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.

 

"Your rights ... have been suspended."

page: 3
38
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Hey, JPZ, I am getting to be an activist. WOW.

How to change their attitude.

Here is my idea, get them to arrest you on purpose and institute the law.

We have gotten to the point that they can no longer hide their corruption.

Is this the point in time we teach them? The only law there is, to not harm another or infringe on their rights of Life, Liberty or Property!




posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 03:35 AM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


Yes sir, indeed! Junk the registration to your vehicle, remove the license plate, and disavow any contracts made with the DMV, and start driving around without a license and license plate, chances are you will not have to provoke an LEO to arrest you. You may be able to convince an LEO you are exercising your God given rights, and if so, great! If not, you have a battle to fight, and a battle that will be fought in the courts. A battle you can win. A battle that should be, and needs to be fought.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Okay, I have been driving for 3 years with no license and no registration.

Let us say I want to push our rights. I drive to damn good, I have been in two accidents in my life. Once in a rear end. ANYWAY.

Let us look at defenses.

Defenses.

1 jurisdiction of the court
2 prosecutor acting as a victim, there has to be a victim for a crime to be committed.
3 state acting as a state, prove that because the definition of state requires the CONSENT of the govern
4 constitutional authority
5 constitutional relevance
6 court law that is applicable
7 jury nullification
8


Been drinking a little tonight, I know I have a couple more.
JPZ, we should put together a sovereigns defense layout

Anyway, life is limited, if one sets the definition of life as what has been given, what is life?



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 





JPZ, we should put together a sovereigns defense layout


Agreed! On that note:




Defenses.

1 jurisdiction of the court

2 prosecutor acting as a victim, there has to be a victim for a crime to be committed.

3 state acting as a state, prove that because the definition of state requires the CONSENT of the govern

4 constitutional authority

5 constitutional relevance

6 court law that is applicable

7 jury nullification


It should be noted that challenging jurisdiction is not a defense. The moment you challenge jurisdiction you are the plaintiff and the court party, or government agency asserting jurisdiction becomes the defendant. It is crucial to understand this, and be careful of the words we choose. A defendant is someone who has agreed to the jurisdiction by which he has been charged.

Challenging jurisdiction means the government agency or court party asserting it, must show on record that they do indeed have jurisdiction, which would then make us subject to them and liable for the rules and regulations they have legislated.

Further, it should also be noted that the courts will normally not allow constitutional issues to be brought up once a trial is in motion. Constitutional issues are usually brought up in evidentiary hearings, which come before the fact finding of any case. Once a person is on trial in a court, this is the fact finding portion of the case. It must be stipulated from the beginning that the "facts" are being challenged in regards to licensing schemes, and registrations schemes.

Just some food for thought. Anyway End, drink to me, drink to my health, you know I can't drink any more. (Pablo Picasso)



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Megiddodiddo
 


Did you write the original article from the blog you posted the link to?

If not, why did you post the whole article without 'ex' tags, and, post not just snippets from the article but the whole thing?

I'm sorry, I got part way through your first post, but, I refuse to continue without knowing WHO'S WORK I am reading.

If it's yours, you need to say so.

If it's NOT then you're out of line posting the article the way you have.

There's a lot to be said for people writing their own rules, such as the Mayor from the Blog - but - that doesn't make it right. Bucking the Constitution or ATS T&C just doesn't cut it in my book.

peace

[edit on 1-8-2010 by silo13]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 05:18 AM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 



The OP would have been moderated by now if he was out of line.

So did you even file a complaint or did you just decide to complain in thread?

*I think the OP did a good job with his posts.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 05:38 AM
link   
Dang it!!! Another thread about corruption. It just breaks my heart reading about all of this going on all the time. It never ends. I just wonder how people get this way. You have to wonder what these people were like as children.

Speaking of LEO. I'm sorry Mods if I go off on a tangent but I just need to share this with everyone.

I just had to deal with some LEO last night for (my sister being too loud at a party). I had to educate her on their tactics they were trying to pull with her. She was drunk and they tried to lure her onto public land(the street) to "listen" to how loud her friends were being. I really hate that tactic. These cops just didn't care about our rights, they really just wanted to bring in more revenue for their department. Don't get me wrong I do know some LEO and I know most really do care about everyone's safety. It's just this one officer last night, who was playing the good cop role amongst the two, was using every trick in the book. He was trying to ask for ID, i told my sister she didn't have to give it to them, but in her drunken stupor she did and they gave her a citation. Yes, in the midst of this, I called my friend who works with the county LE to verify the law. Hell, when i was confronting him about our rights, he started to mock me. I forgot what he said but he pretty much said that I read too much.

