|
What "law" are the sovereign citizens referring to when they say they don't need a driver's license to drive a car because they are "traveling" and not driving a commercial vehicle and why is their logic flawed?
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 03:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:16 |
|
|
Nobody knows, and because it makes no sense. (They think the constitution has some language about privileges and immunities, and try to distinguish between driving as a profession and traveling as an activity and theorize some random poo poo.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 03:33
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:Nobody knows, and because it makes no sense. I was assuming there is something written somewhere, maybe in the constitution, that they use out of context. edit: I'm watching a sovcit video right now and she is headed to jail and her car is getting towed. Cops found cocaine in the car without her permission to search. She mentioned that and the cop said they are not "searching", they are doing an inventory of the car. Is that admissible? This is taking place in Florida. Here is the video for reference if anybody is interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vkJtdLXTZA Skunkduster fucked around with this message at 03:41 on Mar 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 03:37
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:edit: I'm watching a sovcit video right now and she is headed to jail and her car is getting towed. Cops found cocaine in the car without her permission to search. She mentioned that and the cop said they are not "searching", they are doing an inventory of the car. Is that admissible? This is taking place in Florida. The issue is inventory searches of cars when they're impounded after someone is arrested. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrantless_searches_in_the_United_States
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 03:53
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:What "law" are the sovereign citizens referring to when they say they don't need a driver's license to drive a car because they are "traveling" and not driving a commercial vehicle and why is their logic flawed? The articles of incorporation made a much bigger deal about unrestricted travel, but it also came over in the us constitution. Basically states cannot arbitrarily prevent other state citizens from entering their state. Freedom to travel anywhere in the united states without any borders is the idea. SovCits think this right of unrestricted travel between states means that they can travel without any restriction of law so long as they use the magic phrase correctly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 04:05
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:The articles of incorporation made a much bigger deal about unrestricted travel, but it also came over in the us constitution. Basically states cannot arbitrarily prevent other state citizens from entering their state. Freedom to travel anywhere in the united states without any borders is the idea. I wonder if European sovcits try to apply the concept of the Schengen Area in a similar fashion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 04:23
|
|
|
If you want a rabbit hole, there's meads vs meads, which you can just skip to section III (also marked paragraph [60] for convenience when searching). While it's a Canadian case, the judge specifically calls out how most of these strategies are just American based without even bothering to do a find & replace for things like the Bill of Rights, showing A) how much effort has actually been put into them by the grifters and B) how little the people using them even know about things that should be pretty foundational.Mr. Nice! posted:SovCits think this right of unrestricted travel between states means that they can travel without any restriction of law so long as they use the magic phrase correctly. Which is something actually touched on in the decision. Sovcits think that there are magical phrases that they can use, which mean that people have to follow the rules, like a children's fairy tale. If you know the Cop's True Name, you can command them to let you go. They see lawyers saying things in Latin or using certain phrases and then things happen, so if they just learn the magic words they can do it too. So, they're not driving, they're "traveling," which is totally different from a magical incantation standpoint for them. See? It's right here in this document that absolutely was not written in an episode of paranoid schizophrenia! Volmarias fucked around with this message at 04:39 on Mar 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 04:35
|
|
|
Kazinsal posted:I wonder if European sovcits try to apply the concept of the Schengen Area in a similar fashion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 05:00
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:Which is something actually touched on in the decision. Sovcits think that there are magical phrases that they can use, which mean that people have to follow the rules, like a children's fairy tale. If you know the Cop's True Name, you can command them to let you go. They see lawyers saying things in Latin or using certain phrases and then things happen, so if they just learn the magic words they can do it too. So, they're not driving, they're "traveling," which is totally different from a magical incantation standpoint for them. See? It's right here in this document that absolutely was not written in an episode of paranoid schizophrenia! I mean they see lawyers getting up in court and mumbling weird phrases and then yeah, the world is altered, their house is seized, they can't see their kids, their liberty is taken away from them and they think that the power is in the words. What they don't realize is that that power is obtained by sacrificing $100,000 at the altar of law and then abasing yourself in front of the elders of the bar association. They are trying to get the power without going through the steps and then acting shocked when they get tazed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 06:15
|
|
|
Basically Sovcits are seeing performative utterances and trying to go back from the modern era Bird Law to Dinosaur Law*  *this doesn't make any sense but i got to shoehorn a phrase I wanted to include. Now you understand how sovcits work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 06:37
|
|
|
