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.
originally posted by: fractal5
So do you also dismiss the NH constitution as bunk? Explain your self, all you did was take a dump on the guys head without explanation. Is government by consent of the governed or not?
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: fractal5
Sounds like more Sovereign Citizen or Freeman on the Land bunk and if he does go to jail, as he requested, he is certainly a subject of New Hampshire.
When the USA revolted was it a legitimate government? Hopefully you have a yes or not answer to that.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: fractal5
The state. Do you even understand the specific constitutional article you quoted?
That was rhetorical.
If traffic laws were meant to protect anyone from being harmed, then someone would go ahead and find out which laws prevent harm and which ones don't. New Hampshire traffic laws are meant to collect revenues by the state of New Hampshire. I can say this with confidence because its a provable fact that lots of money is collected without attention to whether the laws accomplish anything. The fact being that no laws undergo study to determine if they result in anyone being protected or not. Studies I've seen on traffic law show that removal of traffic lights and speed limit signs results in increased safety. So no, that cannot be the purpose of traffic laws or traffic lights. I don't believe you. Maybe I'm just that smart, or maybe I have motives besides taking other people's money without their permission for my own causes and am willing to live by principles and truth.
originally posted by: jimmyx
originally posted by: fractal5
So do you also dismiss the NH constitution as bunk? Explain your self, all you did was take a dump on the guys head without explanation. Is government by consent of the governed or not?
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: fractal5
Sounds like more Sovereign Citizen or Freeman on the Land bunk and if he does go to jail, as he requested, he is certainly a subject of New Hampshire.
driving a vehicle is not a constitutional right....his point is moot....traffic laws are meant to protect everyone from being harmed by motorized vehicles.
The topic is the right of revolution. So, when the USA revolted, was the USA a legit government? Was it right to revolt for the revolters? If the USA was illegitimate, so is the guy refusing to pay the ticket.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: fractal5
What does the Revolution have to do with the cretin in the Original Post who does not want to pay parking tickets?
He is no revolutionary, he is just a jackass.
Is the United States a scam too or just the guy refusing to pay the ticket? You misread what I was saying... I was not saying I'm smart but rather that I am principled and value the truth.
originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: fractal5
Did you just dismiss something because you think you're "smart"?
I find that difficult to believe if you'll believe an idiot who pushes scams (freeman of the land is a scam). Definitely not the smartest thing to do.
Do I have the right to revolt or don't I?
originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: fractal5
All good contracts contain a cancellation clause.
Laws aren't contracts, they're laws.
So find a country with laws you agree with and move there.
I want out.
Sorry I thought "right of revolution" was the main topic. How silly of me. I guess not. I'll make another thread later about that.
originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: fractal5
Now you're on about rights? You're all over the place.
First it's some fictional guy who wants to get out of parking fines by making his own independent government by using a scam. Then it was your bad understanding about the difference between contracts and laws. Now it's about a right to revolt.
How do you know its a scam? What is the importance of proving the man exists? Do I ask him to post on this thread?
originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: fractal5
But the thread isn't even about that. It's about a pretend person that you haven't proven exists, trying to get out of parking tickets by using a scam.
Because you said "Yesterday, a man filed a paper claiming that he is in formal revolt against New Hampshire and not be paying any of the driving fine he was demanded to pay."
originally posted by: fractal5
How do you know its a scam? What is the importance of proving the man exists? Do I ask him to post on this thread?
originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: fractal5
But the thread isn't even about that. It's about a pretend person that you haven't proven exists, trying to get out of parking tickets by using a scam.
Actually, the scam is the "freeman of the land". Just give them your personal details and bank account numbers and they'll "help you". Help you be ripped off lol.
Apparently the scam is that you are not allowed to escape the corruption of the government and trying to do that is a scam. But do explain the questions I asked and I'll see if he wants to be in this thread as a new member.
Do believe government does not require the consent of the governed? I'd like you to answer that question.
The man in question proposes to be part of another government that has no association with New Hampshire. Now what? What is it that makes his government invalid but the New Hampshire government valid?
originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: fractal5
Do believe government does not require the consent of the governed? I'd like you to answer that question.
It requires the consent of society as a whole...not an individual.
The man in question proposes to be part of another government that has no association with New Hampshire. Now what? What is it that makes his government invalid but the New Hampshire government valid?
Then that is on him to prove.
But he will still go to jail.