Cops dealing with people, understanding your rights...by a dude

Your argument assumes the Constitution is still the law of the land. It is not my friend, and has not been since the USA declared bankruptcy and went into receivership to the FRB in 1933, and FDR declared a state of emergency which has never been lifted.

"Common law" which lays out our inalienable liberties and rights to property ownership no longer applies. We are now living under what is called "commerce law" which is maritime law or the law of the seas. Common law requires an action and proof of subsequent injury for a punishment to be handed down. In commerce law you can be punished for action without injury. So rolling through a stop sign when no other cars are around for miles is a punishable offense.

Since the bankruptcy was declared, we have become the property or"chattel" of the creditor (FRB) until the debt is repaid. And as you know the debt can never be repaid because our currency (FR notes) IS debt. You can't pay off your debt with more debt. Since we are all debtors to the FRB, we are legally subject to their rules and regulations. The congress is merely a group of trustees in the perpetual bankruptcy reorganization. They have no real power, and the people have no RIGHTS. Only PRIVILEGES granted us by our master creditor. You are ALLOWED to drive only because they let you.

FR notes are notes of debt or IOUs. Everything we purchase with FR notes carries a hidden lien (called maritime hypothecation) that attached to that item since it was not paid in full with "real" money. That lien stays with the item until the debt (our country owes the FRB) is paid in full (which it never will). Even after you pay your car loan off and hold the title in your hand, you still do not own the car. The FRB owns it and can do with it as they please. If they don't like the way you are driving their car, they can take it from you - legally. You are merely the "user" of their property.

Also they own the roads since they were also paid for with FR notes.These roads are actually "shipping lanes" in commerce and thus under the jurisdiction of commerce law. If they don't like they way you drive on their roads, they can revoke your permission (license) to drive.

Even your physical body is owned by the creditor. Why do think they were able to pass mandatory seat belt laws or vaccination laws? To protect their property - YOU! Think about it. Where in the Constitution is power granted to pass laws forcing people to protect themselves?

So don't blame the cops, they are just doing what they have been ordered to do by our creditors to protect their property. And don't try to argue Constitutional or common law with them because they don't apply anymore. You are a debt slave or "chattel" owned by the FRB under commerce law and need to get used to it.

Laws were meant to protect us.

A "drivers license" law that allows the State to fine me, take my car, and possibly jail me, is not "protecting" me. It doesn't protect you.

The only thing that "law" protects is the system of corruption itself.

Originally posted by greenovni
The reason that they are not valid is because the statues book are missing a critical piece of text on each and every single statue...

This missing piece on each statue is the ENACTING CLAUSE!

I won't speak to the specifics of the States you mentioned, however, I will address this erroneous statement, as related to Texas "statutes".

Our traffic laws are, mostly, codified in the Transportation Code. You are correct in saying "each statute" does not contain the "enacting clause", individually. However, the clause is present and sufficient in the following manner:

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

SECTION 1. The Transportation Code is adopted to read as follows:

This is followed by the entire text of the Code. Changes to the Code are enacted as amendments, which are then included in the final bill adopting the amended Code. The same applies to the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Penal Code.

As I said before, what you refer to as the "statutes book" is simply the codification of the "laws". A condensed version, if you will, which is "Enacted" in its entirety, when amended and or adopted in its current form.

reply to post by rebeldog

I explain to young officers all the time that they had better be a man before they put on the badge because the badge does not make them a man.

As for the rest of your rant about your own manhood sounds like someone has some doubts to me. My balls are in tact thank you. I am on duty by myself when I work the evening shift. I wade into things that most on here would avoid.

I was in the Air Force and Army. Last I checked we were all on the same side. I do admire the Marines, they are some tough folks. Most of the ones that I have known have not felt the need to prove their manhood, they have a certain humility about them. I'm happy that you think that you can out do me in all these areas.

