Users Online Now:
Donate To GLP
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:J 34504191:MV8yMTM3ODI1XzM2MTYzMjQ5Xzk4OUFGNzEz] [i][color=darkblue]two national governments exist; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions, the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument. By exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to a radical and mischievous change in our system of government will result ... We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism ... It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a government outside the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence." Downes v. Bidwell[/color][/i] Two problems. First, Downes V. Bidwell is a case about whether or not the constitutional protections exist in the [i]territories.[/i] They have nothing to do with the jurisdiction of constitutional protections in the US. Second, you're quoting the *dissenting* opinion. Not the majority opinion. And the dissenting opinion doesn't create precedent nor carries with it the authority of the judiciary. The majority opinion does. It helps if you actually read what you're citing instead of simply cutting and pasting it mechanically without thought or question. [color=darkblue][i]1. The original United States that was in operation until 1860; a collection of sovereign Republics in the union. Under the original Constitution the States controlled the Federal Government; the Federal Government did not control the States and had very little authority.[/i][/color] When you say the 'original' constitution, you mean the one before the 13th amendment? Or before the 14th? By that standard, the 'original' constitution ended in 1791. [i][color=darkblue] The original United States has been usurped by a separate and different UNITED STATES formed in 1871, which only controls the District of Columbia and it’s territories, and which is actually a corporation (the UNITED STATES CORPORATION) that acts as our current government. The United States Corporation operates under Corporate/Commercial/Public Law rather than Common/Private Law.[/color][/i] Says who? Again, you 'sovereign citizen' guys seem to love your long winded pseudo-legal declarations. But when backing these up with actual evidence, they tend to fall apart. The US government certainly *owns* a corporation. But the US government isn't a corporation itself. Just like if you say, open a bank account, that doesn't mean you BECOME a bank account. Oh, and the United States includes all the States. Not just the District of Columbia. The district of Columbia is *only* under the jurisdiction of the US, however. Each State is under concurrent jurisdiction. That of itself...and that of the federal government. [/quote]
I really don't know much about this subject. Is this a genuine description of these people of just the M.S.M. demonizing them?
From Kfor TV out of Oklahoma:
"Law enforcement is paying special attention to a re-surging group of individual extremists; sovereign citizens.
They are anti-government Americans who believe the U.S. government has no authority".
"The world-wide web has been a handy tool in sovereign circles, spreading tactics of their particular flavor of lawlessness.
Sovereign citizens usually represent themselves in court, filing nonsensical paperwork on their own behalf.
Many sovereigns document their struggles to be taken seriously, then post them online.
They rarely have much success."
“What I understand people in some of these cases are doing is making the argument that the original constitutional order left people free from the authority of the federal government and maybe from laws at the state level as well,” Blitz said. “So (they say) ‘You can’t apply these laws to me.’ Not surprisingly, the judges have said, ‘Yes we can.’”
Full article with video:
link to kfor.com
I just want to thank everyone who contributed to this thread. You've all given me a bit of a crash education on this subject and directed me to some great sources for learning even more. It's bed time for me but I'm looking forward to reading any new post when I get up.
Once again, thank you!
Pictures (click to insert)
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Misc Small Smilies
View All Categories
Next Page >>
Disclaimer / Copyright Info
with questions or comments about this site.
"Godlike Productions" & "GLP" are registered trademarks of Zero Point Ltd. Godlike™
Website Design Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Godlikeproductions.com
Page generated in 0.007s (5 queries)