FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > You are not [legal name]
You are not [legal name]
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
"You are not [legal name] The truth It is illegal to use a legal name Looooooooooooool... Someone has more money than sense." Have been seeng lots of these in the last year or so, absolute gibberish  | |||
 | |||
| |||
 | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
"Is this that sovereign citizen rubbish? They regularly get chewed up and spat out in courts" Something similar I think yeah  | |||
"Should I be feeling stupid now?" Came to read thread, felt stupid, looked at your pics, felt better. | |||
"You are not [legal name] The truth It is illegal to use a legal name Looooooooooooool... Someone has more money than sense." These adverts make my brain hurt | |||
| |||
... ok ..... whatever.... what the hell..... I don't get it Suzi xxxxxx | |||
 | |||
| |||
 | |||
"Fairly popular in the US in the loony anti federal fringe. Something along the lines of variations of there is no agreed contract between the individual and the State so the State has no jurisdiction. Earth shattering legal arguments usually used to try and get out of a speeding ticket "Yep; To use a technical term; it's a load of bollocks | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"It is annoying that just because you were born you instantly become part of society. Expected to work and pay tax for the greater good before dying. Rather than living your life as God intended. Everything in our lives is a distraction while we are on the conveyor belt to oblivion. How did you spend your one and only lifetime on Earth? "I watched sky sports and tried to win the lottery while cheating on my loved one". No wonder God has given up on us." Yeah, I tried quoting Matthew 6 (why do you worry about clothes? Consider the lilies in the field and how they grow. They don't work or spin yarn) when up for flashing. Bastard judge threw that argument out too 
Mr ddc | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"The whole idea that you have a "legal entity" that is given to you by the government is mistaken. That's the problem. The entire argument is based on myth - and the people pushing the idea know it. Why do I say that? With the exception of a handful of deluded tre believers, the people who sell this idea (and they are selling it, through courses and DVDs claiming to show people how to use these methods to evadetheir obligations) DON'T use these methods themselves when they find themselves in court. Because they know it's a scam. " I strongly disagree with your first paragraph there. Lol. You definitely do have a legal entity, well I definitely do anyway. My kids do too, and everyone I know does. I (my legal name) had a legal obligation to apply for my kids entities so many days after they were born. And these ARE given by the government too. The documentation which forms a summary of this record is your birth certificate. Without your legal name, you're unable to get car insurance, a mortgage, a bank account, etc. We definitely do have legal entities! | |||
| |||
"That's proof of identity, not a separate legal entity. " I'm really not with you there lol. A birth certificate is a certificate showing details of your legal entity. If I didn't have a legal entity, you woukdnt be able to do a great number of things! How could you even get a driving license?!?! | |||
"That's proof of identity, not a separate legal entity. I'm really not with you there lol. A birth certificate is a certificate showing details of your legal entity. If I didn't have a legal entity, you woukdnt be able to do a great number of things! How could you even get a driving license?!?!" OK, I think I may be doing you a disservice here because I don't think you're using the term "legal entity" the way I'm understanding it, or the way that the "illegal to use a legal name" peddlers would. What you're describing is more like legal acknowledgement that you exist and are who you say you are. What the Freemen-on-the-land types argue is that the government creates a legal entity which they attach to you at birth, which is responsible for all the obligations you are told you have, AND WHICH YOU CAN CHOOSE TO REJECT RESPONSIBILITY FOR. | |||
| |||
"It's all nonsense; Confusing your existence with proof of identity. You are a legal entity , simply by existing. As such, whether you like it or not, you are bound by the laws of the country you live in. Your " name" as recorded on your birth certificate gives you as an entity, a recorded identity . Then you get stuff like a national insurance number, to access the nation's facilities. And that is your " official name" for all purposes.( passports, driving licenses, tax etc) However, under English law, it is perfectly legal to be known by any name you choose; but for official purposes you use the official name. ( in some countries it is illegal to use any name other than your legal name for anything.) So all these " legal name" idiots are confusing your " existence" as an entity; with the name. If an official document arrives, with your " official "( birth certificate) name on it, then it applies to you. End . You can't go round saying it's not you. Funnily enough, all these people who object to "legal name" seem to forget their objections when they get a passport, or have a bank account, or claim welfare off the state ....." This is exactly my understanding also. | |||
| |||
"it is true though, that you haven't entered a contract with anyone about adhering to the laws. just being born in a place where there are laws shouldn't mean you automatically are obliged to consent to them. loads of people break laws all the time and get away with it, so i guess they too agree." It's immaterial, because you don't " enter a contract" you just start to exist in that society. It's just a fact. That is why no one has to apply to become a citizen of their own country. They just are . Though the UK does, in theory, violate that principle, since children, born to British parents overseas, do have to be " naturalized" as British. Interestingly, of course, when you become a citizen of another country ( as I have) you generally do have to " sign a contract". In as much as I have agreed to maintain, uphold, and abide by the principles of French citizens. | |||
"it is true though, that you haven't entered a contract with anyone about adhering to the laws. just being born in a place where there are laws shouldn't mean you automatically are obliged to consent to them. loads of people break laws all the time and get away with it, so i guess they too agree." You don't need to enter a contract to be able to be under the control of an organisation, you simply need to be under it's recognised or asserted remit. This is similar. By bring born in a country, you are subject to those laws whether you accept then or not. In the UK, this is the law and people born here are legally obliged to obey, regardless of their opinions. X | |||
