It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Police encounter. Freeman gets off driving without a license.

page: 18
55
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Dookzor
 




What rules? Your rules? Why are the rules of another man more valid to you than your own?


These aren't my rules, these are the rules that were made up by the Constitutionally elected representatives in the various states. These people are YOUR representatives, which means they are doing what YOU want them to do. Each and every law they pass is because of letters and calls they have received.

If you don't like a law, what is stopping you from having that law repealed? Do you all honestly think that once a law is on the books it's there to stay?


As long as you don't harm another, cause someone loss or commit fraud, why should you follow any mans rules but your own?


No man is an island. It's WE The People, not ME The People.

I got a story that goes along your lines, in Colorado, they passed a law saying no smoking in bars and restaurants. In the town I grew up in, the bar owners unanimously decided to ignore this law.

The law could not be enforced by cops, but instead the Health Department were the ones that enforced the law. What ended up happening is that the bars that ignored the law only would get marked off for not following the law. Otherwise being very clean establishments, they weren't marked off enough to require them to close due to health code violations.

Now why do I agree with the above? Because the community at large agreed with the bar owners. Eventually the health department inspectors stopped marking these otherwise clean establishments down for the smoking violation.

The point of this is to show that it's not just you that live in the community, it's a lot of people. Now if the majority of the people decided to follow your example, the law would become unenforceable.

Do you think that the bar owners would be able to get away with that if the people weren't behind them?




posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


All of that writing and you still seem to have missed the point completely.

Statutory legislation isn't "law", it's policy (I feel this has been stated enough already but for some reason you still insist on referring to matters of legality as matters of LAW).

I'm not from the US so I didn't constitutionally elect anyone. I have never voted in my country, I feel it is an exercise in futility and not only that, to vote is to consent to be governed.

I abide by the laws of the land, IE. COMMON LAW and choose not to consent to legislative mandates (IE. POLICY - not law).

Your problem is that you're still using these words as you would in everyday conversation. Many of them have different meanings on legal documents, many such examples have been highlighted over and over again in this thread.

My opinion on your posts, whatukno, is that you are either finding it really hard to grasp the concept that words may have different meanings in different frameworks; or you are being deliberately obtuse for whatever reason.

Either way, I wish you well in your life but I really do hope for your own sake you open your eyes. IMO this is the one true conspiracy, everything else ties into this and the sooner people realise this the sooner we can free ourselves.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by Dookzor]

[edit on 29-6-2010 by Dookzor]



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dookzor
reply to post by whatukno
 


IMO this is the one true conspiracy, everything else ties into this and the sooner people realise this the sooner we can free ourselves.


If no other truth has been spoken in this conversation....


you are exactly correct. This is the basis behind all other conspiracies. Everything.

Outstanding point.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Dookzor
 


Ok, I am confused, you either aren't in the United States, or you immigrated here legally, am I correct?

If you aren't in the United States, then, whatever happens in your country is your business, not my problem nor is it my concern.

If you immigrated here legally, well, I am sure that you signed something declaring that you would abide by all the laws of this land.

If you are here in the United States legally and have not voted, well, that's your problem, this is a Democratic Republic, you have a choice on what you want done in this country. Many have lost faith in this system, but instead of doing anything about it, they bitch and moan about it. This, is NOT MY PROBLEM. It is NOT MY PROBLEM that you refuse to participate in the system.

If you don't like it here, go HOME!

If you aren't in the United States, then I don't know what your laws are, I don't know how things work there, again, it's not my problem. Do whatever you want as far as I am concerned.

But if you are in the United States and you immigrated here from another country and you don't like how things work here, then GO HOME, cause you agreed and (in the spirit of this bull crap thread) signed a contract that said you would abide by the LAWS of this country.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   
I'm from the UK. England, like the US, is a common law jurisdiction. In case you hadn't noticed already, this is the crux point of the issue.

After 18 or so pages you've still not managed to cotton onto the basic principles of what it is you're arguing against.

This isn't about your country of origin and again you've showcased your inability to understand what people are really talking about by regurgitating inapplicable "factoids" and snippets of your own personal "wisdom".

This conspiracy is of the magnitude that it applies to ALL western nations. It has NOTHING to do with anything you keep harping on about. It's becoming really frustrating.

I won't be responding to you anymore. You're obviously either not ready for this information or can't understand it. Either way, I tried.

