OMgz, such idiocy.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Apparently, it's illegal (http://www.news10now.com/content/all_news/?ArID=98054&SecID=83) to filter vegetable oil in your own home in Adams, NY. Jeezus... Next time I'm in NY, I guess I won't be able to filter those little bits of egg from my cooking oil. And cars... Probably can't be operated on private property, because, ya know, they're filtering fuel. :rolleyes:

It's almost as bad as this (http://www.heraldandreview.com/articles/2007/03/01/news/local_news/1021491.txt).

P.s. If you ever do anything that's not completely legally sanctioned in ever single sense of the word, don't tell anyone about it. :mad:

[ELF]

Good lord! with all the other crimes going on why are they wasting time on these people.

[MetroMPG]

"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." - Abraham Lincoln.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Awesome quote! :D

[MetroMPG]

Yeah, I thought it applied nicely. I just read that quote for the first time yesterday.

[The Toecutter]

"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." - Abraham Lincoln.

This only applies if the politicians want the law to be repealed.

Just look at the war in marijuana users. Most Americans think it should be decriminalized. Most politicians don't. 8 in 10 Americans favor medical marijuana. Less than 1/4 of politicians in congress do. Marijuana criminalization is a bad law in every sense of the word, throwing people in jail for a 'crime' that doesn't hurt anyone and causes minimal(if any) damage to one's self or others, costing ~$20 billion/year in taxes to enforce on a federal level, and violating the constitutional rights of ordinary people in order to find users of the drug. Yet it's been strictly enforced for 7 decades and has yet to be repealed.

There's plenty of other examples of 'bad laws' that are strictly enforced which our politicians will not budge on, no matter what we the people think.

Back to the topic, in Britain, you will get stiff fines and/or imprisonment for running your car on tax free biodiesel or SVO.

The governments of the world want money, and this is one reason why alternative fuels and hyper efficient cars have been so slow to take hold; they bring less of your money to government and business interests in the long run.

It is no surprise state and municipal governments are going after people for using biofuels. They want that money and control, and will stop at nothing to have it.

[kps]

I wonder how those prosecuting this sleep at night. :(

Drugs are bad, 'mkay?

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. -- C.S. Lewis

(I don't use (illegal) drugs myself, but busybodies abound on all sides, and the only way to get rid of the ones that annoy me personally is to get rid of the whole lot of 'em.)

[Ryland]

at least in wisconsin you can mak up to 300 gallons of fuel every 3 months and not have to pay taxes on it, this is only if you are making it, it doesn't count if you are doing it as a coperative, or buissness, I'm pretty sure this law is nation wide, not just wisconsin, but I would have to check.
bio-diesel is seen as a homemade fuel.

[Lug_Nut]

Re: the Wetzels
from: a long thread at tdiclub dot com

"Well, the Wetzels (family friends) did have an article printed about their VW in the local newspaper. It ran on page one of the lifestyle section, or whatever part of the paper runs those fluff pieces. I'm a live and let live kind of person, but I did suggest to them that it might not be wise to advertise their untaxed fuel usage in the newspaper like that. So in a small way, they had a warning that this might come down on them."

Idiocy is boasting that you have broken the law and then being surprised that you are charged with breaking the law.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Considering there aren't any hard and fast laws about this, I think the guberment's the bigger idiot here. Instead of accepting a the past due payment of ~$200 for road taxes, they ask them to post a $2,500 bond? What kinda BS is that. I mean, I'm definitely for flying under the radar, but there aren't many, or any, regulations about WVO use. If I call up the state or fedz and ask how I can pay for the road tax separately, since my car's running biodiesel, and I'll probably get bumped around for an entire day w/o answers.

edited for clarity

[rh77]

I get RSS feeds from the EPA on latest press releases, and many lately have been grants to local jurisdictions for alternative fuel production (including Bio-D). What gives? Can't the consumer produce this without requiring a grant??? It seems like they're encouraging this behavior, but the DOJ is finding a problem with it. Typical -- the branches aren't working together for the greater good.

RH77

[repete86]

That's because the branches only work for the good of the corporations. Ever hear of the Animal Enterprise Protection Act? It declares causing more than $5k worth of profit loss to animal enterprises (meat companies, animal testing labs, etc.) through even legal means is considered terrorism. There are 6 people sitting in prison right now because of this law for running a website called "Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty" that was about the animal abuse at Huntingdon Life Sciences, an animal testing lab. They are serving up to 6 years in prison for operating a website. Technically, SVO boy and I are terrorists under this law for being vegan.

