Comment: Another Rebuttal

(See in situ)


Another Rebuttal

If the rules in the McDonald's handbook do not apply to Wal-Mart employees, and

If the Uniform Code of Military Justice does not apply to non-military, and

If the Uniform Commercial Code does not apply to non-commercial transactions, and

If the Electric Code does not apply to plumbers, and

If the Plumbing Code does not apply to electricians, and

If Residential Building Codes does not apply to non-residential structures, and

If all of these codes apply to specific things or activities because that is the fundamental nature of codes then I do not want to live among a people who would feed me a bunch of bullshit about who the United States code applies to. You would claim I'm full of it? You sir, are full of it. You would claim I sit in the comfort and safety of a coercive legal society? No sir, I do not. I have had automobiles stolen by thugs for not obtaining permission to travel. I have been caged for stating judges are dishonest and addressing them by their given names, not their artificial titles. I have been beaten up by thugs. I have endured persecution like so many countless and nameless others in this unjust system. I derive no comfort from it. There is no safety to be had in it.

I will tell you what I do not appreciate. I do not appreciate being persecuted for lies and bullshit my entire life. If jurisdiction is allegedly constitutionally granted and statutorily allocated then I want to know where any constitution grants any jurisdiction to trespass against me if I have injured no one or damaged no property that can be statutorily allocated by legislators. If the resources of earth are for man to use for his subsistence by natural right, governments exercise a privilege to profit from the land, and all government power is derived from men ... then by what authority does government exclude or regulate any activity I perform which does not harm, injure, or profit from the land?

Family courts ... the people did not delegate any authority for government to regulate families so by what authority does any family court coerce?

Traffic courts ... the people did not delegate any authority for government to regulate travel so by what authority does any traffic court coerce?

I could go on with more examples but they don't have any authority, they simply presume it and the precise means by which the presumption is made is that you were acting in the capacity of a citizen or engaged in commerce. Men may have created government but government created citizens and any man acting as a citizen is subject to its statutes, codes, orders or decrees.

The substantial citations found in travel memorandums of law clearly illustrate the frauds of the present legal monopoly. Roads used to be private. One did not have to get a horse license unless they were operating carriages for hire in some cities and using the roads as a place of business. The automobile came along and the courts extended the same principles to determine if the automobile had the same rights to the road as the horse and buggy. Automobiles required pavement so the state was entrusted to maintain the public paved roadways with the public purse. It was intended that anyone could use the public highway and the authority of the state is limited to regulating people who use the highway to derive a gain, operate on it for hire, or use it as a place of business. It's the reason all Driver Licenses are occupational licenses and a Truck Driver License is merely a different class of occupational driver license. The state says driving is a privilege but what they don't say is what constitutes driving? The state does not disclose driving is an activity of using the public roadway for hire to derive a gain or benefit while unjustly seeking to convert your natural and fundamental right to travel into a driving privilege.

These are the long forgotten maxims of law in the so called republic. Distinctions between business activities for the love of money and non business activities was well understood. It was understood that if you are acting on the love of money you are engaged in commerce subject to regulation because you are ultimately deriving a gain from the land but if your activities are not based on a love of money the only rules are do not injure anyone or damage any property. Well I got news for you ... every action I perform does not derive from a love of money and I refuse to be regulated 24/7/365 in the name of commerce using dishonest presumptions a corrupt legal system refuses to disclose or acknowledge.

You say I am receiving protection? Prove it. I want to know the exact dollar amount of protection I have received or benefited from while being persecuted. This is the problem. People like you want to presume everyone is deriving a gain or benefit from Ceasar 24/7/365 when it is simply not true. Some people are not being protected. The protection was never for the people anyway, it was to preserve orderly commerce. The prohibitions were to insure that the business of government did not unjustly trespass against people.

I haven't even talked about currency which has led to the bankruptcy and largest wealth heist in human history because this entire objection so far has been about law but because the monopolies of justice and currency have been a total failure ... I demand nothing less than competition in justice and currency.