"Creepy Cameraman" pushes the limits of public surveillance.

reply to post by XaniMatriX


So now it is all true cause some documents look alike? If they can change a persons legal status within a legal system then there is a written law or statute you can quote. If not it only exists in your mind.
Thank you for trying thought, you were not the first and probably not the last to try this argument. They all given up like you did before and will do so in the future too. At least if I'm around

These days, pretty much everywhere you go, you are on camera, except the privacy of your own home with shades all down nice and tight.

Remember it, act like it. Look for those cameras, cause you never know who is looking.

Originally posted by Ghost375

I like how they use the term "creepy" to automatically make the brainwashed masses think what he's doing is bad.

I submit that he's being deliberately creepy to drive home his point. I find it creepy that there are surveillance cameras everywhere, spy satellites that can tell if I dress left or right...

Is it just me, or did the first video (the one with the Asian st the computer) seem staged?

He's making an interesting point, regardless.

You mean someone from the media?

In fact I'd like to do that with the media itself. You know, film them as they film others, follow them around, find otu where they live and stand outside their house and film their house, children etc.
We could start a revolution!

Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by XaniMatriX

 

So now it is all true cause some documents look alike? If they can change a persons legal status within a legal system then there is a written law or statute you can quote. If not it only exists in your mind.
Thank you for trying thought, you were not the first and probably not the last to try this argument. They all given up like you did before and will do so in the future too. At least if I'm around

edit on 4/11/2012 by PsykoOps because: (no reason given)

Yes, because the Car certificate is for an artificial entity, and since the birth certificate is for an artificial entity also, that is why they are outlined exactly the same. And they do change peoples legal status, what the hell do you call a person getting a citizenship? What do you call it when a person is now called a Mr, Sir, or a Mrs... that is called a legal status, or rank if you wish.

I hope i am not the first or last, and as long as people like you with your set of mind we will continue to fall for the trap and keep us in a perpetual motion of childish behavior.

Roman Civil Law and Admiralty/Maritime Law, these are the laws we are forced to follow today, did you know That U.S. District Court is a corporation, so is U.S. Chamber of Commerce, listen i can go on forever, but they assume we all know the law, (make the image that they do), but they know we don't and that is what gives them power over us.

Interview with this guy at PINAC. He apparently says he is not doing what my comments earlier said. He wishes to stay anonymous cause he is involved in other projects or something. Says also that other people have filmed him but apparently we've not seen any of that. He also wanted this interview not to be published.

reply to post by XaniMatriX

Yet you cannot quote the law for changing this status as you claim. So it only exists in your mind. Only evidence you have is that some official documents look alike. You're imaging things that are not there.
Btw, this whole idea of Roman Civil Law and Admiralty/Maritime Law is hogwash.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Interview with this guy at PINAC. He apparently says he is not doing what my comments earlier said. He wishes to stay anonymous cause he is involved in other projects or something. Says also that other people have filmed him but apparently we've not seen any of that. He also wanted this interview not to be published.

reply to post by XaniMatriX

 

Yet you cannot quote the law for changing this status as you claim. So it only exists in your mind. Only evidence you have is that some official documents look alike. You're imaging things that are not there.
Btw, this whole idea of Roman Civil Law and Admiralty/Maritime Law is hogwash.

edit on 5/11/2012 by PsykoOps because: (no reason given)

I just told you, CITIZENSHIP is a legal status, everybody knows that, when you get married you also change your status, that is also very well known.

Because it's not called Roman law anymore, it is called CIVIL LAW which is derived from Roman Civil Law and is common in most countries including America.

The military and police carry out enforcement at the request of the government or the courts. The term failed state refers to states that cannot implement or enforce policies, did you read that? ENFORCE, that is why there are CCTV cameras everywhere, and cops carrying weapons, to ENFORCE policies that are made up in COURTS, this is all fact, if you still don't understand, i can go on forever.

So you keep insisting that people are corporate slaves within the legal system but there is nowhere anything written down about it. I know you can spew out bs and I don't care. I know it's bs. cause you cannot source your claims at all. Your opinion means exactly zero in the matter. Only thing that matters is a one tiny little law or statute that doesn't seem to exist anywhere.
Also don't even try the roman law bs. Rome is dead and burried and here's a fun little factoid for you to chew on: romans didn't even know the concept of capital letters.
Do you still wanna argue without official sources to back up your claims?

