Godlike Productions - Reply to Thread

Users Online Now: 1,586 (Who's On?)	Visitors Today: 182,903
Pageviews Today: 303,358	Threads Today: 95	Posts Today: 2,015
02:46 AM

Back to Thread

REPLY TO THREAD

Subject Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?

User Name

Font color: Font:

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:miserkocho2:MV8yMTM3ODI1XzM2MTY2NzIwXzg2MDlEQUU4]
[quote:J 34504191:MV8yMTM3ODI1XzM2MTY2MjI5X0Y5MUVBMEE3]
[color=darkblue][i]imho its a logical progression,just as default contitutionalism was compromised and corrupted into what we see today,an interim political strategy would work toward restoring what we lost,but ultimately evolving towards a free self sufficient non centralised voluntaryists society.[/i][/color]

*Blinking*

This doesn't look snarky at all! Give me a moment to shift gears.

There, all done. So where were we?

I think the problems with non-centralized v8oluntaryist society is the same problems with anarchy in general:

1) Lack of an effective system of conflict management

4) Unsustainability as leaders within the 'non-centralized voluntariyist' society would eventually devolve into factionalism.

5) Vulnerability to outside threats due to lack of organization
[/quote]

im sure you could find videos of stefan molyneux who could articulate it better than me but ill give it a shot.
1) Lack of an effective system of conflict management
when people polarize right and wrong there are almost always extenuating circumstances.thats the purpose of a well informed jury of peers to provide some flexibility to law.again i have absolutely no problem with the foundation of law and the intentions behind it.although im not religious,i find it hard to disagree with the 10 commandments or at least george carlins version.personally the 7 deadly sins is fine also but in a different context.ultimately it would be up to individual provinces,communities etc to test,eventually it may evolve into a more concetrated framework.things like contract law,u could have some mediation tribunal but a transparent  information source and a less volatile monetary system,there's really no excuse.either way.an interim system will have to replace the lamestream media.
2) Difficulty creating major projects (bridges, roads, etc)
the problem with the monetary system is the creation of money,not to dilute the market and devalue the currency but to add something essential for the creater good.the money supply has to move with the population,thats one way.health care,there has to be a free market instrument that creates money to cater for it.i know that usually only leads to corruption but again,different information source.as far as maintenance,it should be up to communities to work together,but the major projects,well spent money generates wealth.free market principles apply but also its a completely different world no longer turning this pristine planet into a strip mall. 
i gtg ill get back to the others
[/quote]

Original Message 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".

snip

"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."

snip

“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)

News