The government is also sending undercover agents to monitor such dangerous national security threats as quaker meetings and peace vigils.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

There are 6 people sitting in prison right now because of this law for running a website called "Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty" that was about the animal abuse at Huntingdon Life Sciences, an animal testing lab. They are serving up to 6 years in prison for operating a website.

That's when you know what you're doing is effective. :thumbup:

[The Toecutter]

I wonder how those prosecuting this sleep at night. :(

I read that article on hightimes yesterday.

It's probably pretty easy for the prosecuters to sleep at night since for them to do their job effectively, they have to feel that the law is automatically justified merely because the law exists. Otherwise, prosecuters(and defense lawyers) wouldn't be able to find logical consistency in the arguments they make. Our whole justice system is one gigantic logical fallacy, yet generally presupposes itself as infallable.

(I don't use (illegal) drugs myself, but busybodies abound on all sides, and the only way to get rid of the ones that annoy me personally is to get rid of the whole lot of 'em.)

In today's world, the 'busybodies' and the robber barons have virtually become the same entity. when they say it's for our own good, their usually raking in money off of it behind the scenes. In fact, that's exactly what's going on with the war on drugs, the war on terror, the war in Iraq, ect.

Idiocy is boasting that you have broken the law and then being surprised that you are charged with breaking the law.

Maybe those charged with the crime aren't necessarily surprised, but instead outraged and disgusted that such a law exists. Unjust laws deserve to be ignored.

There are 6 people sitting in prison right now because of this law for running a website called "Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty" that was about the animal abuse at Huntingdon Life Sciences, an animal testing lab. They are serving up to 6 years in prison for operating a website.

And that is why the Founding Fathers gave us the 2nd amendment, to protect all the others. Too bad people are too scared to band together and ENFORCE their rights with arms if necessary for fear of having a Waco-like event unfold, eh? Law enforcement is choosing to risk their lives for their 'law', so my moral qualms with someone defending their rights from those hired to arrest and detain are few. The only reason these people are in prison is because they let someone come over and cuff them. It is quite obvious that the legal methods available were not practical to asserting their 1st amendment right to free speech. But then again, most people are afraid of death(or worse), and we know the FBI is just waiting to bust up a group that bands together to protect themselves from their own government.

Whatever the case may be, I hope they are set out of prison and that their website is kept operational. This is absolutely deplorable for patriots such as these to be assaulted for excersising a right acknowledged and garunteed by our own constitution.

[Hockey4mnhs]

if enough people do it hopefully give up on it

[cfg83]

...

Maybe those charged with the crime aren't necessarily surprised, but instead outraged and disgusted that such a law exists. Unjust laws deserve to be ignored.

...

Bingo :

Fully Informed Jury Association
http://www.fija.org/

Juries protect society from dangerous individuals and also protect individuals from dangerous government. Jurors have a duty and responsibility to render a just verdict. They must take into account the facts of the case, mitigating circumstances, the merits of the law, and the fairness of its application in each case. The recognition of the authority and right of jurors to weigh the merits of the law and to render a verdict based on conscience, dates from before the writing of our Constitution, in cases such as those of William Penn and Peter Zenger. Should this right ever be suppressed, the people will retain the right to resist, having an unalienable right to veto or nullify bad and oppressive laws, and in fact then would be morally compelled to do so.

This is my pet peeve. What is the historical purpose of a jury? At the start of the USA, jurors were told that they were present to judge the merits of the case AND the merits of the law. They were expressly present to make sure that the application of the law was just. If they thought the law was unjust, they had the right of JURY NULLIFICATION. The judge was required to tell them of this right. This is still true today.

In the late 1800's, it was illegal to strike. Workers, however were striking anyway. When juror's heard of the inhuman conditions they were working under, they exorcised their right of jury nullification and found the strikers not guilty.

This happened so much that eventually the US Supreme Court (corrupt back then too) passed a loophole. Judges were no longer required to tell jurors that they had the right of july nullification.

Today jurors are basically told that even if they don't agree with the law, they must not let their personal feelings get in the way of their judgement. Defense lawyers, if they so much as squeek "jury nullification", can be reprimanded by the judge.

When I am on jury duty, and a lawyer or judge asks me if I can enforce the law even if I don't agree with it, I say NO. And then I promptly infect the jury pool with the reason why. And then I'm kicked off the jury pool.

