for the prosecutor is What published law shows that the terms "firearms, ammunition, and large capacity feeding device" defined in MGL 140 § 121 include my arms for personal use, or the military arms, uniforms and equipment I keep together with my bedding and wearing apparel, livestock, poultry, fuel, provisions, furniture and other personal effects in my household?

 

[Dr. Kang Lu]

I see your IRS win and raise you two federal court cases in which the State of MA paid my team's legal fees and was compelled to increase the pool of persons eligible for an LTC. Not only that, but we indirectly force execution of an SQL alter table statement on the MA licensing database. (I was a small part of the team, real attorneys and Comm2as in house think tank did the heavy lifting).

Yo... you're playing into the system.
I'm saying an LTC is not even required!
that's a pretty different fight.

 

[Dr. Kang Lu]

Oh please, that's not a big deal, anyone with their own business can do it. I got audited when I ran my own business with a handful of subcontractors, I was paying next to nothing in taxes and the IRS didn't like that. I wrote out some explanation, copied some receipts, even gave them a hand written list of expenses I didn't have receipts for (little surprised they accepted that), and wrote a check for $3.00 For my "calculation" error. They accepted the whole thing and moved on. Not paying taxes gets easy when you have a business and are willing to stretch the truth, my guess is they will get around to you sooner or later.

You don't have a lawyer because no lawyer would take this position in court. Most of your stuff won't even be allowed by the judge, a jury is never going to hear it. You'll appeal and appeal and appeal, but eventually you're going to jail.

Not saying it's right or wrong, just saying its reality. You either fight in the real world or live in a fantasy (in jail).

You didn't fight the IRS, you used allowable deductions to reduce your tax burden to zero. By using a §162 trade or business deduction, you're most likely telling at least 1 lie, if not two. -- Unless you serve the functions of a public office. Are you a public officer?

I, on the other hand told the IRS the following:

"I'm discharged from service, and received ZERO remuneration for services. I did not receive any gross income, net earnings from self employment, federal income, gain from property or any taxable income. Therefore, the tax on my ZERO federal income is ZERO."

And with that the IRS left me alone. Try it, it works, and it much better than lying on your tax returns as you surely do now (based on your discussion of subcontractors...)

Remember: "Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor." and once you understand what is written here, you will set yourself free.

 

[AHM]

I'm aware of that, but that doesn't prove an MGL 140 § 121 "firearm" is an "arm for personal use" under MGL 62C § 55A, or "military arms, uniforms and equipment" under MGL 60 § 24 keep me from claiming it's false, does it?

FTFY.

... as each statute, regulation or code that defines a term invariably begin with an "As used in" statement of application, which confines the definitions to a specific purpose established by the legislature. For example, MGL 140 § 121 defines "firearms" and other like items to mean only those "As used in sections 122 to 131Y, inclusive, ..."

... the definition of firearms at MGL 140 § 121: it’s only defined in reference to its USE in section 122-131Y of chapter 140, inclusive! So in essence it takes two things to be a firearm, within the meaning of the statute 1) it’s gotta have the proper physical attributes, and 2) it’s gotta be used within the activities specified in §§ 122-131Y.

 

[Dr. Kang Lu]

FTFY.

So you're saying you can disprove my claim that I had an arm for personal use, or military arms?

How would you be able to do that? I'm curious.

 

[bolt]

That's a whole days excursion for me living near the mass coastline.
But I'm much more than interested.
The time is 9am, on 5/16 /22 correct?
Yes, I'm serious. ....... YOLO -

I hate the pike! Was it not supposed to be paid for and tolls dropped over 25yrs ago after its inception in its plans?
That's Masstaxation!
It never stops!

Are not a SEP-401k?, a IRA, a ROTH IRA(under 129k annual earnings for a single tax payer for 6-7k)), A flexible savings account(FSA), a HealthSavingsAccount(HSA), & a few others specific means also deductible from a single contractors state & federal taxable earnings?

Good luck & best wishes..........

 

[Rob Boudrie]

I hate the pike! Was it not supposed to be paid for and tolls dropped over 25yrs ago after its inception in its plans?

The bonds were about to get paid off so they needed an emergency bond issue to assure the authority's survival. They also rushed through the bond issue without waiting for the "free the pike vote" (that unfortunately lost) to make sure the authority would survive a citizens vote to kill it.

 

[42!]

That's a pretty good summary of what routinely happens.
I can't go into my strategy for now, but lemme assure you that's not the path I intend to follow!

