jetgraphics
11th April 2010, 05:21 PM
Are you a "person liable"?
Law - wha?
There are two types of law - law that protects property rights and law based on consent / policy. An example of the first is the prohibition on theft, assault and murder - injuries to person or property (malum in se). The latter is based on obedience to strict rules and regulations, absent an injured party - known as malum prohibitum .
The question is - how did "YOU" become liable to obey those laws of prohibition?
If you go through an intersection, ignoring the STOP sign, because you verified that no one else is approaching the intersection, you have not injured anyone. But the "Enforcers" will cite you.
It would appear that "Law enforcement" is for the latter, not the former "law".
A victim of assault, theft, or murder seeks justice, not enforcement.
Coincidentally, a victim of a malum in se crime must file charges (grant authority to the government to act), except in the case of a corpse, which grants implicit permission to prosecute on his behalf. If the victim fails to press charges, the accused is free. However, regarding malum prohibitum crimes, since there is no victim, the state prosecutes in every instance.
Are "we" all persons liable?
"In common usage, the term 'person' does not include the sovereign, [and] statutes employing the [word] are ordinarily construed to exclude it."
Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe, 442 U.S. 653, 667, 61 L.Ed2. 153, 99 S.Ct. 2529 (1979) (quoting United States v. Cooper Corp. 312 U.S. 600, 604, 85 L.Ed. 1071, 61 S.Ct. 742 (1941)).
"A Sovereign cannot be named in any statute as merely a 'person' or 'any person'".
Wills v. Michigan State Police, 105 L.Ed. 45 (1989)
As we should know, the government explicitly recognizes that "people are sovereign". And it also knows that government is not sovereign.
Coincidentally, when government wishes a law to be applicable to everyone, it uses the phrase like "Whoever shall...". When the law is not applicable to everyone, it may use the phrase, "Any person who shall....".
Title 18 USC § 111. Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain
officers or employees
(a) In General.-- Whoever--
(1) forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person designated in section 1114 of this title while engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties;
Contrast with:
Title 18 USC § 228. Failure to pay legal child support obligations
(a) Offense.-- Any person who--
(1) willfully fails to pay a support obligation with respect to a child who resides in another State, if such obligation has remained unpaid for a period longer than 1 year, or is greater than $5,000
If one was unaware of the difference, one might believe that both laws were universally applicable. Of course, if you were unaware that the latter obligation is tied to one's VOLUNTARY participation in National Socialism (a.k.a. Social Security), you might not catch the distinction. Liability for obedience requires consent, otherwise it would be involuntary servitude, and unconstitutional.
Do you know how you became a person liable?
Read the law for yourself. You may be pleasantly surprised.
God Bless the U.S.A.!
Law - wha?
There are two types of law - law that protects property rights and law based on consent / policy. An example of the first is the prohibition on theft, assault and murder - injuries to person or property (malum in se). The latter is based on obedience to strict rules and regulations, absent an injured party - known as malum prohibitum .
The question is - how did "YOU" become liable to obey those laws of prohibition?
If you go through an intersection, ignoring the STOP sign, because you verified that no one else is approaching the intersection, you have not injured anyone. But the "Enforcers" will cite you.
It would appear that "Law enforcement" is for the latter, not the former "law".
A victim of assault, theft, or murder seeks justice, not enforcement.
Coincidentally, a victim of a malum in se crime must file charges (grant authority to the government to act), except in the case of a corpse, which grants implicit permission to prosecute on his behalf. If the victim fails to press charges, the accused is free. However, regarding malum prohibitum crimes, since there is no victim, the state prosecutes in every instance.
Are "we" all persons liable?
"In common usage, the term 'person' does not include the sovereign, [and] statutes employing the [word] are ordinarily construed to exclude it."
Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe, 442 U.S. 653, 667, 61 L.Ed2. 153, 99 S.Ct. 2529 (1979) (quoting United States v. Cooper Corp. 312 U.S. 600, 604, 85 L.Ed. 1071, 61 S.Ct. 742 (1941)).
"A Sovereign cannot be named in any statute as merely a 'person' or 'any person'".
Wills v. Michigan State Police, 105 L.Ed. 45 (1989)
As we should know, the government explicitly recognizes that "people are sovereign". And it also knows that government is not sovereign.
Coincidentally, when government wishes a law to be applicable to everyone, it uses the phrase like "Whoever shall...". When the law is not applicable to everyone, it may use the phrase, "Any person who shall....".
Title 18 USC § 111. Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain
officers or employees
(a) In General.-- Whoever--
(1) forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person designated in section 1114 of this title while engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties;
Contrast with:
Title 18 USC § 228. Failure to pay legal child support obligations
(a) Offense.-- Any person who--
(1) willfully fails to pay a support obligation with respect to a child who resides in another State, if such obligation has remained unpaid for a period longer than 1 year, or is greater than $5,000
If one was unaware of the difference, one might believe that both laws were universally applicable. Of course, if you were unaware that the latter obligation is tied to one's VOLUNTARY participation in National Socialism (a.k.a. Social Security), you might not catch the distinction. Liability for obedience requires consent, otherwise it would be involuntary servitude, and unconstitutional.
Do you know how you became a person liable?
Read the law for yourself. You may be pleasantly surprised.
God Bless the U.S.A.!