Good luck with your chosen path.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Dookzor
 


Ok, I am confused, you either aren't in the United States, or you immigrated here legally, am I correct?

If you aren't in the United States, then, whatever happens in your country is your business, not my problem nor is it my concern.

If you immigrated here legally, well, I am sure that you signed something declaring that you would abide by all the laws of this land.

If you are here in the United States legally and have not voted, well, that's your problem,
Many have lost faith in this system, but instead of doing anything about it, they bitch and moan about it. This, is NOT MY PROBLEM. It is NOT MY PROBLEM that you refuse to participate in the system.

If you don't like it here, go HOME!

If you aren't in the United States, then I don't know what your laws are, I don't know how things work there, again, it's not my problem. Do whatever you want as far as I am concerned.

But if you are in the United States and you immigrated here from another country and you don't like how things work here, then GO HOME, cause you agreed and (in the spirit of this bull crap thread) signed a contract that said you would abide by the LAWS of this country.





My God I think it's sinking in.

Do you think the people wanted the federal reserve? The whole process of becoming a free man is NOT signing any contracts. I dont need to be governed. I know what's right and what's wrong. If you a forced to sign a contract then you become a SLAVE.

If you think you are free, wait till war errupts and then you are forced to go fight even if you dont want to. If you lie in court you commit a crime but yet all the elected politicians have lied to get into office.. Pull the boys out of Iraq my butt. You live in a fantasy world where you believe the government is more powerful than you yet they are supposed to work FOR you. If I dont want the goverment making decisions for me, well that's my perogative. That's all this is about.. FREEDOM.. Look it up and compare it to what you think you have.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   
As a CDL driver an instructor I will clear one thing up for most people.

If you are paid you must have a commercial license issued by the state for the federal government, your CDL is a federal license.


But if you don’t not receive compensation anyone can go to the dealer or private party and purchase a tractor trailer and drive it till your hearts content with a regular so called driver’s license. Also as the law is written if you drive a pickup truck for construction purpose like mowing laws for 10 bucks a lawn and us your pickup and or a trailer to transport it lawn to lawn you are required to have commercial plates and a CDL to operate it period. If you work for someone who and his trucks be it a pickup or what ever has commercial plates on it you must have a CDL to drive it period.

As far as freeman goes that is a new name on an old action, it started in PA and that state is a commonwealth the name back then was known as the Patriots or the Patriots of America. And yes they did not need a drivers license they would simple hand the officer and index card size peace of paper stating whom they were and that they were attached to the Patriot organization and that was it no big deal. It was a small organized not known to the general public to keep the peace with the so called norm of society as there members begun to die off a few others have taken up the torch and the freeman organization is just one.

I will say that they are correct in what they are doing and the process has become harder to accomplish, compared to the days of the Patriots but it is perfectly legal in every way to declare sovereignty and drive own property and all that goes with it and all law enforcement on every level can not touch you period.

As a sovereign individual and on my own property the only law is me, if someone any one now matter whom they maybe comes on my property with out written invitation are subject to my law period and my law says I will kill you period and for this I get a good job reward because that is what I declared give to any of my citizens whom reside in my kingdom will receive for protecting my country. Sounds harsh but it is truthful and legal as a sovereign citizen on my own land to declare any laws I chose to make as well as any punishments and rewards.

The simple explanation that most will understand all have heard of diplomatic immunity, and as a sovereign citizen that is exactly what you are, except as long as you own the property it can not be revoked. I hope that clears up some of the confusion for you all.

Good luck to all and God bless us all.


[edit on 29-6-2010 by drmeola]

[edit on 29-6-2010 by drmeola]



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 





Each and every law they pass is because of letters and calls they have received.


hmmm. How many letters or calls does it take? And letters and calls by who?

In this example:



in Colorado, they passed a law saying no smoking in bars and restaurants. In the town I grew up in, the bar owners unanimously decided to ignore this law... Because the community at large agreed with the bar owners.

you indicated that the business owners as well as the community disagreed with a new law. Is that law in the process of being repealed? Whose letter was so influential that it caused a law to be passed against the majority wishes?



well, I am sure that you signed something declaring that you would abide by all the laws of this land.


From what I understand the freemen also wish to abide by the laws of the land. Are you confident you know what the laws of the land are and are not? How can you be so confident that you have not agreed to follow codes, statutes, and regulations that are not necessary to be in compliance with the law of the land?

