-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Any one opt out of their "strawman"/ B.C./ Corporate entity??
- Thread starter Bud-Boy
- Start date
Duckmang
Member
The U$ still prosecutes victimless crimes.
I don't recall implying that they dont. However, without a victim who can claim a loss against you, there is no crime, only statuatory infraction.
You must not realize just how crazy it sounds to hear someone explain that a secret coded response is required in court to win a case. Anyone who believes the mumbo jumbo you are trying to pass off as fact is just plain fucked in court.
I'm pretty sure that's not what I said. In fact I said you need to understand their mumbo jumbo and how they are going to try to use it against you. Pretty much anyone in court is fucked but understanding the rules that they play by will give you a fighting chance. Prisons are full of people that thought that the courts would give them a fair honest trial.
Grow up and take responsibility for your actions or work to change the system.
Boy, you are full of presumptions..... I am a grown up. I am responsible for all of my actions, and I do not know why you would ASSume differently. If you think that our perversely corrupted justice system is open to change, you are seriously deluding yourself.
I don't recall implying that they dont. However, without a victim who can claim a loss against you, there is no crime, only statuatory infraction.
You must not realize just how crazy it sounds to hear someone explain that a secret coded response is required in court to win a case. Anyone who believes the mumbo jumbo you are trying to pass off as fact is just plain fucked in court.
I'm pretty sure that's not what I said. In fact I said you need to understand their mumbo jumbo and how they are going to try to use it against you. Pretty much anyone in court is fucked but understanding the rules that they play by will give you a fighting chance. Prisons are full of people that thought that the courts would give them a fair honest trial.
Grow up and take responsibility for your actions or work to change the system.
Boy, you are full of presumptions..... I am a grown up. I am responsible for all of my actions, and I do not know why you would ASSume differently. If you think that our perversely corrupted justice system is open to change, you are seriously deluding yourself.
first off, mr. duck mang, i am pretty sure el dub was referring to bud boy when he said to grow up and take responsibility but el dub has made some very valid points. i would certainly like to hear the proposal mr. duck mang suggests one use to get the freemen defense in front of the court? that the court has already granted the defendant leave to proceed pro se will be assumed, the defendant is allowed to read the prepared statement he googled up online for a few minutes until the judge gets bored and hollers out "overruled" and then what? the court has just stated that is the end of the freemen defense.
only a few years ago, tax protestor defendants in federal court in the northern district of iowa were ordered handcuffed and gagged by the presiding judge for refusing to give up their rights to the freemen argument. they are currently in fed prison. peace-biteme
only a few years ago, tax protestor defendants in federal court in the northern district of iowa were ordered handcuffed and gagged by the presiding judge for refusing to give up their rights to the freemen argument. they are currently in fed prison. peace-biteme
bugler
Member
The law in my state says, grow dope, go to jail. What does it matter if you want to call it a crime or a statutory infraction? Either way, they have more soldiers, more guns, and a legal monopoly on violence. If they say go to jail, you go to jail.....or hide. Arguing semantics doesn't change anything, does it?
But I think where he was going with the responsibility bit wasn't a personal attack, just that it IS shirking the "legal" responsibility to try to get out of the "legal" penalty of a crime/statutory infraction. Personally I don't think there is anything wrong with shirking such "responsibility", but a more effective way to do it is with a well paid attorney.
Speaking of attorneys...why don't they do this? EVER? And no, it's not because they are part of the evil conspiracy. The attorneys that cost 6 figures and guarantee you'll be released, they NEVER use these types of arguments. Not even when defending their own blood, not even for themselves. IF these arguments work, why aren't they using it? Hell, what about Bernie Madoff, surely he could afford an attorney who would know this secret trick, right? Well why sit in the pen if there's a get outta jail free card for anyone willing to not stand for a judge and refuse to speak the same language as the judge?
agreed completely
But I think where he was going with the responsibility bit wasn't a personal attack, just that it IS shirking the "legal" responsibility to try to get out of the "legal" penalty of a crime/statutory infraction. Personally I don't think there is anything wrong with shirking such "responsibility", but a more effective way to do it is with a well paid attorney.
Speaking of attorneys...why don't they do this? EVER? And no, it's not because they are part of the evil conspiracy. The attorneys that cost 6 figures and guarantee you'll be released, they NEVER use these types of arguments. Not even when defending their own blood, not even for themselves. IF these arguments work, why aren't they using it? Hell, what about Bernie Madoff, surely he could afford an attorney who would know this secret trick, right? Well why sit in the pen if there's a get outta jail free card for anyone willing to not stand for a judge and refuse to speak the same language as the judge?
A
argoagro
To those who beleive in this: If you could be so kind as to tell me what strains are in your growroom that would be AWESOME, because I want whatever you're smoking.
E
el dub
Bingo, bugler!
Who was it that said a secret was safe with two people as long as one of them was dead?
