Replies

>The irony of your tagline is astounding.

Allow me to elaborate then.

Let A be the statement “Violating [or non-compliance with] tax laws is criminal.”

The Supreme Court, in the 1798 case “Calder v. Bull” declared that the prohibitions against Ex Post Facto law is applicable ONLY to criminal law.
So, let B(x) be the Statement x is a criminal law; and let C(x) be the statement “x cannot be retroactive [that is, ex post facto].”
The Supreme Court ruling presents us with this property [P1]: B(x) -> C(x)

Now we know that the Tax-laws have been retroactively changed {under Bill Clinton was one, but I cannot find the reference} so they CANNOT be criminal.
So, C( “tax-law” ) is FALSE.
Because C(”Tax-Law”) is false it CANNOT be the case that B(”tax-law”) is true; that would violate the implication in P1.

Now that we know that tax-law CANNOT be criminal, because it can and is retroactively changed, why are violations of it pursued in criminal court?

Or if you want something a little less formal; consider this:
My state, New Mexico has the following in its State Constitution:
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and
defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but
nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No
municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incidentof the right to keep
and bear arms.

There is a state statute which says:
NMSA 30-7-2.1. Unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon on school premises.
A. Unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon on school premises consists of carrying a deadly weapon on school premises except by:
—(1) a peace officer;
—(2) school security personnel;
—(3) a student, instructor or other school-authorized personnel engaged in army, navy, marine corps or air force reserve officer training corps programs or state-authorized hunter safety training instruction;
—(4) a person conducting or participating in a school-approved program, class or other activity involving the carrying of a deadly weapon; or
—(5) a person older than nineteen years of age on school premises in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance, for lawful protection of the person’s or another’s person or property.

B. As used in this section, “school premises” means:
—(1) the buildings and grounds, including playgrounds, playing fields and parking areas and any school bus of any public elementary, secondary, junior high or high school in or on which school or school-related activities are being operated under the supervision of a local school board; or
—(2) any other public buildings or grounds, including playing fields and parking areas that are not public school property, in or on which public school-related and sanctioned activities are being performed.

C. Whoever commits unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon on school premises is guilty of a fourth degree felony.

Now then, is violation of NMSA 30-7-2.1 a violation of the law? [Especially since the cited section of the State Constitution prohibits any law from “abridg[ing] the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense”.]
Please answer that and give the reasoning behind your answer.