"It is annoying that just because you were born you instantly become part of society. Expected to work and pay tax for the greater good before dying. Rather than living your life as God intended. Everything in our lives is a distraction while we are on the conveyor belt to oblivion. How did you spend your one and only lifetime on Earth? "I watched sky sports and tried to win the lottery while cheating on my loved one". No wonder God has given up on us." I was with you for the first few words...... then you said God. | |||
"it is true though, that you haven't entered a contract with anyone about adhering to the laws. just being born in a place where there are laws shouldn't mean you automatically are obliged to consent to them. loads of people break laws all the time and get away with it, so i guess they too agree. You don't need to enter a contract to be able to be under the control of an organisation, you simply need to be under it's recognised or asserted remit. This is similar. By bring born in a country, you are subject to those laws whether you accept then or not. In the UK, this is the law and people born here are legally obliged to obey, regardless of their opinions. X" i wasn't born to obey anyone else, i do think a lot of laws make sense so i willingly adhere to them. how many people don't fulfil their true potential because society says they shouldn't? and it used to be illegal to be gay, promiscuous, and all other kinds of weird shit. we (not me personally) had to fight for the right to be gay and have sex out of wedlock, lol. fuck those laws eh? | |||
"it is true though, that you haven't entered a contract with anyone about adhering to the laws. just being born in a place where there are laws shouldn't mean you automatically are obliged to consent to them. loads of people break laws all the time and get away with it, so i guess they too agree. It's immaterial, because you don't " enter a contract" you just start to exist in that society. It's just a fact. That is why no one has to apply to become a citizen of their own country. They just are . Though the UK does, in theory, violate that principle, since children, born to British parents overseas, do have to be " naturalized" as British. Interestingly, of course, when you become a citizen of another country ( as I have) you generally do have to " sign a contract". In as much as I have agreed to maintain, uphold, and abide by the principles of French citizens." exactly. i can't even get a passport. this country has legally made it so i am it's prisoner. i could break the law and get out though, if i had the money to do that. and money makes you above laws so all laws are moot now, imo. also see my above reply, some laws were made to be broken and no society had the right to shame people for being who they are, even right now pardons for being gay are being blocked by this government, not really any of their business to tell gay people they are abominations against this society and they should fuck right off with that. and drug users, lets prosecute people who haven't harmed anyone just because they have the potential to based off how some drug users harm others. fucking stupid if you ask me. | |||
 | |||
| |||
"You are not [legal name] The truth It is illegal to use a legal name Looooooooooooool... Someone has more money than sense." Too right! It's similar to the Freemen on the Land rubbish. It's actually worth reading up on that, it's a great laugh! Especially when they end up in the nick for contempt of court! | |||
| |||
"ok went off track there... but basically most people will obey laws because it makes sense to, or they just want to live within in them and it causes them no problems. who the fuck has the right to tell anyone how to live their lives, really? we don't even have the right to lock people in prison for harming others but i understand why we do because it keeps us all safer. which is why governments tend to pull out the safety thing every time they want to restrict us from doing things they don't like. but philosophically, nobody really has the right to tell you how to live your life, nobody. and most certainly not just because you were born into a country they think they own and take taxes off you on everything you do, pretty much everything. you eat? you pay your owners vat on that. lol, like i said stupid. you work? you pay your owners for the privilege. you don't wanna be naked? pay your owners on that too. and yeah i know taxes go on loads of things but your owners got a good pay rise recently under austerity measures...can you see where it all doesn't make sense to obey 'laws'?" I don't obey all laws.. I know what your driving at..like who the fuck has the right to tell me what the hell I can do? If my action harms nobody then I do not care if it's legal or not. I don't go about raging against government or laws though as it seems to me that if you quietly just go about life as you wish to then you can get away with a hell of alot What about other entities though..should they follow the law? Should corporations pay tax just because there told they should? Things like that? | |||
Mr ddc | |||
"ok went off track there... but basically most people will obey laws because it makes sense to, or they just want to live within in them and it causes them no problems. who the fuck has the right to tell anyone how to live their lives, really? we don't even have the right to lock people in prison for harming others but i understand why we do because it keeps us all safer. which is why governments tend to pull out the safety thing every time they want to restrict us from doing things they don't like. but philosophically, nobody really has the right to tell you how to live your life, nobody. and most certainly not just because you were born into a country they think they own and take taxes off you on everything you do, pretty much everything. you eat? you pay your owners vat on that. lol, like i said stupid. you work? you pay your owners for the privilege. you don't wanna be naked? pay your owners on that too. and yeah i know taxes go on loads of things but your owners got a good pay rise recently under austerity measures...can you see where it all doesn't make sense to obey 'laws'? I don't obey all laws.. I know what your driving at..like who the fuck has the right to tell me what the hell I can do? If my action harms nobody then I do not care if it's legal or not. I don't go about raging against government or laws though as it seems to me that if you quietly just go about life as you wish to then you can get away with a hell of alot What about other entities though..should they follow the law? Should corporations pay tax just because there told they should? Things like that? "  that's what not your name means. that you're a person in your own right and not the property of this country just because you were born here and have a birth certificate.
you weren't old enough to enter any legal contract when that certificate was signed. circumstances shouldn't dictate that you have to be something, but the whole system is set up so that this can happen.