Furthermore, are you confident you truly understand our legal system and the concurrent jurisdictions it operates under? Do you even know what that means? I have a feeling you don't and therefore are unqualified to engage in this debate and would be the reason that the majority of your rebuttals are nothing but rhetoric.



[edit on 29-6-2010 by harvib]



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by drmeola
 


Well said.. Diplomatic immunity. And yes when you are on you're property, you are king and you make the laws. The common law still applies on the outside of your "kingdom". You cant harm another human being, his property or commit fraud..

If you do nothing wrong, why should you be punished? At the rate things are going now, people are being punished for things they have no control over. Taxed to death... The rich get wealthier off of the poor.

Here in Canada, there is about 4 billion in the banks but they have 1.5 trillion lent out at compound interest. The money doest exist untill I go for a loan. They lend it to you under the assumption they have it in the bank. It's a classic case of fraud.

The Bank of Canada has the authority to pay off our debt with little or no interest. It's our bank. Not like the federal reserve.. Why does the Corporation of Canada borrow money from private banks then?
Because it's a corrupt government..



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by harvib
 



hmmm. How many letters or calls does it take? And letters and calls by who?


Lot's of letters, lots of phone calls, by citizens. Some of those citizens are called Lobbyists, that's the problem people don't understand, there are groups of citizens out there that hire lobby firms to represent them to their representatives, they spend a lot of money to influence their representatives. Individually the people in the group don't spend a whole lot, but together, they end up spending a lot.


you indicated that the business owners as well as the community disagreed with a new law. Is that law in the process of being repealed? Whose letter was so influential that it caused a law to be passed against the majority wishes?


It was several people that wrote or called their state legislature, they were the ones that influenced their representatives to pass this law, the problem is that a lot of people don't pay attention to the state legislature, all they do is pay attention nationally.

If you aren't informed, you will let them pass something you might be against.

Then there is the process of repealing a law. You get a ton of signatures on a petition and submit that petition to your representative and tell him to call for the repeal of that law, now I don't know whether or not that law in Colorado is being repealed, all I know is last time I checked it was being ignored, the law itself had become unenforceable. Many laws do this, they simply become unenforceable.

It's your government, use it, don't just simply think to yourself, "Well, I singularly don't agree with anything they pass so I will just ignore it all and follow my own code."



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


I have to admit I am a little confused by your position. You seem to indicate that you believe one should sign when and where one is told to sign as long as it is presented by "your Government". However then you support individuals and business owners breaking their agreement and acting unlawfully?

However you don't support individuals deciding for themselves what they wish to agree to and what jurisdiction they wish to operate under? Isn't it more honorable to honor your contracts?

EDIT TO ADD:

I am still curious as to how you respond to my third point regarding your confidence in your knowledge of the legal systems?

[edit on 29-6-2010 by harvib]



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by harvib
 



You seem to indicate that you believe one should sign when and where one is told to sign as long as it is presented by "your Government". However then you support individuals and business owners breaking their agreement and acting unlawfully?


When most of a community rejects a law, that has more power than the law itself. Think of prohibition.



However you don't support individuals deciding for themselves what they wish to agree to and what jurisdiction they wish to operate under? Isn't it more honorable to honor your contracts?


When a community agrees to something that is more powerful than a law, when an individual disagrees with a law, that's just being an outlaw.


I am still curious as to how you respond to my third point regarding your confidence in your knowledge of the legal systems?


That's why they have lawyers.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


You still don't make sense to me. You are offended by the actions of this society because they wish to retain and exercise their rights. You are offended by them even though they appear to be acting in full compliance with the law of the land.

However you are not offended by groups of individuals that contract into a jurisdiction, agreeing to follow all the statutes, codes, and regulations as they are set forth, and then act dishonorably by violating their contract? Go figure...



That's why they have lawyers.


So you don't understand the legal system nor do you understand the concurrent jurisdictions it operates under? Then again I ask this question: How can you be so confident that you have not agreed to follow codes, statutes, and regulations that are not necessary to be in compliance with the law of the land?



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Thats awesome. I have heard of the freeman movement and all that it applies, but this is the first time I have seen it in action.

