Frank Serpico: Incidents like Eric Garner's death drive wedge between police and society

[Pop23]

You don't seem to understand how taxes work.

The government doesn't care who pays the sales taxes, as long as someone does.

You're missing it. Why is it against the law for Garner to sell single cigs on the street?

I don't know, I didn't write the law. But it doesn't have to do with taxes.

You don't know, but you know it doesn't have to do with taxes. LOL.

That's because I understand how cigarette taxes and sales taxes work. It's not complicated.

The law against the sale of "loosies" is part of the sin laws surrounding cigarettes - probably to keep them out of the hands of kids.

Loosey laws existed back when cigarette taxes were almost nothing.

Nope. People give cigs to minors every day and they don't get arrested.

Give vs Sell.

Gift vs. Commerce

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Actually it is 7.5 cents per cigarette, and according to his family, he was supporting them on those sales. He had to be selling alot of loosies.

The "sales tax" that someone selling loosies that they bought retail in NY would technically owe a little less than 2 cents a cigarette.

Let's see your math.

$5 profit per pack x 0.087 (sales tax) = 0.435 cents / 20 cigarettes in a pack = $0.02

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You're missing it. Why is it against the law for Garner to sell single cigs on the street?

I don't know, I didn't write the law. But it doesn't have to do with taxes.

You don't know, but you know it doesn't have to do with taxes. LOL.

That's because I understand how cigarette taxes and sales taxes work. It's not complicated.

The law against the sale of "loosies" is part of the sin laws surrounding cigarettes - probably to keep them out of the hands of kids.

Loosey laws existed back when cigarette taxes were almost nothing.

Nope. People give cigs to minors every day and they don't get arrested.

Give vs Sell.

Gift vs. Commerce

Actually, it's illegal to give minors cigarettes, too.

 

[Pop23]

I don't know, I didn't write the law. But it doesn't have to do with taxes.

You don't know, but you know it doesn't have to do with taxes. LOL.

That's because I understand how cigarette taxes and sales taxes work. It's not complicated.

The law against the sale of "loosies" is part of the sin laws surrounding cigarettes - probably to keep them out of the hands of kids.

Loosey laws existed back when cigarette taxes were almost nothing.

Nope. People give cigs to minors every day and they don't get arrested.

Give vs Sell.

Gift vs. Commerce

Actually, it's illegal to give minors cigarettes, too.

If asked for a cigarette by a stranger on the street, I am under no obligation to verify age. If I sell (commerce), I am.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You don't know, but you know it doesn't have to do with taxes. LOL.

That's because I understand how cigarette taxes and sales taxes work. It's not complicated.

The law against the sale of "loosies" is part of the sin laws surrounding cigarettes - probably to keep them out of the hands of kids.

Loosey laws existed back when cigarette taxes were almost nothing.

Nope. People give cigs to minors every day and they don't get arrested.

Give vs Sell.

Gift vs. Commerce

Actually, it's illegal to give minors cigarettes, too.

If asked for a cigarette by a stranger on the street, I am under no obligation to verify age. If I sell (commerce), I am.

Actually, you're quite wrong - at least where I live.

SFPD actually runs sting operations with volunteer kids bumming cigarettes in sight of cops.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

California penal code:

CALIFORNIA CODES
PENAL CODE
SECTION 308-308b.
308. (a) (1) Every person, firm, or corporation that knowingly or
under circumstances in which it has knowledge, or should otherwise
have grounds for knowledge, sells, gives, or in any way furnishes to
another person who is under the age of 18 years any tobacco,
cigarette, or cigarette papers, or blunts wraps, or any other
preparation of tobacco, or any other instrument or paraphernalia that
is designed for the smoking or ingestion of tobacco, products
prepared from tobacco, or any controlled substance, is subject to
either a criminal action for a misdemeanor or to a civil action
brought by a city attorney, a county counsel, or a district attorney,
punishable by a fine of two hundred dollars ($200) for the first
offense....

 

[depotoo]

Cigarette and tobacco products tax
1.50 per pack ÷ 20 cigs = .075 cents per cigarette

Actually it is 7.5 cents per cigarette, and according to his family, he was supporting them on those sales. He had to be selling alot of loosies.