The only thing I regret about last night was to refer them to the Oathkeepers. Not to plug them, but I really have a lot of respect for that organization. I just want to get along with the Police again. The last 10 years here, it seems like the police just keep getting worse and worse. They keep turning into bullies.

Actually when they were being difficult, I confronted them on how the police force is testing the new head-set camera system they are testing because they use too much force where I live. That's when they backed off a little. Proof I had knowledge of their tactics.

I can regrettably say that I have no trust in the Police where I live. I have to grill them to see what kind of a cop they are before I turn off my a-hole defense system. I just hate doing that. I know they deal with a lot of junk every day. I can see it in their eyes. I feel sorry for them. I would just LOVE to invite them in for tea just to give them a little break from their daily stress of protecting their town/city/county. It's just the few bad ones who make the good ones look bad. We are all in this together.

Alright done with my rant.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


reply to post by endisnighe
 


Well my friends I must say I look forward to your collaboration. Especially one that ends with a how to, covering driving without licensure and how to defend yourself following the inevitable run in with the goon enforcer squads!

And Endisnighe you said you have driven without license for years now? You are a personal hero and inspiration then. Indeed show me how to follow suit!



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by Megiddodiddo
 


Did you write the original article from the blog you posted the link to?

If not, why did you post the whole article without 'ex' tags, and, post not just snippets from the article but the whole thing?

I'm sorry, I got part way through your first post, but, I refuse to continue without knowing WHO'S WORK I am reading.

If it's yours, you need to say so.

If it's NOT then you're out of line posting the article the way you have.

There's a lot to be said for people writing their own rules, such as the Mayor from the Blog - but - that doesn't make it right. Bucking the Constitution or ATS T&C just doesn't cut it in my book.

peace

[edit on 1-8-2010 by silo13]


Because EX tags have begun to restrict amount of text postable within them.

If you have a problem with my inclusive decision to provide FULL CONTEXT of this issue,,, please refer to the complaint box forum...

oh ...wait... we don't have one of those yet, do we?

anyway, the links to the exact location the info came from was provided. if you can't figure it out with that, then I guess I can't really help you.

Obviously, my name isn't Ted Koppel, and this isn't Nightline.... sorry!.... I also believe that this topic has several locations that it was located, and unfortunately I cannot verify which source was the original. I did however provide the links to those locations within my post.

so, getting back on the actual TOPIC of this thread...


How do we get from a discussion about Louisiana gun laws into a discussion about a woman supposedly being stripped searched? Oh, yeah. It's called segue. I almost forgot.


um... this isn't about Louisiana gun laws, but Louisiana gun Law does have a part to play within this post, highlighting Government Abuses, backed by grant authority, supposedly accountable yet unafraid of accountability it appears...

This is a thread that is being showcased as being the EXACT reasons why We need our guns!....



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 06:46 AM
link   
reply to post by fred call
 


Are you honestly basing your understanding of Karma from a television show?

@ The OP.

Jeez man, I was all gitty for a second when I first started reading it. I was like, "Yeah the Mayor admitted they're breaking the law. Maybe he's stepping up to the plate and making people aware of it."

Then I kept reading :/

He admitted they're breaking the law, and will continue to do so!

Then I was just confused.

[edit on 1-8-2010 by mryanbrown]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Megiddodiddo
Totalitarianism In One City: Shreveport's Gun-Grabbing Mayor

Louisiana law recognizes the right of the state's residents to carry loaded weapons in their vehicles, and Baillio has a state-issued concealed carry permit -- that is, a piece of paper in which the state generously recognizes one facet of Baillio's innate right to bear arms.



While I find the Mayor's schooling of his constituent troubling,
didn't the suspension of Mr. Baillio's rights begin with the "permit to carry"?



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Redwookieaz
 




The trick is, talk to your sheriff. Period.

When I was younger, I got into a LOT of trouble. A LOT. Anyway, I moved away and grew up. Came back to my home area and since I have been back, I have decided to ACTUALLY involve myself in my own governance.

EVERYONE out there should schedule a meeting with their highest elected law enforcement officer. The County Sheriff.