I wonder though. I am in Vancouver BC, and here we only have one public insurer ICBC. A publicly owned company, given to big business at a rock bottom price "free" Anyway. Our motor vehicle branch go directly through ICBC and as such, a license is required to insure a vehicle. You also have to pay off any other fines, parking, and transit violations.

If you ask me, the whole idea of requiring insurance is absurd. The logic behind it is to protect people from monetary damage caused by bad drivers. Yet these insurance companies post record profits every year. I cant help but wonder, with all that money being laundered out of an economy and into the hands of the insurance corporation, just how much monetary protection are they offering? It seems counter productive, unless you are a bad driver, are the victim of a bad driver, or work for the insurance company.

I think car insurance should be sold along side life insurance and Lotto tickets. Thats all it is really, a mandatory lottery that you probably dont want to win. It launders money from economies, and uses such things as fear of an accident to maintain the illusion of necessity.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Just saw this in another thread...


www.huffingtonpost.com...



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by jeh2324
Just saw this in another thread...


Your talking to me eh? :-)

Yah different subject, but the same rules applied. I just modified it a little.
I doubt that my lazy nature makes my opinion any less relevant.

Opps, nvm...

[edit on 1-7-2010 by MojosGhost]

[edit on 1-7-2010 by MojosGhost]



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jeh2324
Just saw this in another thread...

www.huffingtonpost.com...




Source
Mark Potok, who directs hate-group research at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said Kane had not been in the group's database before Thursday. But he said that was not surprising, given the "explosive growth" in the anti-government movement in recent years. With 363 new groups in 2009, there are now 512, Potok said.

Members of so-called patriot groups don't recognize the authority of the U.S. government and consider themselves sovereign citizens.

Wow wild article, thanks for posting it.
I don't think this guy is in any way typical of the freeman movement, but the article seems to make unnescary linkages to what they term 'anti-government' groups and their explosive growth. It's contention that they don't recognise the authority of the US Government is complete rubbish, the constitution which defines the very basis of the US Government is the very same basis which allows the freeman liberty. I hate when they take some nutjob and use it to demonize something else, even worse though is for alot of folks articles like this are the first thing they hear about the freeman issue and this creates a preconception of violence and lawlessness. One of several reasons I walked away from my television set years ago and haven't looked back.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 04:30 AM
link   
Notice of Understanding and Intent And Claim of Right
Whereas it is my understanding Canada is a common law jurisdiction, and,
Whereas it is my understanding equality before the law is paramount and mandatory, and,
Whereas it is my understanding a statute is defined as a legislated rule of society which has been given the force of law,
and,
Whereas it is my understanding a society is defined as a number of people joined by mutual consent to deliberate,
determine and act for a common goal, and,
Whereas it is my understanding the only form of government recognized as lawful in Canada is a representative one,
and,
Whereas it is my understanding representation requires mutual consent, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that in the absence of mutual consent neither representation nor governance can exist,
and,
Whereas it is my understanding all Acts are statutes restricted in scope and applicability by the Constitution Act, and,
Whereas it is my understanding Section 32 of the Constitution Act limits it to members and employees of government,
and,
Whereas it is my understanding those who have a SIN (Social Insurance Number) are in fact employees of the federal
government and thus are bound by the statutes created by the federal government, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that it is lawful to abandon one’s SIN, and,
Whereas it is my understanding people in Canada have a right to revoke or deny consent to be represented and thus
governed, and,
Whereas it is my understanding if anyone does revoke or deny consent they exist free of government control and
statutory restraints, and,
Whereas a Freeman-on-the-Land has lawfully revoked consent and does exist free of statutory restrictions, obligations,
and limitations, and,
Whereas I,_________________________________________ am a Freeman-on-the-Land, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that acting peacefully within community standards does not breach
the peace, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that any action for which one can apply for and receive a license must itself be a
fundamentally lawful action, and,
Whereas as I am a Freeman-on-the-Land who operates with full responsibility and not a child, I do not see the need to
ask permission to engage in lawful and peaceful activities, especially from those who claim limited liability, and,
Whereas it is my understanding a by-law is defined as a rule of a corporation, and,
Whereas it is my understanding corporations are legal fictions and require contracts in order to claim authority or control
over other parties, and,
Whereas it is my understanding legal fictions lack a soul and cannot exert any control over those who are thus blessed
and operate with respect to that knowledge as only a fool would allow soulless fictions to dictate ones actions, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that I have a right to use my property without having to pay for the use or enjoyment of it,
and, Whereas it is my understanding that Sky Train is in fact and actuality public property to which I have the right of use
and access, and, Whereas I claim the right to collect a pension if I have paid into it and claim that said right is not
affected if I abandon my Social Insurance Number, and, Whereas it is my understanding that a summons is merely an
invitation to attend and the ones issued by the British Columbia Securities Commission create no obligation or dishonor if
ignored, and, Whereas it is my understanding peace officers have a duty to distinguish between statutes and law and
those who attempt to enforce statutes against a Freeman-on-the-Land are in fact breaking the law, and,
Whereas I have the power to refuse intercourse or interaction with peace officers who have not observed me breach the
peace, and, Whereas permanent estoppel by acquiescence barring any peace officer or prosecutor from bringing charges against a Freeman-on-the-Land under any Act is