if anyone should obey laws it should be corporations, seeing as they made an informed choice to trade here and profit off the people knowing there would be taxes to pay on that. | |||
"you dont become a legal entity just by existing, you become one by having your birth registered with the crown, if you are NOT registered with the crown, then their laws dont apply to you, the reason so many cases get thrown out of court is because free people have to either find a person with clear understanding of both civil and common law or present themselves in court, as lawyers swear an oath to the crown, they will not protect a free persons interests, only a legal persons.....if you dont know the difference, the chances are you'll never need to know, but for those who know the difference, its a way of protecting yourself from any company/persons WILL other than your own "Sorry but that is complete bollocks. It is a basis of law ( and that is statute and common law,) that by existing, you are a legal entity; and bound by the laws of the land. It's simple really, and there is no way round it. | |||
"ok went off track there... but basically most people will obey laws because it makes sense to, or they just want to live within in them and it causes them no problems. who the fuck has the right to tell anyone how to live their lives, really? we don't even have the right to lock people in prison for harming others but i understand why we do because it keeps us all safer. which is why governments tend to pull out the safety thing every time they want to restrict us from doing things they don't like. but philosophically, nobody really has the right to tell you how to live your life, nobody. and most certainly not just because you were born into a country they think they own and take taxes off you on everything you do, pretty much everything. you eat? you pay your owners vat on that. lol, like i said stupid. you work? you pay your owners for the privilege. you don't wanna be naked? pay your owners on that too. and yeah i know taxes go on loads of things but your owners got a good pay rise recently under austerity measures...can you see where it all doesn't make sense to obey 'laws'? I don't obey all laws.. I know what your driving at..like who the fuck has the right to tell me what the hell I can do? If my action harms nobody then I do not care if it's legal or not. I don't go about raging against government or laws though as it seems to me that if you quietly just go about life as you wish to then you can get away with a hell of alot What about other entities though..should they follow the law? Should corporations pay tax just because there told they should? Things like that? that's what not your name means. that you're a person in your own right and not the property of this country just because you were born here and have a birth certificate.
you weren't old enough to enter any legal contract when that certificate was signed. circumstances shouldn't dictate that you have to be something, but the whole system is set up so that this can happen.
if anyone should obey laws it should be corporations, seeing as they made an informed choice to trade here and profit off the people knowing there would be taxes to pay on that. "It's all a bit complicated fer me..I think I'll just carry on as i was. I'm happy and do as I please, harm nobody and ignore the law like I have for years
| |||
 | |||
"ok went off track there... but basically most people will obey laws because it makes sense to, or they just want to live within in them and it causes them no problems. who the fuck has the right to tell anyone how to live their lives, really? we don't even have the right to lock people in prison for harming others but i understand why we do because it keeps us all safer. which is why governments tend to pull out the safety thing every time they want to restrict us from doing things they don't like. but philosophically, nobody really has the right to tell you how to live your life, nobody. and most certainly not just because you were born into a country they think they own and take taxes off you on everything you do, pretty much everything. you eat? you pay your owners vat on that. lol, like i said stupid. you work? you pay your owners for the privilege. you don't wanna be naked? pay your owners on that too. and yeah i know taxes go on loads of things but your owners got a good pay rise recently under austerity measures...can you see where it all doesn't make sense to obey 'laws'? I don't obey all laws.. I know what your driving at..like who the fuck has the right to tell me what the hell I can do? If my action harms nobody then I do not care if it's legal or not. I don't go about raging against government or laws though as it seems to me that if you quietly just go about life as you wish to then you can get away with a hell of alot What about other entities though..should they follow the law? Should corporations pay tax just because there told they should? Things like that? that's what not your name means. that you're a person in your own right and not the property of this country just because you were born here and have a birth certificate.
you weren't old enough to enter any legal contract when that certificate was signed. circumstances shouldn't dictate that you have to be something, but the whole system is set up so that this can happen.
if anyone should obey laws it should be corporations, seeing as they made an informed choice to trade here and profit off the people knowing there would be taxes to pay on that.
It's all a bit complicated fer me..I think I'll just carry on as i was. I'm happy and do as I please, harm nobody and ignore the law like I have for years
"it's not that complicated really lol. i'm just going into too many things. well, maybe the legal name thing is way more complicated as they don't want to be recognised at all as a citizen. you have the right to be you and some laws are unjust, basically. | |||
"it's not that complicated really lol. i'm just going into too many things. well, maybe the legal name thing is way more complicated as they don't want to be recognised at all as a citizen. you have the right to be you and some laws are unjust, basically." The legal name thing isn't complicated, it's bollocks! | |||
" who the fuck has the right to tell anyone how to live their lives, really? you have the right to be you and some laws are unjust, basically." 1. Everyone else in the society in which you live has a right to expect that you will respect the accepted behaviour of that society. Which in a large and sophisticated society, is encoded by laws. 2. "Some laws are unjust" - sure; and as the society at large , by concensus, agree with that, the society changes the law. Which is done by convincing your representatives to do something about it, or in more extreme cases, protests, campaigns, etc. it works: repeal of slavery, anti discriminatory laws, gay marriage. Societies work by concensus; whether it be a wolf pack or a nation. | |||
| |||
| |||
"you are VERY mistaken, show me the law and relevant section that states this. so why do you think gypsies are born IN the country but are NOT bound by the laws? the only different is legal registration and force of will " Er, what? Since when are Gypsies not bound by the law? Of course they are! Show you the law? All of it, common law, statute and case law. | |||
| |||
"This is a very bizarre conversation, but one of the basic freedoms we have is that you can believe whatever you like, no matter how ridiculous "True, very true!