Well there's your first problem, you think you get to determine the path/process in the court. You don't, there are rules and procedures and the judge decides what fits into those and what doesn't. He'll either shut you down fast or let you ramble on and when you're done, he'll continue as if you said nothing.

You didn't fight the IRS, you used allowable deductions to reduce your tax burden to zero. By using a §162 trade or business deduction, you're most likely telling at least 1 lie, if not two. -- Unless you serve the functions of a public office. Are you a public officer?

I, on the other hand told the IRS the following:

"I'm discharged from service, and received ZERO remuneration for services. I did not receive any gross income, net earnings from self employment, federal income, gain from property or any taxable income. Therefore, the tax on my ZERO federal income is ZERO."

And with that the IRS left me alone. Try it, it works, and it much better than lying on your tax returns as you surely do now (based on your discussion of subcontractors...)

Remember: "Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor." and once you understand what is written here, you will set yourself free.

I didn't fight them, I beat them at their own game, even better.

"or any taxable income", well I guess it's possible, but it wouldn't be fighting the IRS it would be using their own rules, no taxable income means no tax liability. But it's more likely this was a lie.

As for me, I've never lied to the IRS. Lying to the IRS fails a cost/benefit analysis every time, unless you like the idea of prison, who am I to judge another on this.

I'm not sure it matters but to me they were contractors, the term "sub" may have some other meaning to it. Regardless, it's certainly no indication of lying, it's a common practice when the work is unpredictable and you don't want to deal with having employees.

You're probably thinking more of how you use "contractors", making them punch in and out, working fixed hours and not based on specific work results, and them having a direct supervisor. All things that would indicate an employee and not a contractor.

And congratulations on having your own practice that provided enough money for you to live on and engage in crazy legal battles while not providing a taxable income. But they have time to get back to you on this. Enjoy it while it lasts.

 

[drgrant]

I have a sneaking suspicion this is not going to end well for Dr. Lu.

I wish him well and good luck, but I fail to see the wisdom of coming on a public forum and bragging that you haven't paid a dime in State or Federal income taxes in 6 years....

Meh, he's not new here. "They" likely already know about him years ago etc. This SC "the sky is not blue because i have chosen to redefine all science on my terms" type stuff isn't new and not unique to him. There are like a half a dozen MA tinfoilers that have "been in one of these movies about not having an LTC" that I can remember. Usually it ends in some kind of CWOF etc. I do hope for his sake the state botched/screws up their end and it gets dropped. Nobody "deserves" to be prosected by these garbage laws.

 

[Boghog1]

Personally I hope he wins, as someone living on the border with the shithole that is Massachusetts, I am tired of going through my truck with a fine tooth comb to make sure I don't have an empty ammo box or heaven forbid a peice of brass.

 

[Jason Flare]

Personally I hope he wins, as someone living on the border with the shithole that is Massachusetts, I am tired of going through my truck with a fine tooth comb to make sure I don't have an empty ammo box or heaven forbid a peice of brass.

There a a lot of members here who are so beat down by the system in MA that they claim to know the outcome rather than supporting someone willing to fight.

 

[Dr. Kang Lu]

That's a whole days excursion for me living near the mass coastline.
But I'm much more than interested.
The time is 9am, on 5/16 /22 correct?
Yes, I'm serious. ....... YOLO -

I hate the pike! Was it not supposed to be paid for and tolls dropped over 25yrs ago after its inception in its plans?
That's Masstaxation!
It never stops!

Are not a SEP-401k?, a IRA, a ROTH IRA(under 129k annual earnings for a single tax payer for 6-7k)), A flexible savings account(FSA), a HealthSavingsAccount(HSA), & a few others specific means also deductible from a single contractors state & federal taxable earnings?

Good luck & best wishes..........

1) Correct, May 16, 2022 starting @ ~ 09:00-09:30; Hampden County Superior Court, Springfield Mass.
2) I haven't paid the pike since 2014. No problems since, see correspondence, last updated in 2017.
3) IRA's and other "savings plans" are for government workers, I cashed out mine when I left the Army.
4) Again, you folks don't believe this, but it's so simple, it's laughable!

The federal income tax is the tax on federal income, not the Federal tax on your income!
For example: a pediatric neuro-radiologist is a radiologist specializing in pediatric neuro-imaging, not a baby radiologist that looks at brian MRIs.

