5 votes

Identifying and Understanding the Patterns of How or Why the U.S. Legal System is Structured.

I do not ask anyone to believe as I believe. What I believe is irrelevant as it can not create what is. That said, I believe there are clear identifiable patterns in the architecture of the entire U.S. legal system with an origin in the Declaration of Independence. It as though there has been some power or force operating behind the scenes that is unknown or unrevealed. I can not explain or describe it but the patterns of its signature is in everywhere in the legal landscape.

In a religious context either one of two things would be true. Any unknown power or force operating behind the scenes would derive from some satan or devil in control of the earth or it would derive from a god who has repeatedly sought to win hearts and minds of people. I see little point for purposes of this topic to elaborate more on the phenomenon beyond the improbability of amendments, codes, or statutes authored by different people of different generations and conforming to similar consistent patterns. As in what are the odds of something like that happening and what would you attribute it to if it has happened?

The most identifiable pattern evidenced in the architecture of the legal system is that everything is crafted as voluntary. It is as if when the Declaration of Independence defined just government power based on the consent of governed and appealed the matter before the supreme judge of the world that those terms have in fact been enforced in the structure of the legal system. Enforcement may not have always been in accordance with voluntary terms but one does not blame an architect for the failures of an enforcer.

Figure 1
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Figure 2
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

The Declaration of Independence and subsequent constitutions have implemented a rule of just government. This rule has placed human action to pursue happiness, defend liberty or property, and enjoy life outside of government regulation by declaring them inalienable rights. Inalienable means unlimited. It means non-transferable so that no people could delegate any power to govern an inalienable right in the establishment of any constitution.

Government is in the business of regulating business (note: with regards to crime, a separate matter, it is not said government regulates crime). Since the pursuit of happiness is excluded from government interference or regulation the only thing government can regulate is business or commercial activity. It is the reason every state expressly defines a motor vehicle as a vehicle "used to transport persons or property." We are talking about a for hire commercial or business use to derive a private gain or profit. It is the reason every state expressly regulates marriage as a use to solemnize. We are not talking about any inalienable right to choose a partner but the business of marriage and jointly owned property placed under the protection of a state. It is the reason every code or statute applies to persons except paternity presumption codes which is the only place one will find the term man or men meaning something different than a person. It is a reason home offices are regulated when a home is used for a business or commercial purpose. It is a reason taxes are always based on value. You say how else would they be based ... ok ... if you produce 10 apples you are taxed 1 apple. The federal reserve note is the intellectual property of bankers. Using any value derived from intellectual property of others declared legal tender is a privilege. Even legal monetary terms have changed. Nowadays everything is an obligation because a note only transfers an obligation to pay. No debt can be extinguished as no one can redeem a federal reserve note in anything that can extinguish debt.

Whether you subscribe to any religion or not the principle money can not buy happiness is a very real concept that manifests in all things legal. The reason is not rocket science. No one has ever proposed any other way that can be used as a rule to consistently distinguish between action pursuing happiness versus action not pursuing happiness. Whether you subscribe to any religion or not the idea the love of money is the root of all evil comes from religion. Religion very much influences the legal systems of the world.

Freemen have largely brought these legal concepts to modern light in various evolutions of legal thought or legal arguments. Some argue code applicability as in what witness is testifying under oath to any first hand knowledge the code in question applies to me. Some argue payroll records as in if I am not engaged in the pursuit of happiness then where is the evidence I was deriving a private gain or profit at the time of complaint in the form of a payroll record or some other payment or benefit. Such arguments are about fundamentally questioning jurisdiction, evidence of jurisdiction, and not allowing it to be presumed by silently acquiescing.