It does become an issue though with those who think that all opinions are equally valid. In some cases that's fair enough; for example I'm wearing a red top, I like it, you may not, both are equally valid. But in many cases this view is fundamentally wrong and can be dangerous; discrimination for instance. In others it's just plain wrong; refusing to accept that the universe wasn't created as per bible for example. | |||
| |||
"you are VERY mistaken, show me the law and relevant section that states this. so why do you think gypsies are born IN the country but are NOT bound by the laws? the only different is legal registration and force of will " Gypsies. Are bound by UK law. Completely. No ifs or buts. And, by the way; " gypsies" i.e. Romanies ; are, by and large,a very law abiding social group; more so than many others social groups in UK. There are other groups of " gypsies" that do avoid the law, to a greater or lesser extent, but they are still subject to it. If they " get away with" ignoring the law; that is down to law enforcers not doing their job. | |||
" Show you the law? All of it, common law, statute and case law." naw just the section that applies to your previous statement. gypsies are NOT bound by law, thats why they get moved on and not arrested, they drive without registration of cars, tax ins.....not all i'm sure, but i know many that do, they have known about sovereign rights alot longer than us, and just because you maybe are unable to understand that LAWS restrict freedom of choice, and our freedoms are inherent (unlike societies man made laws)doesn't mean its bollocks.......as many folk who follow the freeman movement are overturning decisions on debts, foreclosures on homes, illegal removal of benefits and so much more for those people in poverty | |||
| |||
" Show you the law? All of it, common law, statute and case law. naw just the section that applies to your previous statement. gypsies are NOT bound by law, thats why they get moved on and not arrested, they drive without registration of cars, tax ins.....not all i'm sure, but i know many that do, they have known about sovereign rights alot longer than us, and just because you maybe are unable to understand that LAWS restrict freedom of choice, and our freedoms are inherent (unlike societies man made laws)doesn't mean its bollocks.......as many folk who follow the freeman movement are overturning decisions on debts, foreclosures on homes, illegal removal of benefits and so much more for those people in poverty " Um... no. So much no. Utter nonsense. | |||
| |||
" Show you the law? All of it, common law, statute and case law. naw just the section that applies to your previous statement. gypsies are NOT bound by law, thats why they get moved on and not arrested, they drive without registration of cars, tax ins.....not all i'm sure, but i know many that do, they have known about sovereign rights alot longer than us, and just because you maybe are unable to understand that LAWS restrict freedom of choice, and our freedoms are inherent (unlike societies man made laws)doesn't mean its bollocks.......as many folk who follow the freeman movement are overturning decisions on debts, foreclosures on homes, illegal removal of benefits and so much more for those people in poverty Um... no. So much no. Utter nonsense." acually its NOT, as i witnessed it myself in COURT | |||
"Are you referring to the Caravan Utilising Nomadic Travelers who left a mess all over my local park?" did you leave your local park in their FREE EARTH? | |||
" Show you the law? All of it, common law, statute and case law. naw just the section that applies to your previous statement. gypsies are NOT bound by law, thats why they get moved on and not arrested, they drive without registration of cars, tax ins.....not all i'm sure, but i know many that do, they have known about sovereign rights alot longer than us, and just because you maybe are unable to understand that LAWS restrict freedom of choice, and our freedoms are inherent (unlike societies man made laws)doesn't mean its bollocks.......as many folk who follow the freeman movement are overturning decisions on debts, foreclosures on homes, illegal removal of benefits and so much more for those people in poverty Um... no. So much no. Utter nonsense. acually its NOT, as i witnessed it myself in COURT "Use of capitals proves point? Don't know why I bother but... Was this a reported case? If so, please cite reference so we can look it up. If not, assume we don't think you're correct as all other information supports the views I and others have given. In this case, it is not up to us to prove the accepted view of the majority, it is up to you to prove your point. So, my friend, please then cite which statue or case law supports you contention the gypsies are not bound by UK law. | |||
"This is a very bizarre conversation, but one of the basic freedoms we have is that you can believe whatever you like, no matter how ridiculous "It's great for my blocklist though! | |||
| |||
"That's proof of identity, not a separate legal entity. I'm really not with you there lol. A birth certificate is a certificate showing details of your legal entity. If I didn't have a legal entity, you woukdnt be able to do a great number of things! How could you even get a driving license?!?!" I think the same. A birth certificate (from what the originator of the You Are Not A Legal Name stuff contends) is like the deeds of a house or the log book of a car on a person. You need these things to be part of the state/society. But he is saying that we don't need them. This is why the government has made it illegal not to have a birth certificate for new borns, or a log book for a car etc That's how I see it? | |||
" Show you the law? All of it, common law, statute and case law. naw just the section that applies to your previous statement. gypsies are NOT bound by law, thats why they get moved on and not arrested, they drive without registration of cars, tax ins.....not all i'm sure, but i know many that do, they have known about sovereign rights alot longer than us, and just because you maybe are unable to understand that LAWS restrict freedom of choice, and our freedoms are inherent (unlike societies man made laws)doesn't mean its bollocks.......as many folk who follow the freeman movement are overturning decisions on debts, foreclosures on homes, illegal removal of benefits and so much more for those people in poverty " I don't know whether to bother not; or whether this is just chess and pigeons again; Gypsies are bound by law; They are " moved on" because they have been using land without permission; as it happens; using land without permission is not an offence for which you are generally arrested and detained; and it's a bit impractical to arrest , all at once, 50 people, women, children , dogs, cats, and impound all their vehicles; so if they move on; it's perfectly fine ( they are not obliged to have a fixed abode ) As to Car tax, insurance, MOT, income tax, etc, if you knew what you were talking of, you would know that Romany Gypsies actually do pay these things, by and large; most Romsny families in fact use a post box or accommodation address service to make this easier. Other " traveller" groups may be evading these things; if they are not prosecuted for it, that's an issue for the authorities and enforcement. | |||
| |||
| |||
"We are born on this planet and from there forced to live by others laws. A naturist used this as his defence. I know they prosecuted multiple times but how can he be wrong " What? 'How can he be wrong'? Please explain this. It's even more strange a statement than the others above! | |||
" Show you the law? All of it, common law, statute and case law. naw just the section that applies to your previous statement. gypsies are NOT bound by law, thats why they get moved on and not arrested, they drive without registration of cars, tax ins.....not all i'm sure, but i know many that do, they have known about sovereign rights alot longer than us, and just because you maybe are unable to understand that LAWS restrict freedom of choice, and our freedoms are inherent (unlike societies man made laws)doesn't mean its bollocks.......as many folk who follow the freeman movement are overturning decisions on debts, foreclosures on homes, illegal removal of benefits and so much more for those people in poverty I don't know whether to bother not; or whether this is just chess and pigeons again; Gypsies are bound by law; They are " moved on" because they have been using land without permission; as it happens; using land without permission is not an offence for which you are generally arrested and detained; and it's a bit impractical to arrest , all at once, 50 people, women, children , dogs, cats, and impound all their vehicles; so if they move on; it's perfectly fine ( they are not obliged to have a fixed abode ) As to Car tax, insurance, MOT, income tax, etc, if you knew what you were talking of, you would know that Romany Gypsies actually do pay these things, by and large; most Romsny families in fact use a post box or accommodation address service to make this easier. Other " traveller" groups may be evading these things; if they are not prosecuted for it, that's an issue for the authorities and enforcement." i never mentioned "romany" anything
