How do I unregister my car?

[Bookworm]

As has been stated before, Black's is American, so doesn't apply here. It's also a dictionary, which gives definitions, not interpretations.

 

We're back to FOTL playing with semantics and thinking that they equate to rights. And UK irrelevant ones at that.

[peace2k]

many legal systems are are based on the uk system.

 

blacks law is used by uk lawyers.

 

legalities are all about semantics.

 

rights are god given and unalienable.

[Conniff]

[gwc1000]

you will find such a definition in blacks law dictionary.

Have a look at Black's. The first definition in Black's for "person" says "a human being". But you are falling at the first hurdle, as do all of the FOTL.

As Bookie says a legal dictionary is just a dictionary. It is not law. A legal dictionary is not a legal authority. It is futile running a case based on a law dictionary. A dictionary is not persuasive. Courts make decisions based on law.

 

corporations are legal persons.

Indeed they are.

 

does it not follow that persons are corporations?

No it doesn't.

One thing FOTL have difficulty in understanding is that in law whilst all persons are not human beings, all human beings are persons. Study law, not youtube videos.

 

you may have a bank account but you are not your bank account.

And your point is?

 

likewise, you have a person but you are not your person.

Yes you are. This strawman argument is not correct. The legal profession do not recognise it.

acts, statutes and byelaws only apply to the person, unless you consent.

 

Absolutely false.

I challenge you to provide a reference in law to back up that claim.

I have plenty of time, you're going to need it.

consent has been given so readily that it is now assumed and confirmed by fulfilling requests including answering questions.

Consent is given by choosing to reside in any country. If you continue to live here you must follow society's rules. If you don't like it you are always free to leave.

[peace2k]

thanks for engaging in sensible debate.

 

i'm off to the high court, london [no.71] again today where the guy purporting to be a judge has refused to honour his oath twice.

 

ask any constable about his oath and the common law.

 

Oaths

 

i am not a person.

 

what is the name of the society you mention? i suggest that it's the law society of which we arent members and as such we cant read or write the rules. legal people are members of the law society and so are bound not to question their own existence.

 

legal and lawful are different. the law of the land is common law. acts, statutes and byelaws are business legislation.

 

why should i leave the country where i was born? can i leave without a pass-port?

 

are the following shipping terms just coincidence?:

birth [of a ship or person], dock [in a court], pass-port, trans-port, air-port.

[Conniff]

[Conniff]

Oh look - peace2k and nutter friends cooking up something else.

 

What's it going to be this time - you don't have to pay for beer?

 

.

[Bookworm]

 

why should i leave the country where i was born? can i leave without a pass-port?

 

are the following shipping terms just coincidence?:

birth [of a ship or person], dock [in a court], pass-port, trans-port, air-port.

If you're French, an ID card is sufficient for most European countries, actually.

 

So are those terms a coincidence? Errrr no, it's called "etymology". :-?

[gwc1000]

thanks for engaging in sensible debate.

 

i'm off to the high court, london [no.71] again today where the guy purporting to be a judge has refused to honour his oath twice.

Don't start that argument about the judicial oath. A member of the judiciary is not required to provide evidence of their oath in court.

ask any constable about his oath and the common law.

 

What has that got to do with your judge?

i am not a person.

 

In law you are. In case you missed it before, I'll say it again:

In law not all persons are human beings, but all human beings are persons. You may not like that and wish it were different, but that's how it is.

what is the name of the society you mention?

Call it what you like, the population of the UK is as good as any. Are you suggesting that society does not exist?

i suggest that it's the law society of which we arent members and as such we cant read or write the rules. legal people are members of the law society and so are bound not to question their own existence.

I've just realised by that rubbish, I know you

 

legal and lawful are different.

In certain circumstances yes, but not in the way you are suggesting. You really have trouble understanding law don't you?

the law of the land is common law. acts, statutes and byelaws are business legislation.

Wow, you really are way down that rabbithole aren't you? You obviously know nothing about law. Research more.

 

why should i leave the country where i was born? can i leave without a pass-port?