In any event the world is going to change because the inconsistencies in the present legal structures are becoming more plain for all to see. In the U.S. there is no full and honest disclosure for anything whether it is registering property or applying for any license. No state or federal entity ever discloses parties to these business arrangements and the respective bundles of rights for all parties. Nor is the property honestly described, for instance, what is the property being registered in a birth registration? It can be plainly seen how language has been deceptively employed by the dishonest profession of attorneys. People think any natural, fundamental, and inalienable right to travel is driving. A driver license is an occupation license to transport persons or property on the public highway. It is a commercial or business use to derive a private gain or profit. It is the reason truck drivers and passenger car drivers have the same driver license distinguished only by class. One is a class A whereas the other is a class E which determines the size, weight, and cargo of persons or property that can be transported. One is also additionally designated commercial but both both are a business license.

I like referring to the driver license because I think it is a good measure of how things will turn out. If people are going to respect a constitutional system then people will have to accept that people can travel using their own property to pursue happiness, such as going to McDonald's to get food, without a license. However many people do not want that and it represents the classic opposition to constitutions. They say we can't allow everyone to just exercise their right to travel unregulated. They say do what you want while pursuing happiness except do no harm is not good enough. They say the same thing about firearms. They say we can't allow crazy people or felons to own firearms even though they have an inalienable right to self defense. Many people simply do not believe in unalienable rights to pursue happiness, defend life and liberty, or enjoy life. Many people want to trespass against some peoples inalienable rights for some purposes and as such any constitution based on such principles will be meaningless. Quite frankly people do not believe trusting in freedom to preserve their own is in their best interests.

Libertarians provide an alternate guiding principle which is non-aggression. I like that idea better than all of these ambiguities in language and hostility surrounding inalienable rights to pursue happiness. I like the idea of a free market where defense and justice services compete like any other service. I do not advocate taking the U.S. over. I advocate libertarians separating from people who demand kings. Let them have their king and tyrannies of their own making. If a bunch of people do not trust in freedom and are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety let them eat those fruits. Let libertarians geographically organize to create their own free market society and live according to their own self determination.

I am tired of all the legal hypocrisy of a system designed where everything is voluntary to obtain the consent of the governed yet arbitrarily enforced. If I asked a cop how they distinguish between a use to transport persons or property versus using ones property on the public highway to pursue happiness would they have any answer? Hell no. I am tired of all the legal hypocrisy breaking my balls my entire life over petty bullshit when officials who commit heinous or egregious acts go unpunished. Screw these criminal officials, this deceptive and perverted injustice system, and all of the citizenry who support it.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Bump for later comment

Excellent HAM.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

Garan's picture

I can only digest so much right now, yet..

The first thing that came to mind while scanning your post, is this.

Perspectives may conveniently come together into a revelation or consistent view.
Sometimes, it does not matter weather the view is 'correct' or not, just if it is consistent with a theme.
That theme may be useful in making judgements and determinations.

For instance, if you add up a bunch of well intentioned actions and their consequences are consistent with bad intentions, then you can judge the situation as being as harmful as one perpetrated maliciously.

In other words, if it looks, walks, talks, and smells like a duck, it's a duck.

That being said, be careful what perspectives you adopt, because you have a choice, and those choices may define your view of reality.
Some realities are hells that you do not want to spend too much time in.

Be careful, so that you don't mess yourself up.
At the same time, entertain those views.
They might guide you and others well.

RE: "Be careful, so that you don't ... "

For someone like me there is not much cause for optimism. I have resisted the state every way possible for the past couple decades. It has cost me everything. I have survived on less than $20/wk for the past two years eating the same cheap ass ninety nine cent packs of bologna sandwiches many days. I smoke, my health is shit, teeth have deteriorated, and I was recently told by doctors I have lung cancer. It seems possible and probable I may very well die as a homeless man in some obscure place in the not too distant future and no one will know who it is because I have no government or other identification. I do not collect any welfare because I do not feel like begging from an unjust government that has persecuted me. That may sound like a sad story but there are plenty of people who have and do endure worse than I so I have tried to be content with anything in life I do get to enjoy. Of course it is difficult to have any kind of positive or optimistic outlook when life sucks and what can I say ... I am not perfect and come across as an a-hole sometimes.