you are entitled to your 'opinion' thankfully that's nothing to do with the law | |||
"We are born on this planet and from there forced to live by others laws. A naturist used this as his defence. I know they prosecuted multiple times but how can he be wrong What? 'How can he be wrong'? Please explain this. It's even more strange a statement than the others above! " you are born then the rules of the country you were born in are forced upon you. The naturists defence was he didnt accept those laws or the eatablishment that made them. | |||
" as many folk who follow the freeman movement are overturning decisions on debts, foreclosures on homes, illegal removal of benefits and so much more for those people in poverty " Please also cite a single instance of this happening that is in a court that sets precedent. There are some cases where the judge clearly feels it's not in the public interest to continue the case so ends it. But that's not the same thing as it being a valid argument. | |||
"We are born on this planet and from there forced to live by others laws. A naturist used this as his defence. I know they prosecuted multiple times but how can he be wrong What? 'How can he be wrong'? Please explain this. It's even more strange a statement than the others above! you are born then the rules of the country you were born in are forced upon you. The naturists defence was he didnt accept those laws or the eatablishment that made them." And his opinion is valid for what reason? See my post above, not all opinions are valid. And you haven't answered 'how can he be wrong'. | |||
" i never mentioned "romany" anything
you are entitled to your 'opinion' thankfully that's nothing to do with the law "Except in that he's quoting the law. Have a go in court if you like, just tell us where so we can come and watch, it'd be more fun than any comedy on tv! | |||
| |||
" who the fuck has the right to tell anyone how to live their lives, really? you have the right to be you and some laws are unjust, basically. 1. Everyone else in the society in which you live has a right to expect that you will respect the accepted behaviour of that society. Which in a large and sophisticated society, is encoded by laws." I think our societies now are so vast that it's not possible to predict behviours within them or expect that now. No way are 100,000s of people gonna agree on everything that goes on and it's why we see smaller communities forming within communities. It's also why people are dissatisfied with a fair vote because not everyone being governed by a certain political ideal will want that. "2. "Some laws are unjust" - sure; and as the society at large , by concensus, agree with that, the society changes the law. Which is done by convincing your representatives to do something about it, or in more extreme cases, protests, campaigns, etc. it works: repeal of slavery, anti discriminatory laws, gay marriage. Societies work by concensus; whether it be a wolf pack or a nation. " but when you think about who thought they had the given right to ban gay marriage in the first place, or had the right to keep slaves, or to discriminate? that wasn't anyone's birthright to be born into somewhere where they are told how to live and what they are based on nothing. that was someone making up rules for their own benefit, or to harm other people, and people were born into that out of circumstance and nothing more. i think the you're not your legal name is something different to this really though, even though it's along the same lines, it's more a protest about something specific, not sure what exactly but people are breaking laws and trying to get away with that because they feel those laws are wrong OR maybe they feel like they're above the law. not sure which. | |||
" Please also cite a single instance of this happening that is in a court that sets precedent. "There are some cases where the judge clearly feels it's not in the public interest to continue the case so ends it. But that's not the same thing as it being a valid argument." " ^^^(not relevant)^^^ i never said the case set a precedent...did i? free people dont use magic, they use existing laws and their 'definitions' to their advantage, rather than to the systems advantage....namely money. | |||
" i never mentioned "romany" anything
you are entitled to your 'opinion' thankfully that's nothing to do with the law
Except in that he's quoting the law.
^^^about a group i never mentioned^^^
Have a go in court if you like, just tell us where so we can come and watch, it'd be more fun than any comedy on tv! "been there and done it MANY times thanks. | |||
" who the fuck has the right to tell anyone how to live their lives, really? you have the right to be you and some laws are unjust, basically. 1. Everyone else in the society in which you live has a right to expect that you will respect the accepted behaviour of that society. Which in a large and sophisticated society, is encoded by laws. I think our societies now are so vast that it's not possible to predict behviours within them or expect that now. No way are 100,000s of people gonna agree on everything that goes on and it's why we see smaller communities forming within communities. It's also why people are dissatisfied with a fair vote because not everyone being governed by a certain political ideal will want that. 2. "Some laws are unjust" - sure; and as the society at large , by concensus, agree with that, the society changes the law. Which is done by convincing your representatives to do something about it, or in more extreme cases, protests, campaigns, etc. it works: repeal of slavery, anti discriminatory laws, gay marriage. Societies work by concensus; whether it be a wolf pack or a nation. but when you think about who thought they had the given right to ban gay marriage in the first place, or had the right to keep slaves, or to discriminate? that wasn't anyone's birthright to be born into somewhere where they are told how to live and what they are based on nothing. that was someone making up rules for their own benefit, or to harm other people, and people were born into that out of circumstance and nothing more. i think the you're not your legal name is something different to this really though, even though it's along the same lines, it's more a protest about something specific, not sure what exactly but people are breaking laws and trying to get away with that because they feel those laws are wrong OR maybe they feel like they're above the law. not sure which." You are a bit short on history, then; Slaves have existed since the dawn of time; and it was considered normal; therefore not illegal ( there was no law making slavery legal, dlavery was just always there) then oriole became enlightened, and passed laws to make it illegal. Same with homosexuality; it was regarded as immoral by religions; therefore it became, by default, illegal ( Europen laws derive mainly from the Judaism-Christian religions). And then written into law ( not as homosexuality per se, but as gross indecency). When people started to accept homosexuality then it eventually was made legal. Etc...... | |||
"as many folk who follow the freeman movement are overturning decisions on debts, foreclosures on homes, illegal removal of benefits and so much more for those people in poverty " How can it be illegal removal of benefits if they aren't a legal entity? It's a two way street, if they believe they aren't bound by the law then they can't be 'legally' entitled to benefits, so it's not illegal to remove them. | |||
| |||
"as many folk who follow the freeman movement are overturning decisions on debts, foreclosures on homes, illegal removal of benefits and so much more for those people in poverty How can it be illegal removal of benefits if they aren't a legal entity? It's a two way street, if they believe they aren't bound by the law then they can't be 'legally' entitled to benefits, so it's not illegal to remove them. " i never said the person who received help with benefit from a freeman was also a freeman | |||
" i never mentioned "romany" anything
you are entitled to your 'opinion' thankfully that's nothing to do with the law
Except in that he's quoting the law.