I was 37 when I went through Army Basic and I was 47 when I did the POPAT. I suppose that being in NC you can find out what that means when becoming a police officer. As far as the rest of your abilities, if you ever come through my little town and I stop you, you be a gentleman I will too and we won't have to find out the nasty truth of the matter.
Seeashrink

reply to post by goose97


Nice to make your acquantance fellow traveler! Well stated! You do realize that there are loopholes allowing you to gain administrative rights over your strawman, right? You also recognize that the formation of the FRB was done illegally and not in accordance with the Constitution. We are in this predicament because we ALLOW ourselves to be, not because we are obligated to be.

Best regards,
Kozmo

Originally posted by seeashrink

Originally posted by YouSir
reply to post by seeashrink

 

Slick, you don't know a thing about me. You don't know that I have a military issued flag hanging in my office of a public building up side down. I'm just going to assume that you know what that means. You have no idea of the people that I cut slack just because I don't like getting in their pockets because the governments are getting into them enough without my help. You don't know that a ticked book last me 2 years when most officers go through a book in 6 wks to 2 months or less.

Every cop has his strong point, an area that he/she likes to work. Some love traffic, some love drug cases, my particular strong point is investigations. I get stolen guns off the street and out of the hands of violent criminals. I find stolen cars. I investigate child sexual abuse and rape and murder. Stuff you wouldn't have the guts to come from behind you cushy computer desk to deal with.

As I told someone in the other thread, the idea that you guys have would be wonderful in existance, but it is not going to exist in this current society until there is a breakdown of same.

Have you ever rode with a cop? Have you ever served in the military or are you just a mouth piece for your own ideas and design without anything in your vast experience to support it? I've served MY country in both the military and civilian role and I've done so with more than words. I would be surprised if you could say the same and I don't know that I would believe you if you. You seem to enjoy the anonymity of the internet. I've had a mod on here challenge me as to if I were a cop of not. I gave him my office phone number and gave him permission to talk to my chief. So yes, I am real, and I am a realist and I don't need the internet to hide behind.

You and your kind are so full of hate that you can't see the forest for the trees. You're just sad little people. You will be amazed as you grow up how much you learn and how much of what you thought you knew but didn't.

Gee, I hope that I don't get deleted by a mod for M&D. Anybody want to take bets on that?

Seeashrink

Ummmm..............."Slick, you dont know a thing about me"......to borrow your condescension.........I've served in the military.......TWICE........honorably discharged both times, with enough awards and medals to paper a room.......am I proud of it?..........HELL no...... so stop gladhanding yourself....When your perfected, and.......NEVER.....break your statutes while off duty, let alone while on.......then you can come on back and correct me for being ......wrong...
You need to entertain something in your small mind, i'm not your bro, not your "son" and certainly glad that I dont live in your little corner of the universe......There's also something you need to get a grip on, I dont.......hate you.....get it? I dont hate any of you........I despise you, I even deteste you.......your hypocrites of the first magnitude..........but I can still have compassion for you the individual..........let that thought roll through your firmament......yep, you got some good ole fashioned anger out of me but you can never get me to hate you.

You see........Slick.....I seem to have tweaked a real nerve of yours, which psychologicaly would point to a deepseated angst, fed by your subconscious......knowing...that I'm right.....thus, the response....Dont feel too put upon..because I deteste the person that...I... used to be......a soldier......in service to a corporate state that impugnes the misplaced, misguided and ignorant devotion of those that do serve....to those that do take the oath and sends them to a farther shore to die for an unconstitutional war.....as I stated before.....I will KEEP my oath..........to the constitution.....but never again to a corporate charter....nuff said

YouSir

reply to post by goose97


Common law doesnt exist?? I somehow think you are mistaken
Common saw supersedes ANY statute or act. Acts and Statutes are given the "FORCE" of law by consent of the governed. Force of law and actual law are 2 different things.

