More info on US IDs

i was surfing around the web the other day and happened across this bit of interesting information It seems that there is a distinction between, you and i as "living breathing persons" and "Legal Fictions" , from what i gathered from the below refrenced (sp) article is that while "person" retains constitutional god given rights, once you agree to become a "legal Fiction" i.e. Apply for a state ID ,drivers license, social security card or the like you waive certain rights and become a "slave" to the system. I will not type out the whole explaination, but I thought this was very informative and ask each of you to read for yourselves and make your comments and conclusions for yourselves. and as always responses would be greatly welcomed , expecially from those w/ a background in law. thank you .big brothers con

[edit on 5/28/2007 by MTGOmagickwitch]

[edit on 5/28/2007 by MTGOmagickwitch]

It would be interesting to find out what would happen if someone actually did that stuff.... they'd probably get thrown in jail.

Op, did you read the entire website? Over in the left column are some "interesting" items. Some of these make one wonder about these folks.

For about USD$300,000.00 the will arange to sell you a Scottish tittle as a Baron. Or you may opt to purchase, about USD$10,000.00, a citizenship, through their "contacts", in the Dominican Republic.

They sell many and sundry things, but most of them are less than sterling, IMO.

Furthermore, I just went in and looked in my file cabinet, and found an old court document. Their claim that the name would be spelled in CAP LETTERS was false.

Now I would not dissuade anyone from checking this out to their own satisfaction. However, I find them a tad unsavory.

Originally posted by steve22
It would be interesting to find out what would happen if someone actually did that stuff.... they'd probably get thrown in jail.

IF what the site says about this "John" from florida is true, then I don't think so... the judge accepted the fact that he had been bested and told the guy to leave his court room, seemingly able to go about his merry way on public roads WITHOUT a driver's license. one can only wonder if there are other loop holes such as this that could prove fruitful only the brave at heart will know for sure . I think this just goes to show that we should NOT take what SAM says at face value and be willing to test our boundries on a regular basis, after all the individual is the only one in my opinion who should have any say in any matter that efffects them directly.. After all...how can we claim to be "The land of the free" if we allow someone else to tell us what we can or can not do.

home.hiwaay.net...

1. Jaeger v. Dubuque County, 880 F.Supp. 640 (N.D.Iowa 1995)
2. United States v. Heard, 952 F.Supp. 329 (N.D.W.Va. 1996)
3. Boyce v. C.I.R., 72 T.C.M. ¶ 1996-439 ("an objection to the spelling of petitioners' names in capital letters because they are not 'fictitious entities'" was rejected)
4. United States v. Washington, 947 F.Supp. 87, 92 (S.D.N.Y. 1996)("Finally, the defendant contends that the Indictment must be dismissed because 'Kurt Washington,' spelled out in capital letters, is a fictitious name used by the Government to tax him improperly as a business, and that the correct spelling and presentation of his name is 'Kurt Washington.' This contention is baseless")
5. United States v. Klimek, 952 F.Supp. 1100 (E.D.Pa. 1997)
6. In re Gdowik, 228 B.R. 481, 482 (S.D.Fla. 1997)(claim that "the use of his name JOHN E GDOWIK is an 'illegal misnomer' and use of said name violates the right to his lawful status" was rejected)
7. Russell v. United States, 969 F.Supp. 24, 25 (W.D. Mich. 1997)("Petitioner * * * claims because his name is in all capital letters on the summons, he is not subject to the summons"; this argument held frivolous)
8. United States v. Lindbloom, 97-2 U.S.T.C. ¶ 50650 (W.D. Wash. 1997)("In this submission, Mr. Lindbloom states that he and his wife are not proper defendants to this action because their names are not spelled with all capital letters as indicated in the civil caption." The CAPS argument and the "refused for fraud" contention were rejected)
9. Rosenheck & Co., Inc. v. United States, 79 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 2715 (N.D. Ok. 1997)("Kostich has made the disingenuous argument the IRS documents at issue here fail to properly identify him as the taxpayer. Defendant Kostich contends his ‘Christian name' is Walter Edward, Kostich, Junior and since the IRS documents do not contain his ‘Christian name,' he is not the person named in the Notice of Levy. The Court expressly finds Defendant WALTER EDWARD KOSTICH JR. is the person identified in the Notice of Levy, irrespective of the commas, capitalization of letters, or other alleged irregularities Kostich identifies as improper. Similarly, the Court's finding applies to the filed pleadings in this matter")
10. United States v. Weatherley, 12 F.Supp.2d 469 (E.D.Pa. 1998)
11. United States v. Frech, 149 F.3d 1192 (10th Cir. 1998)("Defendants' assertion that the capitalization of their names in court documents constitutes constructive fraud, thereby depriving the district court of jurisdiction and venue, is without any basis in law or fact").

Point well taken Unit, thanks for the clarification. with with that information in mind am i correct to assume that this would mean that one could not still use the deffense of "hearsay" in regaurds to " your honor, that isn't me, that name was imposed upon me at birth...not of my own choice/creation...I did not apply for that SS#....Idon't own that address because I can not take it with me. Etc." Please forgive me folks if this got a bit confusing there but I think that what I am getting at is that these things are all created for you by someone else in an effort to tell the rest of the world "who" you are, and done so before you have a chance to dispute or clarify them (at the age of legal consent). at which point "the "created" You has been so ingrained into your files and