^^^about a group i never mentioned^^^
Have a go in court if you like, just tell us where so we can come and watch, it'd be more fun than any comedy on tv!
been there and done it MANY times thanks."You mentioned gypsies, commonally known as Romany. Did you mean another group. You say MANY times, please quote some. Some that we can verify, that's how discussions like this work, | |||
" Please also cite a single instance of this happening that is in a court that sets precedent. "There are some cases where the judge clearly feels it's not in the public interest to continue the case so ends it. But that's not the same thing as it being a valid argument." ^^^(not relevant)^^^ i never said the case set a precedent...did i? free people dont use magic, they use existing laws and their 'definitions' to their advantage, rather than to the systems advantage....namely money." What? | |||
"Seen a few of these lately. I do like the comment I read by a barrister about them: "It's a kind of brew of pseudo-legal ideas. It's the equivalent of thinking Harry Potter is science." " | |||
"His opinion is valid because he is correct. just because society decides to conform to pre determined rules laws and boundries dosnt make it correct to the naturist these rules are forced upon him with no choice in the matter. " So we're applying relativity to this? By your argument his opinion may be correct but is totally irrelevant, he'll be prosecuted regardless of what he thinks. Tough but then life can be. | |||
" Show you the law? All of it, common law, statute and case law. naw just the section that applies to your previous statement. gypsies are NOT bound by law, thats why they get moved on and not arrested, they drive without registration of cars, tax ins.....not all i'm sure, but i know many that do, they have known about sovereign rights alot longer than us, and just because you maybe are unable to understand that LAWS restrict freedom of choice, and our freedoms are inherent (unlike societies man made laws)doesn't mean its bollocks.......as many folk who follow the freeman movement are overturning decisions on debts, foreclosures on homes, illegal removal of benefits and so much more for those people in poverty I don't know whether to bother not; or whether this is just chess and pigeons again; Gypsies are bound by law; They are " moved on" because they have been using land without permission; as it happens; using land without permission is not an offence for which you are generally arrested and detained; and it's a bit impractical to arrest , all at once, 50 people, women, children , dogs, cats, and impound all their vehicles; so if they move on; it's perfectly fine ( they are not obliged to have a fixed abode ) As to Car tax, insurance, MOT, income tax, etc, if you knew what you were talking of, you would know that Romany Gypsies actually do pay these things, by and large; most Romsny families in fact use a post box or accommodation address service to make this easier. Other " traveller" groups may be evading these things; if they are not prosecuted for it, that's an issue for the authorities and enforcement. i never mentioned "romany" anything
you are entitled to your 'opinion' thankfully that's nothing to do with the law "Well firstly; strictly ; Gypsies are Romany; only Romany are Gypsies. Others calling themselves ( or called ) gypsies are traveller of various kinds. Thank fully my "opinion" is not my opinion; it is the law; However, again, I am playing chess with a pigeon, so I'll leave you to it in your ignorance. | |||
" You mentioned gypsies, commonally known as Romany. Did you mean another group. ^^^^^ yes..i was talking of some spanish gypsies i met, really makes no difference where they are from, as free people have no borders. You say MANY times, please quote some. Some that we can verify, that's how discussions like this work," is it?...........where's your verification on any of your opinions or experiences? | |||
" Please also cite a single instance of this happening that is in a court that sets precedent. "There are some cases where the judge clearly feels it's not in the public interest to continue the case so ends it. But that's not the same thing as it being a valid argument." ^^^(not relevant)^^^ i never said the case set a precedent...did i? free people dont use magic, they use existing laws and their 'definitions' to their advantage, rather than to the systems advantage....namely money." No you didn't say it set precedent, I did to clarify. That's how common law works. Courts interpret it. Statute overrules it. Parliament sets statute. Courts interpret statute. Your remarks about 'free' people are interesting. They may as well try magic, their attempts to use the legal system to their advantage invariably fail, as per my comments above. Of course, feel free to prove me wrong, a single cited case would do it. | |||
" You mentioned gypsies, commonally known as Romany. Did you mean another group. ^^^^^ yes..i was talking of some spanish gypsies i met, really makes no difference where they are from, as free people have no borders. You say MANY times, please quote some. Some that we can verify, that's how discussions like this work, is it?...........where's your verification on any of your opinions or experiences? " You clearly don't get how this works! I am arguing the mainstream view, you are arguing a fantasy. Unless, of course, you care to prove otherwise. Chess and pigeons! | |||
" Thank fully my "opinion" is not my opinion; it is the law; " no i'm afraid not, the law is very bending, as every word in the LAW has more than one meaning. thats maybe why your not a lawyer, lack of objectivity | |||
"His opinion is valid because he is correct. just because society decides to conform to pre determined rules laws and boundries dosnt make it correct to the naturist these rules are forced upon him with no choice in the matter. So we're applying relativity to this? By your argument his opinion may be correct but is totally irrelevant, he'll be prosecuted regardless of what he thinks. Tough but then life can be." my my aint we a little grumpy today. You asked me a question I answered your question. the answer I gave dosnt give you pleasure. As quite simply its correct. So lets put relativity on the plate pmsl.like it or lump it the naturist is correct we are born free then made conform to society. | |||
"no i'm afraid not, the law is very bending, as every word in the LAW has more than one meaning. " Actually, that's the great difference between legal English and common English, the legal sort has considerably less ambiguity. True, cases hinge in interpretation but in general the language is much more precise. | |||
"His opinion is valid because he is correct. just because society decides to conform to pre determined rules laws and boundries dosnt make it correct to the naturist these rules are forced upon him with no choice in the matter. So we're applying relativity to this? By your argument his opinion may be correct but is totally irrelevant, he'll be prosecuted regardless of what he thinks. Tough but then life can be.my my aint we a little grumpy today. You asked me a question I answered your question. the answer I gave dosnt give you pleasure. As quite simply its correct. So lets put relativity on the plate pmsl.like it or lump it the naturist is correct we are born free then made conform to society. " No, not particularly grumpy just a bit intolerant of irrelevant argument. We are not 'made to conform to society' we agree to live in it. | |||