You do not need a drivers license....the definition of a driver is one who is engaged in commerce on the road. For example Black’s Law Dictionary defines a driver as: “One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle, with horse, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car.”

As you are not using you vehicle for commerce...you do not need a license as you are not driving, you are travelling....which is a god given right.

Too many people are ignorant to the law. I would suggest everyone looks at the legal definitions of wording used by governments as the words do not mean what you think. Legalize is a language we should all be taught at birth.

Wow!

You are quite articulate and make a very compelling argument for your cause and perhaps this is the way things should be or could be; however, it is far from the way things are.

Trying to argue that statutes are not laws is simply wordplay.

Statute and Law are used interchangeably in American law and they mean the same thing.

Statute

A law established by an act of the legislature.

Under the U.S. and state constitutions, statutes are considered the primary source of law in the U.S. -- that is, legislatures make the law (statutes) and courts interpret the law (cases).

Most state statutes are organized by subject matter and published in books referred to as codes. Typically, a state has a family or civil code (where the divorce laws are usually contained), a criminal code (where incest, bigamy and domestic violence laws are often found), welfare code (which contains laws related to public benefits), probate code (where laws about wills, trusts and probate proceedings are collected) and many other codes dealing with a wide variety of topics. Federal statutes are organized into subject matter titles within the United States Code (for example, Title 18 for crimes and Title 11 for bankruptcy).

The written will of the legislature, solemnly expressed according to the forms prescribed in the Constitution; an act of the legislature.

Law

n. 1) any system of regulations to govern the conduct of the people of a community, society or nation, in response to the need for regularity, consistency and justice based upon collective human experience.

2) n. a statute, ordinance or regulation enacted by the legislative branch of a government and signed into law, or in some nations created by decree without any democratic process. This is distinguished from "natural law," which is not based on statute, but on alleged common understanding of what is right and proper (often based on moral and religious precepts as well as common understanding of fairness and justice).

3) n. a generic term for any body of regulations for conduct, including specialized rules (military law), moral conduct under various religions and for organizations, usually called "bylaws."

This looks like they are the same thing to me; however, likely someone as well read on the topic as you are will have some compelling sounding argument as to how they are not; unfortunately the arguments sound good on the internet but don't really hold water in a court or the fabric of our society would break down.

I don't see any evidence here that compels me to use these arguments in court or to encourage others to do so as likely as not they and I would simply end up on jail.

Further, I don't see any compelling evidence anywhere that these arguments work. If they did the system would come crashing down and that clearly is not the case.

That said; I don't see any evidence to support the success of a "freeman" lifestyle in the US; perhaps as one poster opined this belongs in a philosophy column - it is indeed something to admire unfortunately all that comes to mind is:

reply to seeashrink:

This was a very nice reply that I enjoyed reading. Now before I start I should forewarn you that I’m sure I will be called biased as I too am a police officer. Have been for the last 12 years. After reading this subject in its entirety I have been swayed back and forth several times. However what I see most here is that people here make a common mistake of seeing something that looks right and in their best interest and latch onto this like a life saver and hold this to be the ultimate truth. The problem is you do not look beyond what is said, the context it is said in, or the location. This is the internet. This covers the entire world. What is right in N.C. may not be the same in say, Louisiana where I work. I myself do not believe in tickets and was more than happy when they finally abolished the quota system here for all police except state police. As you have stated most officers have a place they are strong in. yours is investigations. Mine is drugs. I will wade into ghettos and fight armed crack and meth heads to take this stuff from them. I will GLADLY take their money and TBH I could care less if the governor himself is sticking the money is his back pocket as long as I can hurt them by taking it.