Now, if you live in a place say like New York City, I feel for you. In a lot of jurisdictions, the Mayor or say a City Manager appoints the Chief of Police. So in that situation, you would need to talk to the mayor or the Chief of Police. I am still attempting to figure out the jurisdictional component of the city appointed police force.

You have 4 levels of governance.

Federal
State
County
City

Now, in Constitutional Governance, you are GUARANTEED a republic as laid out in the Constitution. Each State is allowed to foment their own Constitution. As long as it does not DIRECTLY deviate from the original Constitution of the united States of America. Thereby each county and city is also restricted by both the US Constitution and the State Constitution.

As a citizen of your REPUBLIC, you should actually know your own Republic Constitution.

For years I mistakenly assumed that the US Constitution was the law of the land. It is, but your state (Republic) Constitution is actually MORE important. There are things that I am finding in my state Constitution that are blowing my mind. Currently, Wisconsin and Arizona are the ONLY two states that recognize allodial title! So even though Wisconsin is one of the blue states, we have not completely destroyed the right to property. That is one thing I am investigating.

Now, I have had two encounters with officers of the court since I have come back. One was when being a "traveller" I lost grip on the road and fishtailed down my street. Yes, I was being like a child having fun on roads that were covered in snow. About 9 inches to be exact. It was my first year back and I was just having fun. At the time, I still had a valid California license but NO valid registration. I told the officer everything. I also told him I had no intention of registering my vehicle. He gave me a verbal warning and let me go. A verbal warning, as you know means nothing.

Now, the second time I encountered an officer, was when I was out and about in town. I had finished eating at a restaurant/saloon type establishment and their was a disturbance. Several officers showed up and of course they went to everyone there.

It was kind of funny when they asked for a license while I was in my vehicle. I told the officer that I had no valid license anymore and I did not need one since I was not operating a motor vehicle and I was not a commercial driver.
He brought up that I could be charge with operating a motor vehicle without a license. I remember this specifically, I asked him to show me the motor vehicle.
I had a smile on my face and he knew I knew exactly the terminology he was using.

Now, this was a police officer of the city I live in. He was NOT a sheriff or a deputy sheriff. These people are jurisdictional law enforcement officers. AS YOU KNOW. My father back in the day use to ride my motorcycle all the time without any licensing. I use to ask him what are you going to do if you get pulled over. He used to tell me, so what, what RIGHT do they have to enforce anything. That is one thing I wish my father would have taught me a little more. He was an Air Force Major when he retired. I do not think he ever had a driver's license.

A license is something you are given that permits you to do something that supposedly is illegal without it.

Ask yourself this, when was the first time that driver's licenses were introduced?

Boy, I miss that man, an ass just like me.

We have to RELEARN what it means to be free.

There is one law, to not harm another and to not infringe on another's right to life, liberty and property.

Disclaimer-unless YOU people out there have spoken to your county sheriff and he/she agrees to Constitutional protections, do not ATTEMPT anything I have stated.

OH, one more thing, WHO IS YOUR HEAD LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER

Is he/she a sheriff or a city chief? Maybe you should find out!

[edit on 8/1/2010 by endisnighe]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   
well I need to post this

We Have No Civil Rights!!!!! when the Government can take them Away!!

Freedom of Speech nah when the Federal or Civilian Courts or Government throws a gag order in your face...


it Should be called Civil Privileges! just like a License to Drive is A privilege


You want to talk about loosing your Civilian Rights when you did nothing wrong at all ! all because of your race! and your parents or grand parents background culture !

instead of police officers how about The Federal Government !

The Japanese Americans!!!!! born in the grand Old USA 1st to 2nd generation
True Americans that are raised in the American Culture! lost the their rights ! Treated like War criminals all because of race and their descendant background !

The United States Government Presents !!!!!!! Japanese Relocation

Japanese American Internment (U.S. Govt Propaganda)


George Takei in Japanese concentration camps




something to look at

Executive Order 9066
en.wikipedia.org...

Japanese American internment
en.wikipedia.org...

German American internment
en.wikipedia.org...

There are not anymore Civil Rights! 2.20 min mark !! or just go to the 4.40 min mark



IS The Patriot Act Upgrade of the McCarran Act?
aka Internal Security Act of 1950
tucnak.fsv.cuni.cz...

ahh Punishment Park Fema Camps ?