I love this because it illustrates how there really is no right to privacy. We are born naked and vulnerable to the world and Privacy is a thing we create for ourselves. There is no right to clothing, doors, fences, tall hedges and security guards....these are things we must find for ourselves. We have used "manners" and "social norms" as an unwritten contract of the privacy we do give each other out in the world. But there is no right or nor should there be an expectation people will not look at us whenever they want.

reply to post by PsykoOps


There are no rules in either law or grammar to which you would spell a name in all upper-case letters. Proper names are always capitalized, i.e. John Smith, and are not spelled in all upper-case, i.e. JOHN SMITH. These are "legal fictions" as opposed to "lawful names". Thus we can assume that this practice is done with the intent in mind of undertaking some sort of fraud.
As to the question of whether or not this makes you a corporation; it does not make "you" a "corporation" since "you" are a flesh and blood living soul. Corporations exist only as "legal fictions". However, if you step forward and speak for the legal fiction, ALL CAP, corporation, you assume its place.

LEGAL FICTION definition:
Believing or assuming something not true is true. Used in judicial reasoning for avoiding issues where a new situation comes up against the law, changing how the law is applied, but not changing the text of the law.


This is the reason behind the use of all caps when writing a proper name. The US and State Governments are deliberately using a legal fiction to "address" the lawful, real, flesh-and-blood man or woman. This is deliberate because their own official publications state that proper names are not to be written in all caps.They are deliberately not following their own recognized authorities.


What is PERSON? Definition by law:
A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the rights to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes. A human being considered as capable of having rights and of being charged with duties; while a “thing” is the object over which rights may be exercised.


A corporation is a "person" for purposes of the constitutional guarantees of equal protection of laws and Due Process of Law.

you want me to keep going, i got all night dude.

No, all caps names means that a person is a pink unicorn from venus. Don't ask me to quote that cause everyone forgot to write down that law.
So now you actually admid that there is no law about spelling a persons name with all caps. Yet somehow with magic this action changes persons legal standing and status within a legal system. Yeah go on

Originally posted by PsykoOps
No, all caps names means that a person is a pink unicorn from venus. Don't ask me to quote that cause everyone forgot to write down that law.
So now you actually admid that there is no law about spelling a persons name with all caps. Yet somehow with magic this action changes persons legal standing and status within a legal system. Yeah go on

It's not proper English to all-cap names, because then it becomes none legal name, they must be capitalized by law, teachers are required by law to teach their kids the difference.

Example: "See Spot run" is the proper way of writing, "see" is obviously capitalized since it is the beginning of the sentence, "spot" is capitalized since that is the proper way to right a name, not spot (that means a dirty "mark" of some sort on the body), and it is not "SPOT", there is a reason for this.

All corporations are capitalized because it doesn't represent a real living human, doesn't that make you wonder why all of the id's have your name in all-caps? which is not the proper way of writing a name? all id's will and do have your name in all caps, it is not grammatically correct to right a name in such a from, which means it represents something other then your real name... Example "John Doe" is a real name, "JOHN DOE" is not, that is why all tombstones also have all-caps names, since that name doesn't represent a real live person berried 6 feet underground it would be grammatically correct, if it was only capitalized that means there is a live person that has just been berried alive, makes you think doesn't it?

This is taught in grd 1, 2, and 3, the proper way to spell a legal name of a living person by law.

Unicorns? i am no longer responding to you, you are not taking this seriously or even trying to debunk it, just being plane rude.

reply to post by boncho


Interesting idea.....

Overall, he's not actually doing anything illegal, unless he tries filming in a restroom or something. Legally, we can take pictures, and make video, in public, and we don't need the permission of the people we film. I don't think I would call this "creepy", if his goal is to make people think about all the cameras viewing them everyplace we go these days.

Personally, I have taken pictures of crowds before, or people in crowds. Typically, these are at some event, like a 4'th of July gathering or something of the sort, just to have memories of the event. Occasionally, if someone looks memorably interesting, I will snap a picture, too. People can be fun to watch.

I am far more worried about all of the surveillance cameras than some guy with a camera, unless he's creepy in some other way. Someone stalking, for example, would be an issue. The other cameras, though, aren't the same. We never know who could be watching, or what they might do with the data. Anyone watch Person of Interest? That could be closer to reality than we know....

Note that they don't say exactly how this all works...