The "sales tax" that someone selling loosies that they bought retail in NY would technically owe a little less than 2 cents a cigarette.

Let's see your math.

$5 profit per pack x 0.087 (sales tax) = 0.435 cents / 20 cigarettes in a pack = $0.02

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Cigarette and tobacco products tax
1.50 per pack ÷ 20 cigs = .075 cents per cigarette

Actually it is 7.5 cents per cigarette, and according to his family, he was supporting them on those sales. He had to be selling alot of loosies.

The "sales tax" that someone selling loosies that they bought retail in NY would technically owe a little less than 2 cents a cigarette.

Let's see your math.

$5 profit per pack x 0.087 (sales tax) = 0.435 cents / 20 cigarettes in a pack = $0.02

That 1.50 per pack tax is an excise tax, not the sales tax.

If you purchased a pack retail, that tax was already paid.

 

[depotoo]

There is an excise tax on cigarettes collected at time of sale. And it is actually higher than I posted, it is $1.50 per pack for nyc excise tax and another $4.35 ny excise tax per pack for a total of $5.85 per pack. Thus the reason for tax stamps on bottom of packs. traditionl swles tax is not charged. That comes to 29.25 cents per cigarette. Of which is the whole basis

Cigarette and tobacco products tax
1.50 per pack ÷ 20 cigs = .075 cents per cigarette

Actually it is 7.5 cents per cigarette, and according to his family, he was supporting them on those sales. He had to be selling alot of loosies.

The "sales tax" that someone selling loosies that they bought retail in NY would technically owe a little less than 2 cents a cigarette.

Let's see your math.

$5 profit per pack x 0.087 (sales tax) = 0.435 cents / 20 cigarettes in a pack = $0.02

That 1.50 per pack tax is an excise tax, not the sales tax.

If you purchased a pack retail, that tax was already paid.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

There is an excise tax on cigarettes collected at time of sale. And it is actually higher than I posted, it is $1.50 per pack for nyc excise tax and another $4.35 ny excise tax per pack for a total of $5.85 per pack. Thus the reason for tax stamps on bottom of packs. traditionl swles tax is not charged. That comes to 29.25 cents per cigarette. Of which is the whole basis

Cigarette and tobacco products tax
1.50 per pack ÷ 20 cigs = .075 cents per cigarette

Actually it is 7.5 cents per cigarette, and according to his family, he was supporting them on those sales. He had to be selling alot of loosies.

The "sales tax" that someone selling loosies that they bought retail in NY would technically owe a little less than 2 cents a cigarette.

Let's see your math.

$5 profit per pack x 0.087 (sales tax) = 0.435 cents / 20 cigarettes in a pack = $0.02

That 1.50 per pack tax is an excise tax, not the sales tax.

If you purchased a pack retail, that tax was already paid.

Excise taxes are, by definition, not collected at the retail point.

That's the whole point of the tax stamp - the stamp means the excise tax has already been paid.

The distributor has to buy those stamps from the state. That's how the tax is collected.

 

[Freewill]

From the article linked in the OP:

This is the use of excessive force for no apparent reason on a guy who is selling loosie cigarettes; what is the threat to your well-being?

A very good question.

And it begs an even more obvious question: If there is no threat to your well-being, then why is this law on the books in the first place?

Garner was busted, not for selling cigarettes (there is a store on the same block that sells them all the time, and nobody is upset about that), but for selling them without paying the taxes on them.

In other words, Garner wasn't busted because there was any threat to anybody's well-being. He was busted because government wasn't getting the money it wanted. And police used excessive force (if that was what it was) in furtherance of government getting more money, not to protect anyone.

Is that a proper law? One that puts citizens at risk, and authorizes police to use force (that might become excessive) simply so that government can get more money?

I know that you guys love trying to make this about taxes, but that's not the issue at all.

Selling "loosies" is illegal, and always has been.

It has always been illegal because of taxes, why else?

 

[depotoo]

Of course they are, but they are included in your total cost of the pack. The whole point is the state and city are losing big, if he was buying them without paying the excise tax and is selling enough to have made a living for his family.

