Common LawSubmitted by TommyPaine on Wed, 02/20/2013 - 18:44
A lot of legal theories are out there amongst liberty lovers because we can see that the rules of the constitutional republic are not being followed by those who have been hired to follow them.
Let's have a conversation about what the current "law profession" (lawyers, judges, cops, and politicians) think our system IS, versus what it actually was intended to be, and how we can push the people who have it wrong into doing what is right.
Let's start with: What is the Common Law? The Common Law dates back before the Revolution to Merry Ol' England. Does it date back before England? (I don't know; I'm asking). Anyway, we (Americans) inherited the Common Law system. It is the "common practices" by the people, as determined in court cases. When enough court cases all say the same thing ("If you steal your neighbor's mule, you must pay him twice the amount in value" or something like that), then that was considered "the law." There was no need for a legislature to make up a "code" for this; it was determined by court cases.
Fast forward to today and the "Common Law" is still court cases. But now it is mixed with court cases that have to do with legal principles in general (not too many of those) and court cases that are adjudicating regarding statutes (almost all cases these days).
If you have a dispute with your neighbor, there MIGHT be a Common Law principle that COULD allow a judge to render a verdict, BUT most likely that judge will INSTEAD turn to the Municipal Code to figure out how to make a judgement.
That is my take on it. Seems like the Common Law has been pushed aside because now there are so many statutes that judges just do what is easy and written down: they enforce codes.
Do I have this basically right or not? Correct if I am in error.
Now then ...
Those of you who post (or don't post) various legal theories as to what is really going on these days, where up seems down and black seems white, I have some questions:
(1) In a few sentences, how did this change occur? (Do NOT point me to 3-hour videos or 10,000-word web pages -- tell me in YOUR words, and keep it simple.)
(2) What legal basis is used by a judge to use a statute rather than the Common Law, and can this same legal basis be used by me in reverse to enforce the Common Law on the judge? (Do NOT point me to 3-hour videos or 10,000-word web pages -- tell me in YOUR words, and keep it simple.)
(3) What are the SPECIFIC things someone can do to AFTER they are either dealing with a bureaucrat by mail who is making allegations that the person "must" do this or that, or when dealing with a judge AFTER some sort of ticket has been written or charge made, that can go around statutes that have nothing to do with anyone violating another person's rights? (Do NOT point me to 3-hour videos or 10,000-word web pages -- tell me in YOUR words, and keep it simple.)
I don't know how clear all this is because I am trying to understand these issues myself, so I don't know for sure what the right questions are. In a nutshell: How did everything go to hell in a hand basket, and what can we do outside of political elections and within the legal system to re-assert our rights -- WITHOUT declaring "sovereignty" or anything that turns our life upside down.
After all, IF the power has been usurped and is being enforced unlawfully, then by definition it is not valid. WE shouldn't have to upend our lives because of THEIR unlawful actions.