You don't have to leave. But whilst you're here you have to follow the law.

Unless of course you are willing to prove by action that you are not bound by statute law. Are you up for a challenge?

 

are the following shipping terms just coincidence?:

birth [of a ship or person], dock [in a court], pass-port, trans-port, air-port.

Ha ha. Admiralty eh? You are really struggling aren't you. Er, berth and birth? Do you have learning difficulties?

dock is an old word for a pen for caged animals.

[Bookworm]

Would that make my i-pod a judge? (yes, I realise how surreal that sentence would sound out of context )

[Conniff]

Ahhh - a snapshot of peace2k as a baby.

[gwc1000]

I'll make a prediction:

peace2k will tell us that The Golden Rule is the law of the land.

[Conniff]

Why oh why are you people responding to this crap. There has never been an answer to anything asked and never will be. You are just perpetuating crap.

 

I'm not sure if they are trying to turn you or themselves.

[Conniff]

[gwc1000]

Why oh why are you people responding to this crap. There has never been an answer to anything asked and never will be. You are just perpetuating crap.

 

I'm not sure if they are trying to turn you or themselves.

The FOTL argument is easily debunked, but they will never see that.

It is ironic that the OP of this thread pleasuredome thought he knew it all and claimed statutes were not law and ended up in prison owing the best part of four grand in costs.

He was a follower of John Harris and believed everything Harris told him.

[Conniff]

The FOTL argument is easily debunked, but they will never see that.

 

So why keep on responding?

[Bookworm]

Why oh why are you people responding to this crap. There has never been an answer to anything asked and never will be. You are just perpetuating crap.

 

I'm not sure if they are trying to turn you or themselves.

well, it's that or sorting a huge pile of washing and I am desperately trying to find excuses not to do it.

[gwc1000]

So why keep on responding?

OK, I admit it. I enjoy it. Debunking brainwashed FOTL is similar to shooting fish in a barrel.

Not that I would ever shoot a fish, mind you.

[Bookworm]

Woop, FOTL has left the building. Was it something we said, do you think?

[gwc1000]

This is a very good read:

 

The Freeman Movement and England - JREF Forum

 

It is many many pages long, but gives an excellent insight how the brainwashed FOTL operate, it is well worth reading.

I have a sneaky feeling that peace2k is "Especially" in the thread above. He also posts as notwattyler on tpuc.org. I recognise his style.

Edited June 24, 2010 by gwc1000

[Bookworm]

95 pages, woo-hoo, that's my excuse for not sorting out the laundry sorted!!!

[Conniff]

well, it's that or sorting a huge pile of washing and I am desperately trying to find excuses not to do it.

 

 

That is without doubt the best and most sensible post on the whole thread.

[gwc1000]

95 pages, woo-hoo, that's my excuse for not sorting out the laundry sorted!!!

Interestingly the infamous Rob Menard enters the debate about thirty pages in but soon realises he is beaten by the critical thinkers of the randi forum and leaves after making very few posts.

[Bookworm]

Oh, what does "WOO" stand for? Way Of O....something, presumably?

[peace2k]

a QC barrister today confirmed that blacks is accurate. person has several definitions. one is a natural person [or human being - my words]. one is a corporate legal fiction. it depends on what definition is being used.

 

is an illegal immigrant a person?

 

one real world example:

 

a friend of mine was in juvenile court for the victim-less crime of 'possessing articles with the intent of causing criminal damage to property of persons unknown'.

he asked the judge if he had an oath of office. the judge left in silence and returned to 'try again'. he was asked the same question and left in silence again. my then friend said:

'does anyone here have a claim on me?'

'as no-one has a claim on me, my business is done and i'm leaving'

 

the case has disappeared, no warrant issued.

 

explain that one. no doubt you'll say they couldnt be bothered to follow it up. show me any other example where this is the case.

 

i can provide a more detailed report on the high court case if anyone is interested. the legal system is totally corrupt. those that deny the obvious are likely suffering cognitive dissonance.

Edited June 24, 2010 by peace2k
correction