There is an excise tax on cigarettes collected at time of sale. And it is actually higher than I posted, it is $1.50 per pack for nyc excise tax and another $4.35 ny excise tax per pack for a total of $5.85 per pack. Thus the reason for tax stamps on bottom of packs. traditional sales tax is not charged. That comes to 29.25 cents per cigarette. Of which is the whole basis

Cigarette and tobacco products tax
1.50 per pack ÷ 20 cigs = .075 cents per cigarette

Actually it is 7.5 cents per cigarette, and according to his family, he was supporting them on those sales. He had to be selling alot of loosies.

Let's see your math.

$5 profit per pack x 0.087 (sales tax) = 0.435 cents / 20 cigarettes in a pack = $0.02

That 1.50 per pack tax is an excise tax, not the sales tax.

If you purchased a pack retail, that tax was already paid.

Excise taxes are, by definition, not collected at the retail point.

That's the whole point of the tax stamp - the stamp means the excise tax has already been paid.

The distributor has to buy those stamps from the state. That's how the tax is collected.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Of course they are, but they are included in your total cost of the pack. The whole point is the state and city are losing big, if he was buying them without paying the excise tax and is selling enough to have made a living for his family.

There is an excise tax on cigarettes collected at time of sale. And it is actually higher than I posted, it is $1.50 per pack for nyc excise tax and another $4.35 ny excise tax per pack for a total of $5.85 per pack. Thus the reason for tax stamps on bottom of packs. traditional sales tax is not charged. That comes to 29.25 cents per cigarette. Of which is the whole basis

Cigarette and tobacco products tax
1.50 per pack ÷ 20 cigs = .075 cents per cigarette

Let's see your math.

$5 profit per pack x 0.087 (sales tax) = 0.435 cents / 20 cigarettes in a pack = $0.02

That 1.50 per pack tax is an excise tax, not the sales tax.

If you purchased a pack retail, that tax was already paid.

Excise taxes are, by definition, not collected at the retail point.

That's the whole point of the tax stamp - the stamp means the excise tax has already been paid.

The distributor has to buy those stamps from the state. That's how the tax is collected.

That's true, but not what he was arrested (and killed) for.

He was arrested for selling loosies.

 

[Neil N. Blowme]

REVEALED Who s Paying For All Of The Signs that You See At The Anti-Police Protests The Federalist Papers

 

[Bush92]

Cowardly cops living by the 'shoot first, ask questions later' mantra put the good guys in a bad light and threaten the public's right to justice.

Cowardly cops 'don't belong in the uniform', according to retired NYPD Officer Frank Serpico.

Was I surprised by the Staten Island grand jury? Of course not. When was the last time a police officer was indicted?

This is the use of excessive force for no apparent reason on a guy who is selling loosie cigarettes; what is the threat to your well-being? If a police officer's life is in danger, he has every right to use every force in his means to defend himself.

In the old days, they used to put a gun or a knife on somebody after a shooting. Now they don't even bother.

But today, we have cops crying wolf all the time. They testify "I was in fear of my life," the grand jury buys it, the DA winks and nods, and there's no indictment.

I remember a guy I worked with back in the 81st Precinct, an ex-Marine named Murphy. He would not turn out for roll call until his shoes were spit-shined, and his uniform was creased.

One night, he was called to a family dispute. There was a man waiting behind the door, and he came out with a butcher knife and slashed Murphy's face.

Murphy could have emptied his gun in him. Instead, he disarmed the man and put him in cuffs. What's happening today in the performance of some officers can only be described as sheer cowardice. They don't belong in the uniform, and they shouldn't have weapons — whether they're cops or not.

I hear cops saying all the time — and they're proud of it — "shoot first, ask questions later."

They say, "It's my job to get home safe." Yes, but not at the cost of a human being who never posed a threat to you in the first place.

I called for, way back when before the Knapp Commission, for an independent investigative body. When I was testifying about police corruption, I saw very clearly how the DA can lead the grand jury in any direction they so desire.

More: Frank Serpico on Eric Garner: Cops cry wolf all the time - NY Daily News

If you don't know who Frank Serpico is - you should make an effort to find out.

Serpico is a fucking scumbag.

 

[Pogo]

Cowardly cops living by the 'shoot first, ask questions later' mantra put the good guys in a bad light and threaten the public's right to justice.

Cowardly cops 'don't belong in the uniform', according to retired NYPD Officer Frank Serpico.