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 04:31 AM
link   
created if this claim is not responded to in the stated fashion and time,
Therefore be it now known to any and all concerned and affected parties, that I,___________________ a Freeman-on-
the-Land do hereby state clearly specifically and unequivocally my intent to peacefully and lawfully exist free of all
statutory obligations restrictions and maintain all rights at law to trade, exchange or barter . Furthermore, I claim that
these actions are not outside my communities’ standards and will in fact support said community in our desire for
truth and maximum freedom. Furthermore, I claim the right to engage in these actions and further claim that all property
held by me is held under a claim of right as mentioned in the Criminal Code of Canada. Furthermore, I claim that
anyone who interferes with my lawful activities after having been served notice of this claim and who fails to properly
dispute or make lawful counterclaim is breaking the law, cannot claim good faith or colour of right and that such
transgressions will be dealt with in a properly convened court de jure. Furthermore, I claim that the courts in British Columbia are de-facto and bound by the Law and Equity Act and are in fact in the profitable business of conducting,
witnessing and facilitating the transactions of security interests and I further claim they require the consent of both parties
prior to providing any such services. Furthermore, I claim all transactions of security interests require the consent of both
parties and I do hereby deny consent to any transaction of a security interest issuing under any Act for as herein stated
as a Freeman-on-the-Land I am not subject to any Act. Furthermore, I claim my FEE SCHEDULE for any
transgressions by peace officers, government principals or agents or justice system participants is TWO HUNDRED
DOLLARS PER HOUR or portion thereof if being questioned, interrogated or in any way detained, harassed or otherwise
regulated and TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS PER HOUR or portion thereof if I am handcuffed, transported, incarcerated
or subjected to any adjudication process without my express written and Notarized consent. Furthermore, I claim the
right to use a Notary Public to secure payment of the aforementioned FEE SCHEDULE against any transgressors who
by their actions or omissions harm me or my interests, directly or by proxy in any way. Furthermore, I claim the right to
convene a proper court de jure in order to address any potentially criminal actions of any peace officers, government
principals or agents or justice system participants who having been served notice of this claim fail to dispute or discuss or
make lawful counterclaim and then interfere by act or omission with the lawful exercise of properly claimed and
established rights and freedoms. Furthermore, I claim the law of agent and principal applies and that service upon one
is service upon both.
Furthermore, I claim the right to deal with any counterclaims or disputes publicly and in an open forum using discussion
and negotiation and to capture on video tape said discussion and negotiation for whatever lawful purpose as I see fit.
Affected parties wishing to dispute the claims made herein or make their own counterclaims must respond appropriately
within TEN (10) days of service of notice of this action. Reponses must be under Oath or attestation, upon full
commercial liability and penalty of perjury and registered in the Notary Office herein provided no later than ten days from
the date of original service as attested to by way of certificate of service.

Failure to register a dispute against the claims made herein will result in an automatic default judgment and permanent
and irrevocable estoppel by acquiescence barring the bringing of charges under any statute or Act against My Self
Freeman-on-the-Land______________________________ Place of claim of right: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Dated:___ Blah.. Blahh.. www.scribd.com...



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by twitchy
 


Actually I disagree, from reading through this thread, I believe this guy was typical of a person in the freemen group.

I believe this is the ultimate goal of the Freemen, to start doing this to cops across the nation. Asserting their "Natural Right" to blow away authority figures for trying to keep the peace.



[edit on 7/2/2010 by whatukno]




top topics



 
55
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join