 

[Dr. Kang Lu]

The bonds were about to get paid off so they needed an emergency bond issue to assure the authority's survival. They also rushed through the bond issue without waiting for the "free the pike vote" (that unfortunately lost) to make sure the authority would survive a citizens vote to kill it.

Well there's your first problem, you think you get to determine the path/process in the court. You don't, there are rules and procedures and the judge decides what fits into those and what doesn't. He'll either shut you down fast or let you ramble on and when you're done, he'll continue as if you said nothing.

I didn't fight them, I beat them at their own game, even better.

"or any taxable income", well I guess it's possible, but it wouldn't be fighting the IRS it would be using their own rules, no taxable income means no tax liability. But it's more likely this was a lie.

As for me, I've never lied to the IRS. Lying to the IRS fails a cost/benefit analysis every time, unless you like the idea of prison, who am I to judge another on this.

I'm not sure it matters but to me they were contractors, the term "sub" may have some other meaning to it. Regardless, it's certainly no indication of lying, it's a common practice when the work is unpredictable and you don't want to deal with having employees.

You're probably thinking more of how you use "contractors", making them punch in and out, working fixed hours and not based on specific work results, and them having a direct supervisor. All things that would indicate an employee and not a contractor.

And congratulations on having your own practice that provided enough money for you to live on and engage in crazy legal battles while not providing a taxable income. But they have time to get back to you on this. Enjoy it while it lasts.

If you are not a governmental unit (and any agency or instrumentality thereof), and your contractors are not performing a government service, then you indeed LIED when you issued them 1099-misc.

Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

 

[paul73]

The federal income tax is the tax on federal income, not the Federal tax on your income!

but the jail is just a jail, as a locked room with metal bars on windows...
you may say all you want about the original nature of existing federal taxation, but, it is still not going to end with anything good.

 

[garandman]

Anyone we know?

NH Doctor Facing Charges for Illegal Firearm, Engaging in Sex for Money

A New Hampshire doctor is facing charges after police in Auburn, Massachusetts say he was arrested Sunday night with an unlicensed firearm after allegedly engaging in sex with a woman for money. Kang Lu, 42, of Spofford, New Hampshire, appeared Monday in Worcester District Court on charges of...

www.nbcboston.com

Gun-toting radiologist keeps license in New Hampshire, loses it in Mass.

Although Massachusetts authorities revoked the medical license of a gun-toting radiologist, the New Hampshire Board of Medicine has let him off with a reprimand and a $1,500 fine.

www.unionleader.com

 

[jasons]

 

[Rob Boudrie]

but the jail is just a jail, as a locked room with metal bars on windows...
you may say all you want about the original nature of existing federal taxation, but, it is still not going to end with anything good.

There is even a $500 penalty for using such arguments in any filing with the IRS.

 

[FalArAk]

Curious at to whether or not the OP has reached out to any MA firearms lawyers and got turned away.

Personally, if I had the bankroll to fight something like this I would like to have guys that are entrenched in the nuances of law at my disposal.. You can still represent yourself, but nice to have a bunch of options.

 

[Dr. Kang Lu]

but the jail is just a jail, as a locked room with metal bars on windows...
you may say all you want about the original nature of existing federal taxation, but, it is still not going to end with anything good.

Yes, but liberty for yourself, your family and your countrymen is worth the fight.

Know the Truth, and the Truth shall set you free!

 

[FalArAk]

Anyone we know?

NH Doctor Facing Charges for Illegal Firearm, Engaging in Sex for Money

A New Hampshire doctor is facing charges after police in Auburn, Massachusetts say he was arrested Sunday night with an unlicensed firearm after allegedly engaging in sex with a woman for money. Kang Lu, 42, of Spofford, New Hampshire, appeared Monday in Worcester District Court on charges of...

www.nbcboston.com

Gun-toting radiologist keeps license in New Hampshire, loses it in Mass.

Although Massachusetts authorities revoked the medical license of a gun-toting radiologist, the New Hampshire Board of Medicine has let him off with a reprimand and a $1,500 fine.

www.unionleader.com

Do you see anything wrong with those charges ?

I do... already been posted earlier in the thread.

 

[paul73]

Yes, but liberty for yourself, your family and your countrymen is worth the fight.

Know the Truth, and the Truth shall set you free!

i agree with the notion of the fight, but one has to be able to recognize a difference between a fight and an attempt to run into the charging freight train with a war cry - 'i will smash you'.

i wish you all the best, nevertheless.