I get your point and confirm it with my own testimony. Belief in anything is a risk. I am extremely critical of a mentality like ... well I will just pay this $100 ticket because it is not worth it to fight it. If I fight it will end up costing me a lot of time or money and if I lose it may end up a $1000 fine because they wanted to make an example to anyone who questions their supreme wise overlord authority.

I completely get why people go along with incremental tyrannies. If you fight or resist it may very well end up costing you everything. The price of freedom is injustice and it is a very high price to pay. However the fact remains the only reason states get away with it is because people do go along with their unjust decrees and pay. It is a catch twenty two scenario.

Although I am sympathetic to people who have rolled over on command to incremental tyranny at every stage I think it would be extremely unjust for such a people to enjoy any return to liberty or freedom without suffering. It doesn't seem just, right, or fair that a minority has paid the price in property or liberty by resisting injustice for a majority to benefit who has done little or nothing about it. The only reason for pot legalization is because a minority has paid a price of being caged or property confiscated and now the majority sees the injustice of it. When the IRS or income tax is abolished it will be because of all the tax resistors who have been caged or had property confiscated in order for a majority to have witnessed the injustices. It is like police abuse ... if the injustice wasn't in your face people would not even be talking negatively about police.

A couple years ago for some reason I sat down and wrote an unpublished book shared only with a few people. I am no prophet, saint, or holy man but the book primarily contained some heavy religious context because that topic was heavily on my mind at the time for whatever reason. For instance: 666 = United [6] States [6] person [6] and pontificating about a concept like a mark of the beast makes perfect sense as a capacity or identity. I know ... crazy tin foil hat kind of stuff. It is the only written work other than posting I have completed and I have no idea what motivated me at the time so much to finish it.

I do have a point bringing up this book and if you bear with me I will get to it. There are some passages in the book of revelations about seals and prophecy. For argument sake let's just throw everything people think about the Bible out the window for a moment. We live in a world where deception counts for a lot when it comes to power and authority.

First seal: "And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer."

I pontificated in order to divide and conquer a man the first step is convincing a man to believe in some earthly authority external to self. In the passages I see the crown as an authority and obviously a bow can symbolize force use to conquer.

Second seal: "And there went out another horse [that was] red: and [power] was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword."

After a man has been divided by believing in the authority of other men over them peace is taken from the earth due to the resulting conflicts and war.

Third seal: "And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a denarius, and three measures of barley for a denarius; and [see] thou hurt not the oil and the wine."

In order to pay for wars unjust weights and measures are implemented. Currencies are debased, etc.

Fourth seal: "And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth."

Unjust weights and measures result in more injustice and death.

Fifth seal: "And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:"

I pontificated this seal is talking about people who have resisted injustice or stood up for truth and been persecuted for it (ie. Jesus, Martin Luther, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, etc.)

Sixth seal: "And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:"

I pontificated this seal represents the voice of a people crying out against injustices that have piled up to the point where they are so vast and so great people can no longer tolerate them.

The seventh seal to me represents the subsequent revolution and a disruption to those in power where power is transferred to a new entity. When most people think of the book of revelations they would think of those seals as a divine final end times event and not describing a cycle that has reoccurred throughout the history of empires. As I said above let's throw everything out the window for a moment. What if an intended audience of the Bible is people who seek power. What if the Bible is an instruction manual for power. What if the book of revelations is nothing more than warnings to those who would seek power. These seven seals kind of represent a cycle. This cycle is not an alien concept. There have been threads right here on Daily Paul that have talked about a cycle of freedom to tyranny that has simply repeated itself throughout human history and identifying its various stages.

I am not saying anything I just wrote is true. I am only suggesting there is a consistent theme which does make sense from a certain perspective ... which was one of your points in your comment.