On a side note I for one feel empathy for the public to which I belong. I do not like writing tickets. However there is times when you must. My two pet peeves in this world we drive in is loud music and children not in a safety seat. I don’t care if your are the pope himself, if I catch you blaring your offensive rap music cursing through the streets or you are stupid enough to let your child walk from the front seat to the back and back to the front then I WILL stop you and write you a several hundread dollar reminder of why you should not do that. If by some miracle you come to court and throw out some BS law that invalidates my fine, I am ok with that. At least that child was safe the rest of the day. I WILL learn form that encounter and improve my law courses.
To get back on topic I have to say the most swaying post on here are the ones where it spells out the Right To Travel more clearly. We as the police and voices of the government are not saying you cannot travel freely from your house to where ever you want. What is said is that you must do so in a safe and prudent manner. This involves a class on how to drive. A test of your driving knowledge and skill. And then a license to prove those to the officer that stops you. If you want to avoid this then I suggest you lace up the boots and hit that dusty ol trail. No one will stop you. That is your right. You can even ride your bike, as long as you obey the laws of this state when you travel on the roadway.

I would beg any of you to come and ride ONE weekend night shift with me and come enforce drug laws with me just ONCE! If you are ever my way shoot me a PM and I will beg the chief to let you come ride. If you make it the whole night and are still alive in the morning I will gladly buy you breakfast if you don’t change at least some of your views. WE the police stand ready on your defense. WE the police are here 24/7 ready to do battle with evil and tyranny when you are in need of it. If you do not like this and do not believe in it then I say call someone else when you most need help. Since this thread seems to be full of quotes I will leave you with this one: "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm." - Winston Churchill

P.S. even though I have served in the military I do not know what that flag position signifies. Also I am not ashamed of my ignorance and therefore have no problem asking. Could you please explain it to me?

reply to post by YouSir

Well slick, you seem to be the one disallusioned. I have nothing to prove and no reqrets for my service. You can spout off all you want to about your freeman crap and it will not hold water in a court of law......Period. Two tours of duty and all those rewards and didn't learn crap. Come back and talk to me when you grow up.
You can go ahead and get the last word in, I don't mind. But please don't let it make you belive that you are right and I have given up. I'm just tired of the same old spin that leads no where and has no bearing on real life.
Thanks Slick,
Seeashrink

reply to post by seeashrink


Sorry to bust yer bubble seeashrink, but the "Freeman" argument has held up in more than one court of law. One just need to become better educated on how to employ a "Freeman" defense and will have had to complete the process of gaining administrative rights over your strawman (Fiction). Do some research and you'll see that I am 100% correct.

Appreciate your service, sir! However, do us all a favor and make certain that your future service is to mankind and not a corporate charter.

reply to post by rebeldog


I too would like to wade in on this comment. I myself am from the ARMY. I could make several disparaging remarks to you about the Marines and anyone who has served can do the same. It is a right you gain by going through and for the most part is playful banter between friendly forces. Also a driving force for each to do their best. So I will refrain from insulting your branch and instead of thank you for serving as I and millions others have.

However with that being said I think I should reply that I personally don’t think you have done half the things you lead us to believe and personally think you have seen too many war movies. I know many marines and as seeashrink stated most have been very nice and humble (unless you count the fresh ones out of boot that act like they are God until you put one on his face). I personally can tell you that my father was a Force Recon member with the Marines in Vietnam and he was one of the most humble men you could have ever met. I NEVER knew what he did until the final months of his life when he began to tell me. And I then understood why he was so humble. These men did terrible things for our freedom in a war that we probably shouldn’t have even been in. To see you write in such a frivolous way about your past experiences (if even real) only cheapens the heroic deeds you and others of your team may or may not have done.

As far as your half hearted threats at the bottom I agree with seeashrink on this. If you drive through my area and are any less courteous to me than I am to you then I guess we will see which way that wall falls. I have no need to prove my manhood by getting into a cock measuring contest with you. I myself do not believe in fighting in these stupid arenas as I only know how to fight one way. As though my life depends on it. So be fair warned, if it comes to this I have no problem pulling your hair, scratching your face, or even biting your left testicle off and spitting it in your eye to win. Because my number one concern is that at the end of my tour of duty I AM going to go home and see my loved ones.