Sovcits are my favourite brand of crazy and my very favourite thing about them is that they think there has to be some deeper legitimacy to the law that isn't "whatever the people with the power to enforce the law say it is." Aussie sovcits are all about how the high court is the only "legitimate" court but mate, even if the district court wasn't actually authorised by Real Law (of course it is but let's just pretend for a second) the judge there still has the real practical power to get you thrown in prison, no matter how many times you stomp your feet and point out it's Not Real.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 12:09
|
|
|
The difference between the magic words the State says and the magic words the sovcit says is that the State has the power to back them up. There is no inherent difference between a signed warrant and Ron Swanson's "permit", but one of them is actually recognised by people who, ultimately, have the ability to make your life immediately and drastically unpleasant if you don't agree with them. This is just how society works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 12:43
|
|
|
Organza Quiz posted:Sovcits are my favourite brand of crazy and my very favourite thing about them is that they think there has to be some deeper legitimacy to the law that isn't "whatever the people with the power to enforce the law say it is." Privy Council or go home.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 14:55
|
|
|
the thing is though, there are areas where sovcit-like invocations are real and actually work the immediate example that comes to mind is mentioning jury nullification to get out of jury duty, or not mentioning it and then using it to secretly do things that juries are totally allowed to do but the judge totally won't let you if he knows you're doing it, but once you do it, the law totally means you get to do it because it's really the law even though they hate it another example that is much more vague is getting out of a traffic ticket by convincing the cop you're a good guy so they don't write you a ticket and just give you a warning instead: this is an example of authorities who have discretion which you can influence with words, and I'm sure there's other areas of law enforcement/justice/etc. where people have discretion, including especially judges' discretion over e.g. sentencing a third area is where you are essentially a customer engaging with legalistic-looking processes where you have to make choices, like the several different ways you can apply for a passport or register to vote. It appears as though some legal magic happens to grant you a passport in one day or one week or 12 weeks or 20 weeks and surely there's "law" behind those processes, right? And you can get hosed if you didn't apply in time or you applied the wrong way, you had to invoke the law in the right way to get the outcome you wanted, but it was complicated and you maybe did it wrong a fourth area is where government processes are just obviously, flagrantly hosed up, like applying for disability; you have to invoke the law that says you get SSI by convincing certain authorities that you are genuinely disabled, and then they always reject your application regardless and then you spend a year appealing and maybe you finally do get your disability, and why is it like that? Because you have to invoke rules and laws and fill out forms and say the right things to the right people! It's like a complicated magic spell that the government says you did wrong the first time Our society teaches people to become sovcits by putting them through all these wringers and putting all these situations in front of them (or people they know & interact with, which might as well be the same thing but via telephone/proxy) and this result is basically inevitable as an outcome. There are all these ways in which the pat answer that the laws are what they are and all you have to do is follow instructions and obey the laws and you'll be treated fairly, is just flagrantly violated by the party in the agreement that holds all the power; and then there's these secret paths and performances that the weaker side (us) can actually locate and use to win these battles, all over the place! Of course people latch on to that and take it to an extreme.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 18:03
|
|
|
Saying "I'd like to order a hamburger" at McDonalds is not magic. Its just "communicating" SovCit's believe they have learned arcane spells that they can cast on an opaque and arduous legal process, giving them 'Special Power' because they're delusional and lookign for a shortcut to simply getting what they want. They're the PUAs of legal process. - They're obnoxious, smelly, delusional and unpleasant. - Any successes they claim are made up, or the result of other factors beyond their control. - Their 'methods' are regurgitated flim flam, sold by self-proclaimed gurus, to people too dumb and desparate to know better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
That's a pretty strange way to look at it. Jury nullification is a concept, not an actual legal term. Mentioning it to the judge is saying "I plan to disregard your instructions and I'm telling you now," which are also magical words you can use for all kinds of people if we're thinking that way! Getting a better result by being charismatic isn't really what we're talking about here. "Smooth talking" isn't a magic phrase. Having different passport processing times is just... having priorities? It's like saying that people get attention in the hospital ER by using the magic words of "gunshot wounds to the abdomen, significant blood loss, in shock" Fourth is sort of reaching an actual point here. The nature of bureaucracy is that you find out you need to fill out form 27B not 27A, which if you squint hard enough looks like "I am volmarias the forums shitposter, not VOLMARIAS the corporation," and something like a cease and desist or a restraining order approaches the idea of "I am a free shitposter on the forums, writing poorly under the MAGNA CARTA" which, yes, that's kind of the point here. They see legal actions occur with very strange wording in them and think that they can learn these magic words too. I'll concede the last point though, and there's definitely instances where using a certain word or phrase means "I am probably informed of the law, or at least enough that you will have to spend time and money to deal with me / get in trouble with your own supervisor." And, I suppose you can look at it that way, but I see it less as "I'm going to make this a pain in the rear end" and more "I know your true name, officer Rumpelstiltskin, you must let me be on my way." It's why we see sovcits insisting that this One Weird Trick MUST absolutely work (cops hate it!).