None of this is anything new because it is the topic of conversation around here all the time. People see patterns of a new world order. People see things like the IMF, U.N., UPU or other international organizations as an ongoing effort to achieve some kind of global governance via international incrementalism. Power always wants more power so it makes perfect sense those who seek power want power over the entire world and eventually universe. Domestically people see trends of the military training for civil unrest, large ammunition purchases by government, militarized police agencies, fema camps, tightening the grip on the power grid and food production, etc. In a perspective of what I wrote above it is as if some people in power are aware of the cycle and are trying to prepare for that large outcry of the people for justice while at the same time working for more international institutions to have a new global governance solution already in place to be able to skip any revolution stage. Clearly what anyone in power does not want is a revolution because that is a disruption to power and historically not a very good one ... hence regicide (see wiki for regicide).

In closing let me get out of tin foil hat land and back to normal socially acceptable perceptions of reality. Your point there are risks for adopting any belief is a very valid point which can lead to severe consequences depending on the belief or principles adopted. Generally we are only constrained by what we choose to believe. Beliefs have a self governing aspect on human action once they are adopted. Yet my point doing nothing and rolling over on command to go along with incremental tyranny can not be socially acceptable behavior if there is ever to be realized any kind of society with justice and liberty for all.

Kind of off topic but not

the little w's, "www" = 666 in ebcidic (next computer language up from machine language). Not the capital w's but only the lowercase = 6. The www certainly is "a beast" wouldn't you say?

Freedom is not: doing everything you want to.
Freedom is: not having to do what you don't want to do.
~ Joyce Meyer

I am rather

unopinionated about it at present. I mentioned there was a moment in time that for whatever reason the particular topic preoccupied my thoughts for no rational reason. I am not even convinced what I wrote is true but I do not really have a problem talking about the specifics of anything I have thought or written whether it is true or untrue. In my journey I have found things I tend to believe more strongly come in bits and pieces from multiple sources. I guess I would compare it to Austrian economics. If you only read Mises that is one view. If you also read Rothbard then your views might be shaped by both. Or the constitution ... one might take something out of the federalist papers, combine it with notes from the convention, and mix in a little english common law to form their own constitutional interpretation. Since some of the things I have thought about are so abstract and largely irrelevant to normal day to day life I highly doubt there is much of anything I have to say that is useful other than ... well that was certainly an interesting tin foil hat perspective. :)

Not tin foil hat, it's not opinion...it's actual code

I just mentioned it because your accounting of 666 brought it to memory and many people (searching for the beast) don't know www=666. It's doggone curious if nothing else.

Freedom is not: doing everything you want to.
Freedom is: not having to do what you don't want to do.
~ Joyce Meyer

I actually started some research ...

... about the history of the American legal system and why it seems so convoluted today. I didn't get very far, but maybe I will pick up that "hobby" at some point.

The American system is based in the English system, and the English system was implemented and refined over the years primarily by certain key kings.

The original Britons ("original" meaning before the Romans invaded in 43 AD) were driven out of Britain and into today's Wales and Scotland. Various German tribes (collectively referred to as the "Anglo-Saxons") eventually invaded and drove out the Romans around 500 AD. William of Normandy invaded in 1066 and turned the Anglo-Saxons into peasants (he instituted the feudal system England).

Throughout this time, the various kings borrowed their ideas of law from the Romans, but William and his successors also had a separate system for the Anglo-Saxons to deal with disputes between themselves.

This is what turned into what we now call the common law, but civil law (the law decreed by the king) was always a part of the system, as well. The rest of Europe had civil law (from the Romans) but not common law.

Many Americans today think of the American system as one of common law only and these civil laws (mandates from government) are not consistent with common law. But civil law was always a part of the system, as well. The founders didn't really abandon civil law; they just promoted common law as the primary where civil law did not address something.

Unfortunately, governments expand over time, and they have overrun common law principles, which is the main source of the injustices we see today.