Sry for going off topic.

reply to post by sempul

I enjoyed your post. I do realize that they're people here from all over the US and the world. Most state laws do not deviate that much so I feel that most of the arguements are sound.
I have to apologize for my lack of manners today with people. I have the flu and I am seldom ever sick and it has left me a little ill tempered. I feel to lose your temper shows ignorance in some circumstances.
The flag is flown upside down as a sign of distress or indicates an emergency of some sort. I feel that our country is in distress. We are headed toward socialism as hard as we can go. Our economy is shot, etc, etc.
This is what I cannot get these people to understand. I don't disagree with their ideas, I think that they are wonderful, they are simply unrealistic. I don't know why they waste their time.
Seeashrink
P. S. Keep your head down brother. Be safe.

Freeman have won cases....heres proof of one



Part 2



This is in the uk....and is for failure to pay council tax.

Originally posted by sempul


On a side note I for one feel empathy for the public to which I belong. I do not like writing tickets. However there is times when you must. My two pet peeves in this world we drive in is loud music and children not in a safety seat. I don’t care if your are the pope himself, if I catch you blaring your offensive rap music cursing through the streets or you are stupid enough to let your child walk from the front seat to the back and back to the front then I WILL stop you and write you a several hundread dollar reminder of why you should not do that.

Alittle off topic, but I have to chime in. Your pet peeve of music,you deem offensive is just that.YOURS. Because someone in their OWN vehicle is playing it loud,because THEY like it,doesnt mean YOU have to write a ticket for it. I am sure you are talking about those who have their windows rolled down,but do you write a ticket for those with the windows up? Hear a little base in the trunk,and you immediately have to pull them over? Before you use the loud obscenity clause,as your reason to do it, you stated its one of your pet peeves,so I would have to say,you are already biased, with how you write your tickets. I have lived in a inner-city for most of my life. I have seen police officers pull up to bunch of kids,take their drugs,and keep them for themselves. I have seen police beat downs. I have seen NO police presence,when the police should be there protecting. I look at Egypt right now,and see the people rising up against crooked police forces. The Police are a gang in blue. No difference,then any other street gang. They will ALWAYS protect their own. I try to respect those who I know serve to their best ability,and I have many police officer friends. That doesnt change the fact that many of them abuse the authority they are being payed to enforce. Gang members are NOT part of society. They are gang members.

On topic.
Our laws are meant to protect. If those who are in authority do not know the laws they are trying to enforce,they need a refresher course daily. Some laws are just plain bad. We the people can only change it.

reply to post by loves a conspiricy


That "Freeman" video was debunked here.

All they show is a man flustering the court, walking away,claiming victory, and then, in the video, they SHOW the actual court document, assessed after the fact, which shows the defendant suffered a summary judgment AGAINST his case in absentia.

It's just smoke and mirrors.

~Heff

Originally posted by sempul
reply to post by rebeldog

 

I too would like to wade in on this comment. I myself am from the ARMY. I could make several disparaging remarks to you about the Marines and anyone who has served can do the same. It is a right you gain by going through and for the most part is playful banter between friendly forces. Also a driving force for each to do their best. So I will refrain from insulting your branch and instead of thank you for serving as I and millions others have.

However with that being said I think I should reply that I personally don’t think you have done half the things you lead us to believe and personally think you have seen too many war movies. I know many marines and as seeashrink stated most have been very nice and humble (unless you count the fresh ones out of boot that act like they are God until you put one on his face). I personally can tell you that my father was a Force Recon member with the Marines in Vietnam and he was one of the most humble men you could have ever met. I NEVER knew what he did until the final months of his life when he began to tell me. And I then understood why he was so humble. These men did terrible things for our freedom in a war that we probably shouldn’t have even been in. To see you write in such a frivolous way about your past experiences (if even real) only cheapens the heroic deeds you and others of your team may or may not have done.