| |||
" who the fuck has the right to tell anyone how to live their lives, really? you have the right to be you and some laws are unjust, basically. 1. Everyone else in the society in which you live has a right to expect that you will respect the accepted behaviour of that society. Which in a large and sophisticated society, is encoded by laws. I think our societies now are so vast that it's not possible to predict behviours within them or expect that now. No way are 100,000s of people gonna agree on everything that goes on and it's why we see smaller communities forming within communities. It's also why people are dissatisfied with a fair vote because not everyone being governed by a certain political ideal will want that. 2. "Some laws are unjust" - sure; and as the society at large , by concensus, agree with that, the society changes the law. Which is done by convincing your representatives to do something about it, or in more extreme cases, protests, campaigns, etc. it works: repeal of slavery, anti discriminatory laws, gay marriage. Societies work by concensus; whether it be a wolf pack or a nation. but when you think about who thought they had the given right to ban gay marriage in the first place, or had the right to keep slaves, or to discriminate? that wasn't anyone's birthright to be born into somewhere where they are told how to live and what they are based on nothing. that was someone making up rules for their own benefit, or to harm other people, and people were born into that out of circumstance and nothing more. i think the you're not your legal name is something different to this really though, even though it's along the same lines, it's more a protest about something specific, not sure what exactly but people are breaking laws and trying to get away with that because they feel those laws are wrong OR maybe they feel like they're above the law. not sure which. You are a bit short on history, then; Slaves have existed since the dawn of time; and it was considered normal; therefore not illegal ( there was no law making slavery legal, dlavery was just always there) then oriole became enlightened, and passed laws to make it illegal. Same with homosexuality; it was regarded as immoral by religions; therefore it became, by default, illegal ( Europen laws derive mainly from the Judaism-Christian religions). And then written into law ( not as homosexuality per se, but as gross indecency). When people started to accept homosexuality then it eventually was made legal. Etc...... " but this is exactly what you mean by society, when you say things were considered normal. unwritten laws basically. and i also remember the parts of history where people were robbed from and had their land stolen by those who considered themselves an authority. taxes were forcibly taken just because someone declared themselves the owner because they had a better army. and now we just pay them and they don't need an army at all, but that's normal too. i can't even imagine what fucked up state we'd be living in if people didn't have to fight for their rights to be themselves and for their basic rights, that were stolen from them by being born into a place they do not own. | |||
'
'Oh..okay. ..carry on then'
| |||
" who the fuck has the right to tell anyone how to live their lives, really? you have the right to be you and some laws are unjust, basically. 1. Everyone else in the society in which you live has a right to expect that you will respect the accepted behaviour of that society. Which in a large and sophisticated society, is encoded by laws. I think our societies now are so vast that it's not possible to predict behviours within them or expect that now. No way are 100,000s of people gonna agree on everything that goes on and it's why we see smaller communities forming within communities. It's also why people are dissatisfied with a fair vote because not everyone being governed by a certain political ideal will want that. 2. "Some laws are unjust" - sure; and as the society at large , by concensus, agree with that, the society changes the law. Which is done by convincing your representatives to do something about it, or in more extreme cases, protests, campaigns, etc. it works: repeal of slavery, anti discriminatory laws, gay marriage. Societies work by concensus; whether it be a wolf pack or a nation. but when you think about who thought they had the given right to ban gay marriage in the first place, or had the right to keep slaves, or to discriminate? that wasn't anyone's birthright to be born into somewhere where they are told how to live and what they are based on nothing. that was someone making up rules for their own benefit, or to harm other people, and people were born into that out of circumstance and nothing more. i think the you're not your legal name is something different to this really though, even though it's along the same lines, it's more a protest about something specific, not sure what exactly but people are breaking laws and trying to get away with that because they feel those laws are wrong OR maybe they feel like they're above the law. not sure which. You are a bit short on history, then; Slaves have existed since the dawn of time; and it was considered normal; therefore not illegal ( there was no law making slavery legal, dlavery was just always there) then oriole became enlightened, and passed laws to make it illegal. Same with homosexuality; it was regarded as immoral by religions; therefore it became, by default, illegal ( Europen laws derive mainly from the Judaism-Christian religions). And then written into law ( not as homosexuality per se, but as gross indecency). When people started to accept homosexuality then it eventually was made legal. Etc...... but this is exactly what you mean by society, when you say things were considered normal. unwritten laws basically. and i also remember the parts of history where people were robbed from and had their land stolen by those who considered themselves an authority. taxes were forcibly taken just because someone declared themselves the owner because they had a better army. and now we just pay them and they don't need an army at all, but that's normal too. i can't even imagine what fucked up state we'd be living in if people didn't have to fight for their rights to be themselves and for their basic rights, that were stolen from them by being born into a place they do not own." I am having difficulty getting inside your logic cycle. But the point is; ( certainly with UK law; which evolves under case law ) it evolves one way or another ; and what I said was; if you don't like it; then you get it changed; either via your representatives , or by public opinion, or protest, or by challenging the legislation in test cases in the courts.( or by a revolution, if need be). | |||