Was I surprised by the Staten Island grand jury? Of course not. When was the last time a police officer was indicted?

This is the use of excessive force for no apparent reason on a guy who is selling loosie cigarettes; what is the threat to your well-being? If a police officer's life is in danger, he has every right to use every force in his means to defend himself.

In the old days, they used to put a gun or a knife on somebody after a shooting. Now they don't even bother.

But today, we have cops crying wolf all the time. They testify "I was in fear of my life," the grand jury buys it, the DA winks and nods, and there's no indictment.

I remember a guy I worked with back in the 81st Precinct, an ex-Marine named Murphy. He would not turn out for roll call until his shoes were spit-shined, and his uniform was creased.

One night, he was called to a family dispute. There was a man waiting behind the door, and he came out with a butcher knife and slashed Murphy's face.

Murphy could have emptied his gun in him. Instead, he disarmed the man and put him in cuffs. What's happening today in the performance of some officers can only be described as sheer cowardice. They don't belong in the uniform, and they shouldn't have weapons — whether they're cops or not.

I hear cops saying all the time — and they're proud of it — "shoot first, ask questions later."

They say, "It's my job to get home safe." Yes, but not at the cost of a human being who never posed a threat to you in the first place.

I called for, way back when before the Knapp Commission, for an independent investigative body. When I was testifying about police corruption, I saw very clearly how the DA can lead the grand jury in any direction they so desire.

More: Frank Serpico on Eric Garner: Cops cry wolf all the time - NY Daily News

If you don't know who Frank Serpico is - you should make an effort to find out.

Serpico is a fucking scumbag.

And why is that?

 

[Bush92]

Sub standard police officer and glory hound. Political tool of the left. Hippie, dope smoking, cut a deal hypocrite. He was just as corrupt as any other NYPD cop at that time. Fuck him. He wrote a book and made a movie to get ahead of the story. So what. Scumbag.

 

[Pogo]

--- link?

 

[FA_Q2]

From the article linked in the OP:

This is the use of excessive force for no apparent reason on a guy who is selling loosie cigarettes; what is the threat to your well-being?

A very good question.

And it begs an even more obvious question: If there is no threat to your well-being, then why is this law on the books in the first place?

Garner was busted, not for selling cigarettes (there is a store on the same block that sells them all the time, and nobody is upset about that), but for selling them without paying the taxes on them.

In other words, Garner wasn't busted because there was any threat to anybody's well-being. He was busted because government wasn't getting the money it wanted. And police used excessive force (if that was what it was) in furtherance of government getting more money, not to protect anyone.

Is that a proper law? One that puts citizens at risk, and authorizes police to use force (that might become excessive) simply so that government can get more money?

I know that you guys love trying to make this about taxes, but that's not the issue at all.

Selling "loosies" is illegal, and always has been.

It has always been illegal because of taxes, why else?

I would have said something similar in the beginning of the thread but thedoctorisin has THOROUGHLY debunked that concept.

It is likely just another control method - cigarettes are regulated far more than many other products because of the entire 'the state has to protect you from yourself' mantra. Like others have stated, likely something to do with saving the kids.

It is an asinine and stupid law. I don't think that a single person in here actually disagrees with that sentiment. I have to wonder why, then, the thread has devolved into a silly explanation about tax law when such law has nothing whatsoever to do with the point of the thread.

 

[FA_Q2]

You don't know, but you know it doesn't have to do with taxes. LOL.

That's because I understand how cigarette taxes and sales taxes work. It's not complicated.

The law against the sale of "loosies" is part of the sin laws surrounding cigarettes - probably to keep them out of the hands of kids.

Loosey laws existed back when cigarette taxes were almost nothing.

Nope. People give cigs to minors every day and they don't get arrested.

Give vs Sell.

Gift vs. Commerce

Actually, it's illegal to give minors cigarettes, too.

If asked for a cigarette by a stranger on the street, I am under no obligation to verify age. If I sell (commerce), I am.

That is flat out incorrect. You are certainly required to verify age and if the child lies to you and presents a fake ID, you are STILL liable. Same goes for alcohol and sex.

Where do you get the idea that you can claim ignorance of age in any situation with a substance that is controlled for minors?