CarloSW2

[Ryland]

From http://www.liquidsolarpower.com/DieselLikesChinese.htm

"In Wisconsin, the question has arisen as to whether the state should begin to tax biofuels the same way it taxes gasoline. So far, however, authorities there have ruled that vegetable oil bought as homemade fuel from a garage is not subject to tax."


http://www.biodieselnow.com/blogs/methods/default.aspx (http://www.biodieselnow.com/blogs/methods/default.aspx)

"Currently (April 2005), the first 400 gallons of homemade biodiesel is exempt from Federal excise taxes. Anything over 400 gallons is subject to the normal tax rate. You will need to check your State Tax Code for exemptions on State Excise Taxes."

I haven't been able to find anything saying that you have to pay taxes on homemade fuel, or that you don't have to... at least not in any of the state law web sites, but I sugest that you check for your self for your own state.

[Lug_Nut]

I get RSS feeds from the EPA on latest press releases, and many lately have been grants to local jurisdictions for alternative fuel production (including Bio-D). What gives? Can't the consumer produce this without requiring a grant??? It seems like they're encouraging this behavior, but the DOJ is finding a problem with it. Typical -- the branches aren't working together for the greater good.

RH77
There is no inconsistency between supporting the increased production of biofuels, and the requirement of taxes being paid on that biofuel.
Wheat farmers get subsidies. Does that mean the pre-made sandwich I buy for lunch should be exempt from my state's meals tax? And if I should brown-bag my own tax-free sandwich I made at home, and sit at a sidewalk cafe to eat it, should the cafe owner not be compensated in some form?

[maxxgraphix]

I don't filter WVO. It just get's screened for food chunks. The BD get's filtered though.
I only make 399.9 gallons or less per quarter. If you make more than that then you are considered a processor and need to have a licence and pay taxes.

I'm not going out this weekend to collect WVO.

[Lug_Nut]

I only make 399.9 gallons or less per quarter. If you make more than that then you are considered a processor and need to have a licence and pay taxes.
Having a license to do some work or paying a tax on some part of that work is not a 'blank check' implication of permission to do anything else that might require a different license nor does it pretend to offer some legal impunity from paying other taxes on other goods or services.

My wife's home business is data processing. She pays a quarterly tax based on her 'process' output. Can she be exempted from having to pay federal and state fuel tax, too?:rolleyes:

[RoadWarrior]

Do they tax the Amish on the pasture and hay they grow for their horses?

[dosco]

My wife's home business is data processing. She pays a quarterly tax based on her 'process' output. Can she be exempted from having to pay federal and state fuel tax, too?:rolleyes:

Of course the issue is that the Government has to figure out a way to tax things. Your wife's work is income.

Making BD - for the homebrewer - is taking someone's garbage and making it into fuel. Different buckets, y'know. Fuel, on the commercial scale, is (presumably) taxed to support the transportation infrastructure.

A similar situation is homebrewing of beer. You can make up to 200 gallons without a license. Of course, I would speculate that some people make waaay more than that - the issue is enforcement. On a related side note, have you noticed that alcohol products are categorized? In other words, a traditional high gravity beer is categorized as a "malt liquor." It is still beer, but for Gubmint taxation purposes it is classified into a particular category.

[Lug_Nut]

Do they tax the Amish on the pasture and hay they grow for their horses?Yes, and I don't think so. Their buggies are required to meet requirements for use on public roads, but I don't personally know what, if any, the fees might be for certifying those minimum buggy requirements. I'm similarly 'taxed' on my property, and am not 'taxed' to pedal my bicycle on public roads.
Your wife's work is income.
:rolleyes: Oh I wish there were income from that 'hobby', but she still pays a quarterly tax...

The BD issue isn't so much the manufacture of the fuel, it's the quantity of fuel and the quantity of the ingredients. My spray cans of paint and insecticide, the jug of gasoline for the snow thrower, isn't subject to hazardous waste storage regulations. But you know that if I were to go around collecting other's household wastes "someone's garbage" in your vernacular, and were producing recycled paint from the hundreds of gallons I could collect, that there would be some sort of license and a fee I'd need to do so.

[101mpg]

Do they tax the Amish on the pasture and hay they grow for their horses?

YES. The Amish are moving out of their most historical home, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, due to excessive taxes. Now in West Virginia (there are more Amish in Ohio and West Virginia now), it is in the state Constitution that any land whose primary purpose is agriculture is tax-free. (Paraphrased)

Guess what? If you own a home and a LOT of property, if the primary thing that the land is for is for growing crops, you don't have to pay tax on it.

I want to own a bunch of land and grow trees. Trees are indeed plants, and no one said I had to harvest them all.

Stupid gubmint. Run by Dubya. Isn't that just pathetic?

[RoadWarrior]

Well what I really meant was do they pay a particular extra tax for growing horse food rather than anything else.