"I am having difficulty getting inside your logic cycle." Logic? I give up, we're playing multiple chess games at once against a whole pigeon loft! It's even worse than arguing science. I've updated my status to reflect this! | |||
" who the fuck has the right to tell anyone how to live their lives, really? you have the right to be you and some laws are unjust, basically. 1. Everyone else in the society in which you live has a right to expect that you will respect the accepted behaviour of that society. Which in a large and sophisticated society, is encoded by laws. I think our societies now are so vast that it's not possible to predict behviours within them or expect that now. No way are 100,000s of people gonna agree on everything that goes on and it's why we see smaller communities forming within communities. It's also why people are dissatisfied with a fair vote because not everyone being governed by a certain political ideal will want that. 2. "Some laws are unjust" - sure; and as the society at large , by concensus, agree with that, the society changes the law. Which is done by convincing your representatives to do something about it, or in more extreme cases, protests, campaigns, etc. it works: repeal of slavery, anti discriminatory laws, gay marriage. Societies work by concensus; whether it be a wolf pack or a nation. but when you think about who thought they had the given right to ban gay marriage in the first place, or had the right to keep slaves, or to discriminate? that wasn't anyone's birthright to be born into somewhere where they are told how to live and what they are based on nothing. that was someone making up rules for their own benefit, or to harm other people, and people were born into that out of circumstance and nothing more. i think the you're not your legal name is something different to this really though, even though it's along the same lines, it's more a protest about something specific, not sure what exactly but people are breaking laws and trying to get away with that because they feel those laws are wrong OR maybe they feel like they're above the law. not sure which. You are a bit short on history, then; Slaves have existed since the dawn of time; and it was considered normal; therefore not illegal ( there was no law making slavery legal, dlavery was just always there) then oriole became enlightened, and passed laws to make it illegal. Same with homosexuality; it was regarded as immoral by religions; therefore it became, by default, illegal ( Europen laws derive mainly from the Judaism-Christian religions). And then written into law ( not as homosexuality per se, but as gross indecency). When people started to accept homosexuality then it eventually was made legal. Etc...... but this is exactly what you mean by society, when you say things were considered normal. unwritten laws basically. and i also remember the parts of history where people were robbed from and had their land stolen by those who considered themselves an authority. taxes were forcibly taken just because someone declared themselves the owner because they had a better army. and now we just pay them and they don't need an army at all, but that's normal too. i can't even imagine what fucked up state we'd be living in if people didn't have to fight for their rights to be themselves and for their basic rights, that were stolen from them by being born into a place they do not own. I am having difficulty getting inside your logic cycle. But the point is; ( certainly with UK law; which evolves under case law ) it evolves one way or another ; and what I said was; if you don't like it; then you get it changed; either via your representatives , or by public opinion, or protest, or by challenging the legislation in test cases in the courts.( or by a revolution, if need be). " that takes ages (years, decades even, and if we think about the gay people prosecuted for being gay that pardon they want is coming up to a century now), and a lot of support. my logic is some things are forced that do not belong in any civilised society because it benefits a few people, i've left many examples already. that we are not born to obey others. we have the right to be who want to without harming anyone else, a society should expect it's citizens to be harmless otherwise there'd be no society. that there are a lot of double standards within our society also. and the ones outside of our societies are using our society as a way to maintain a high status where they do not have to conform to our rules, the rules they create. but more basically, people are born into something they choose not to be a part of. if you could choose to take your taxes and pay for a life to be saved or a life to be taken, which would you choose? do you think you have the choice right now? would you like that choice? you weren't born into any society that let's you choose to do many things. sure you have some freedoms, but they're within rails, one choice or another but not anything you'd choose for yourself maybe. what would you really do with your life if you had the choice? would you be here arguing with me if you had something better to do? | |||
"i watched a video of a guy who left his court summons on the table to be tried in place of himself. think he got done for breach of court as well. "Have you seen the Cwmbran court video where using the same method they take control of the court, dismiss the 'judge' and declare all proceedings null and void? | |||
"i watched a video of a guy who left his court summons on the table to be tried in place of himself. think he got done for breach of court as well.
Have you seen the Cwmbran court video where using the same method they take control of the court, dismiss the 'judge' and declare all proceedings null and void?"no, you got a youtube link? i couldn't find the video i was on about either, it is fairly old though. | |||
| |||
| |||
"It's "Freeman Stephen Barry Beats Court". It's quite long but great drama." lol, found it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-Us0UT2EfY | |||
| |||
"That's proof of identity, not a separate legal entity. I'm really not with you there lol. A birth certificate is a certificate showing details of your legal entity. If I didn't have a legal entity, you woukdnt be able to do a great number of things! How could you even get a driving license?!?! OK, I think I may be doing you a disservice here because I don't think you're using the term "legal entity" the way I'm understanding it, or the way that the "illegal to use a legal name" peddlers would. What you're describing is more like legal acknowledgement that you exist and are who you say you are. What the Freemen-on-the-land types argue is that the government creates a legal entity which they attach to you at birth, which is responsible for all the obligations you are told you have, AND WHICH YOU CAN CHOOSE TO REJECT RESPONSIBILITY FOR. " And which, of course, you can't reject responsibility for. | |||
| |||
As a footnote, if your that bright you wouldn't get caught breaking the law anyhow. | |||