Now you guys want us to believe that every attorney, judge and clerk of court in the freakin' free world is in on this court scam and no one is talking? Ever.....
lw
Who was it that said a secret was safe with two people as long as one of them was dead?
Now you guys want us to believe that every attorney, judge and clerk of court in the freakin' free world is in on this court scam and no one is talking? Ever.....
lw
Duckmang
Member
One of the basic tenants of the UCC, "Let he who will, be fooled"
"The law in my state says, grow dope, go to jail."
You're only part right. The law doesn't say that, the statutes do. Statutes are corporate by-laws, not in any way a supreme law of the land. For a corporation to be able to act on you under their statutes, they must get you under contract. Lucky for them, the courts are designed to do just that. Standing for a judge is only an example of an implied contract. Once you stand for a judge, it grants him jurisdiction. Not standing will most likely result in the threat of contempt, but since there is no injured party he cannot theaten criminal contempt, and if you refuse to contract with the judge he can not threaten civil contempt.
It's not about a secret handshake and some secret phrase. It's about understanding what is actually happening inside the courtroom. Most people don't have even the slightest clue. However armed with sufficient knowledge of what is actually happening in a courtroom and how to prevent being placed under contract it is possible to avoid the royal fucking that most people get. However slip up once and you are guaranteed that they will nail your ass to the wall for trying to use their rules against them.
"The law in my state says, grow dope, go to jail."
You're only part right. The law doesn't say that, the statutes do. Statutes are corporate by-laws, not in any way a supreme law of the land. For a corporation to be able to act on you under their statutes, they must get you under contract. Lucky for them, the courts are designed to do just that. Standing for a judge is only an example of an implied contract. Once you stand for a judge, it grants him jurisdiction. Not standing will most likely result in the threat of contempt, but since there is no injured party he cannot theaten criminal contempt, and if you refuse to contract with the judge he can not threaten civil contempt.
It's not about a secret handshake and some secret phrase. It's about understanding what is actually happening inside the courtroom. Most people don't have even the slightest clue. However armed with sufficient knowledge of what is actually happening in a courtroom and how to prevent being placed under contract it is possible to avoid the royal fucking that most people get. However slip up once and you are guaranteed that they will nail your ass to the wall for trying to use their rules against them.
E
el dub
Have you never met a lawyer who broke an oath sworn to the courts?
Btw, no one has a clue as to what is happening in the court room so its best not to have a lawyer?
lw
Btw, no one has a clue as to what is happening in the court room so its best not to have a lawyer?
lw
E
el dub
duckmang: I just re-read your jibber jabber above. Talk about fucking brain washed.....
lw
lw
E
el dub
I don't have to know everything to recognize convoluted and faulty reasoning when I see it.
Btw, show me a person who doesn't interpret what he/she reads as they see fit.
As far as "Not going to waste any more of your time," I'll believe that when you stop posting shite in the legal and security section that actually puts folks more at risk than they were before reading that tripe you are trying to pass off as fact concerning the courts and law of this land.
lw
Btw, show me a person who doesn't interpret what he/she reads as they see fit.
As far as "Not going to waste any more of your time," I'll believe that when you stop posting shite in the legal and security section that actually puts folks more at risk than they were before reading that tripe you are trying to pass off as fact concerning the courts and law of this land.
lw
Is that not exactly what you are doing by interpreting laws and judicial rulings the way you do?
Just for the sake of argument, say you were right. About all of it. It was a legit legal defense, you could really opt out of your "strawman" and cash out your free 100 million dollars. You could drive everywhere without a license and didn't have to follow any laws. If this all really worked and was 100% legit, do you not think that the powers that be would shut down the loophole in about 2 seconds? What do you expect them to do in the end, "Oh well, guess you were right, carry on doing whatever the fuck you like then. Here's your free money." No, they would change the wording of the law, or write new ones. The government would not just let a complete state of anarchy go on with no intervention, while at the same time giving you huge sums of money. It's not like the entire government and judicial system is just gonna pack it in and give up.
eggs-ackley mr. real ting, what court in the land would entertain such an argument? but bigger questions came when mr. duck started blurting things concerning corporate law? and the only ucc i am aware of stands for uniform commercial code which is in fact, a set of rules in manufacturing. but this raises the question with me on how mr. duck mang expects to apply these in a criminal case? title 18 of the fed code governs most criminal activity and states follow suit in a similar fashion. bottom line, that is how freemen really expect the bs to work, that a court will agree and apply corporate law in a criminal case? and yes, i watched an attempt to use this defense in fed court in my own backyard, so to speak. the judge allowed about two minutes of the rhetoric and shut it down and when the defendant refused to shut up, he was ordered gagged and cuffed and the trial proceeded. if one intends to proceed pro se and defend himself, the court can only assume his actions shall follow proper court decorum. peace-biteme