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 18:34
|
|
|
Took some trainings at a previous job Re: sov cits, as Wisconsin has a lot of them. They are known to pull poo poo like bogus leans on court or lawmakers homes, also to just declare they own property, because people (not banks) can only own property. So if it's unowned, I dunno, it's like legit salvage? The logic is wild. In any case, they break in to bank owned property, change the locks, rent them - a month or two later the 'tenant' is tossed out as a trespasser. Also, there is a local Midwest variation, who base their sovereignty on the fact they are a lost tribe from the bible, and got here before Native Americans, so you know, they own everything. (Notwithstanding the fact that logic didn't help Native people all that much. Moorish Nation, who are largely African American. They give paid information courses, as a scheme to earn money from ignorance. So, not ALL crazy white nationalists.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Saying "I'd like to order a hamburger" at McDonalds is not magic. Its just "communicating" I think a critical component here is that sovcit's, and many others, view what actually goes on in the opaque and arduous legal process as being full of arcane spells for rich people to get what they want, and you know, there is a fair amount of truth in that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
I think the fundamental difference is that the things you are describing are ways in which society will let you make your path through life a bit easier if you work with the system rather than against it. If you work out how to navigate the bureaucracy in the most efficient way possible you aren't just making your own life easier, you are making life easier for everyone who's job is to interact with you on the way. SovCits aren't looking for that, they're very open about the fact that they're looking for the cheat code that gives them all of the benefits and none of the responsibilities or mutual obligations. There's a reason the whole movement starts with fraudsters selling training courses/material.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 19:32
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:I think a critical component here is that sovcit's, and many others, view what actually goes on in the opaque and arduous legal process as being full of arcane spells for rich people to get what they want, and you know, there is a fair amount of truth in that. they do not think the law is an arduous process. they think that incanting the right words instantly gives you legal immunity and/or endless riches. in their view of the world there's nothing arduous about it, it's just everyone is lying to you about how easy it is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 19:40
|
|
|
Representing that you have an ace (bluffing or actually having an ace) vs "I have an ace I win!" when you haven't even been dealt in
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 20:21
|
|
|
I didn't mean to imply I thought sovcits themselves are being "reasonable" - more that I feel like I can grok where they start from, the way that our society and its structures and processes are too complicated for any single person to ever understand, the way many people cope with that complexity with certain types of categorization, and then from there there's a whole online whackadoodle influencer thing where people get sucked in by lies and promises. Like being susceptible to that poo poo doesn't just come out of nowhere, people have personal experiences in their lives that prime them. It all bears a striking resemblance to people who are quite sure the world is flat, or UFO culture, etc. It's a type of applied conspiracy theory, plus the standard grifter principle of playing on people's greed (you don't actually have to pay taxes).
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 20:42
|
|
|
ah, so idiots
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
Kinda similar to the "less wrong" yudkowski crew, and their complaint that academia is a corrupt old boys club that doesn't seek scientific truth all that well. Which, ya, but that doesn't mean self study is able to come anywhere close to being better maybe biohackers are part of this too Epitope fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Mar 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 20:49
|
|
|
The extreme self sabatoging sovcits come because when faced with: 1) Admit that you were wrong, and that you have been publicly making a fool out of yourself. (Also, you are hosed in regard to whatever made you interact with the legal system to begin with + all the extra problems your behavior has caused) or 2) Double down people will generally choose and legitimately believe (2), even against overwhelming evidence and mounting consequences. This isn't limited to law either, it happens everywhere (business, scams, personal relationships, etc...). It's just something humans are bad at. If someone gets on a sovcit track in a minor way (from either greed or desperation), they'll tend to ratchet up to more extreme forms
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:I think a critical component here is that sovcit's, and many others, view what actually goes on in the opaque and arduous legal process as being full of arcane spells for rich people to get what they want, and you know, there is a fair amount of truth in that. I promise you these people's agenda and actions are not worthy to being hitched to the larger social issues of legal reform.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
Like 9 times out of 10 its people who were dumping or parking poo poo somewhere they weren't supposed to and then after they got a ticket for it, got real mad because they had already felt like they deserved to do whatever they were doing so now it "shouldn't" be illegal because they Feel like it OR they got a fuckin seatbelt ticket and decided to google ways to get out of it so they felt smart about it
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 21:12
|
|
|
I had a guy come in once, holding a 10 year old Black's Law Dictionary which he dramatically dropped on the table in front of me (lmao) and said, "Now you're going to dismiss this case" and proceeded to explain to me that the town "doesn't have Jurisdiction! over his Corporate Person's Natural Rights" and that the "Treaty of Buttfck1885 or whatever granted "dominion over the land to all citizens" or something. And I told him, "you have to buy the $8 parking pass to park at the lake. You didn't. The fine is $25. I'm not dismissing your case."