As far as your half hearted threats at the bottom I agree with seeashrink on this. If you drive through my area and are any less courteous to me than I am to you then I guess we will see which way that wall falls. I have no need to prove my manhood by getting into a cock measuring contest with you. I myself do not believe in fighting in these stupid arenas as I only know how to fight one way. As though my life depends on it. So be fair warned, if it comes to this I have no problem pulling your hair, scratching your face, or even biting your left testicle off and spitting it in your eye to win. Because my number one concern is that at the end of my tour of duty I AM going to go home and see my loved ones.

Sry for going off topic.

edit on 30-1-2011 by sempul because: I spell like a drunken monkey

Man, I thought I was being too much to the point. That is an awesome post. Like you supported, every Marine I have ever met with any age or rank has been as nice, and mature, and as humble as they can be. After reading that guy's post, I was trying to figure out what part to this thread warranted the "I'm a bad dude" speech.
Like you, I am too old and have been doing this too long for the dick measuring crap. I even hate going to the range to qualify because I have to listen to these young officers talk about what amazing cops they are.
When I deal with someone I evaluate their size, attitude, and demeanor. If the guy is six four and two hundred fifty pounds and puts his hands on my 200 pound frame and 54 year old body, I'm going to do whatever is neccessary to go home. My force continuam is short, I don't wear the bat man belt. I carry a gun, sometimes a tazer in the car, or I may stick oc spray in my pocket or an ASP in the small of my back. So my options are short as you can see. Thanks again for your service and support.
Seeashrink

reply to post by Hefficide


He was not arrested for contempt of court...he did a lot of stuff that would normally mean you would be led away to a cell.
Im pretty sure there was an update to this?? I will have a look around and see if i can find the conclusion to this court case

EDIT: I assume someone has spoken to Raymond StClair in regard to this to find out the outcome?? I am going to email him now and see what actually happened after the case

TO THE MODS:
I would respectfully request that the tolerence of off topic post exist here as existed in my thread about the people getting along with cop and understanding their rights. Fair is fair. These freeman derailed that thread and nothing was done.
Seeashrink

An interesting thread op. Ah the fine line we walk between being policed for profit, to the freedom to drive your car around without a hassle, when you did nothing wrong. Oh and arguing the fine point of what "freedom" and "rights" mean, when what all interpretations really means is, he who has the most power and people on there side, well there interpretation of those two words is the right interpretation, and lets not forget he who has the most power and people on there side is depended on who has the most money. A true conundrum, round and round we go. But unfortunately and its been said many times before, no one really follows the constitution or common law, least of all those who make the laws, and few people even actually follow common sense.

But this is what happens when something that should be a practice of rights and common sense, becomes a bureaucratic profit making machine. Oh yes its happened before were the protectors, become those you pay to be protected from. But in more subtle times the changes are more subtle. And it usually starts subtly like some have said in this thread.... a law here....and interpretation of a right there..... And so on and so on, and no matter who things there right, human felling will always come into play. And then they break into groups those for, or against, and bicker on this or that, all the while following were the money goes.

But whatever, It's obvious to anybody that cop's now a days walk a fine line, between being the enforcers of the bureaucracies and policies of the corporate profit making machine, to just doing there job's. Sounds like the problem like always is in the way they raise there revenue and the whole structure of such a thing, and who is in charge of making the rules of raising those revenues. Though I really have nothing against cops, and have met some good cops, and some cops with a higher then thou attitude. All in all most cops are just doing there jobs. I would say if your going to do something about it, then attack the source, not the arm of the source. There really has to be a more better and efficient way of raising revenues for such things that wont collide with the interests and greed humanity, for if not.... then the rest as they say will be history.

It's funny if you think about it, if this whole thing goes to the tshtf, on the tombstone of the achievements of this society and world, it will be written. "They drowned themselves with all there bullshint, and laws and rules" Wouldn't be the first that this happened to, but it would be the most funniest.