Civil Rights, Privacy Issues, USA Patriot Act
usliberals.about.com...

Surveillance Under the USA PATRIOT Act
www.aclu.org...

[edit on 1-8-2010 by Wolfenz]

[edit on 1-8-2010 by Wolfenz]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Wolfenz
 


The chickens have come home to roost and the Americans are racists for bombing Hiroshima...........Jeremiah Wright



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Okay, hold the phone. A right to drive a vehicle? I'm afraid I may have to disagree on that point.

One thing that I certainly do agree with is that the statements about the DMV's contracting system, which does inhibit the right to freedom of movement when stopped by a police officer, and that every citizen has a right to free travel. But does that mean that it's the right of anyone and their brother to get behind the wheel of two tons of plastic and metal capable of accelerating up to 100+ miles per hour? I, personally, think not.

Some unlicensed, 95 pound, 14 year old girl getting behind the wheel of an unregistered car after getting piss-drunk off half a Bacardi Breezer and running down some poor schmuck while he stands on his lawn waiting for his dog to finish going to the bathroom is not my idea of a feel-good story. Especially if there's no way to track her down, thanks to a lack of registration.

Or what about that seven year old kid who lead the police on a forty-five minute chase through town, narrowly avoiding several accidents, because he didn't want to go to church with his parents?

Dear old Grandma, 106 years old, blind in one eye and so badly hunched from the osteoporosis that she can barely see over the steering wheel, let alone turn her head to look both ways at an intersection?

Do these not-so-hypothetical people have a right to drive?

We do, as citizens, have the right to free travel, and every single one of us can hop, skip, gallop, bike, walk, run, etc. anywhere we wanna go. But in using a car, large and deadly machines that they can be, there are concessions to be made: licensing to ensure that drivers know how to properly operate the vehicle, and registration to figure out who is who on the road.

Cancel your license, tear up your registration, throw away your plates... and just take the train.

[edit on 1-8-2010 by harblargh]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Megiddodiddo
 


This is quite an eye opener, but unfortunately not surprising. While most police officers over here in the UK are OK, there are some who are astoundingly arrogant and there are horror stories - I'm sure some, just a minority, are just looking for the buzz of power. It is these few cops who ruin the reputation of the whole dept.

In this case, for the major to actually sponsor this debacle is quite frankly a perversion of his power, can't this be taken higher, to the county or state gov't?



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by harblargh
 


No one was screaming that riding a horse, or a horse and buggy was a privilege and not a right. There was no such thing as a DHB, or Department of Horse and Buggy. Riding a horse can be just as dangerous, if not more. Certainly a carriage with four horses charging at full speed can be dangerous. Even so, it is not like people were screaming, driving a horse drawn carriage a right? I think not!

It is always the fear mongers who come in with all their examples of why something isn't a right, because this could happen, and that could happen, so come on guys, who's with me? Let's just make it a privilege and not a right! That way, when this happens or that happens, at least we can say, see? I told you that would happen. Aren't you glad we have a licensing scheme?

Every argument you have made could just as easily apply to guns, and of course, is applied to guns, and why people so desperately want to argue that guns should be outlawed. No sir, you are incorrect, and it is not your privilege, nor your right to abrogate and derogate the rights of others. People have the right to travel, and if they chose to travel by using their own automobile to do so it is their right.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by harblargh
Do these not-so-hypothetical people have a right to drive?


No, but they have a right to travel in their automobile.

Also I'm sorry you disagree with the law. Luckily for us your personal beliefs have no merit on the matter. This isn't a Democracy.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Hey, I was just expressing my own opinion. That's it.

Bad things happen. Everyday. People die in cars and from car accidents, and they also die from gunshot wounds, heart disease, stroke, shankings, electrocution, asphyxia, drowning, and countless other things. Even sex can kill you.

I don't believe that the licensing and registration of vehicles is necessarily a bad thing, I think it saves lives in some cases. That was simply a point I was trying to illustrate. Sorry if I offended.

(And on a side note, I am all for personal gun ownership, but with better registration and steeper penalties against those who use guns in the commission of a crime.)



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by harblargh
 


Uh-huh. You're all for gun ownership just as long as it is treated as a privilege and not a right and registration is required just like a vehicle, huh? Thanks for sharing you're opinion, brother. As dangerous as that opinion is, I will fight tooth and nail for your right to express it.



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join