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
"But its my Natural Right to park at the lake!" "Lol no its not. And if you don't pay the fine, they'll just arrest you." "They can't do that!" "Watch them."
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
You don't have jurisdiction over me! *arrested on bench warrant* Ah! Well, nevertheless
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 21:28
|
|
|
Did you tell him he can't beat the ride because that's very important
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 21:32
|
|
|
Back when I was line prosecuting I had a few of those nutjobs who, through no effort of their own, had problems with their case. Like the lab guy from the crime lab retired and we couldn't prosecute the quaalude dui. I remember one case real well. This guy would drive over this woman's lawn for reasons. She'd fix her fence, he'd drive over it again. She'd rebuild it, he'd drive over it. For whatever reason I can't remember we had to dismiss it. I never disabused them, of course. Dismissing or otherwise resolving their cases like that made them so happy. I couldn't break their little hearts.
BigHead fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Mar 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 21:35
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:ah, so idiots https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHJbSvidohg
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2023 22:09
|
|
|
Deleted; thanks for the assistance
The Demilich fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Mar 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2023 04:50
|
|
|
Healthcare police are California Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (CA MFCU) or local branch of the DHSS Office of Inspector General (OIG). Did your friend happen to get the alphabet soup of the agency that called? If he wants to file a police report he can find the website for either of those agencies. There is an online form or a tip line. He'll need all the information he can get to make the report. I encourage that. One of the few times being a narc is good are situations where Medicare patients in nursing facilities get explored. If he wants to get real spicy he can Google lawyers that deals with "False Claims Act qui tam" cases. That's the whistleblower law. It's very complex and involves big boy litigation, so if he wants to try for that he needs to find that type of specialist. Otherwise, what does he hope to gain with the lawyer? Does he want his money back? Or does he just feel like the situation is wrong? If so, once he moves her out of the facility, then what more will he want the lawyer to do? Getting money back for medication mismanagement might be tough. Maybe a medical malpractice lawyer can help? But did she have any lasting injuries? Most generic civil litigation is about recovering money for damages, unless she has actual damages she might be in an uphill battle. Definitely listen to the lawyers he's talked to, though the MFCU might be his best avenue. BigHead fucked around with this message at 06:58 on Mar 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2023 06:54
|
|
|
They're looking to recoup money I believe, especially since they feel they now have to find a new place for their parent which is difficult since they 1) can't find anything in the same price range, and 2) their parent has a history of violence as a schizophrenic (which is kept in check via medication, so you can see why this location misplacing medication from the get go is an issue). Honestly they really don't know what options are on the table and frankly I don't know either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2023 08:32
|
|
|
I have a question about an employment lawsuit - are the records produced in discovery public record? I was terminated by my employer, a 501(c)(3) that receives state and federal grants, I believe it was in reprisal for investigating the operations director for a number of internal control and policy violations. I'm hoping to just receive a severance offer and not get an attorney involved, I understand that this thread can't give specific advice, but my threat of a lawsuit would have more teeth if the problems i identify will be in the public record because then they will be available to auditors and monitors.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2023 21:40
|
|
|
Is it blackmail to seek severance for not whistleblowing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2023 21:42
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Is it blackmail to seek severance for not whistleblowing? And would the severance agreement be unenforceable because it's contrary to public policy to let you contract away whistleblowing rights
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2023 21:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:16 |
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:I have a question about an employment lawsuit - are the records produced in discovery public record? just because you get something in discovery does not automatically make it public, no. generally if you get confidential stuff in discovery, you have to sign a "protective order" which, basically, means you'll keep it confidential and use it only for the lawsuit. if you file something that includes that information you'll generally have to give the other side a chance to argue it should be "under seal" (i.e. not public, redacted on any public filings). if you use it in court, similarly you generally have to give them a chance to "seal the court" (kick everyone else out), but that is harder.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2023 21:53
|
|