Take note - All quarantine codes reference "person(s)". Th first sentence implicates a man (or woman) based on a title. If you do not take a title with duties and obligations, then this DOES NOT APPLY.
Black's Law Dictionary -4th Edition:
PERSON: A man con…
Take note - All quarantine codes reference "person(s)". Th first sentence implicates a man (or woman) based on a title. If you do not take a title with duties and obligations, then this DOES NOT APPLY.
Black's Law Dictionary -4th Edition:
PERSON: A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the right to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes. People v. R. Co., 134 N.Y. 506, 31 N.E. 873.
"Persons" are of two kinds, natural and artificial. A natural person is a human being. Artificial persons include a collection or succession of natural persons forming a corporation; a collection of property to which the law attributes the capacity of having rights and duties. The latter class of artificial persons is recognized only to a limited extent in our law. Examples are the estate of a bankrupt or deceased person. Hogan v. Greenfield, 58 Wyo. 13, 122 P.2d 850, 853.
PERSON New York, 7 S.Ct. 108, 119 U.S. 110, 30 L.Ed. 342; and a statutory requirement of such conditions is not in conflict with the XIVth Amendment. (added for clarity - this is in reference to a 14th amendment citizen "person")
It has been held that when the word person is used in a legislative act, natural persons will be intended unless something appear in the context to show that it applies to artificial persons, Blair v. Worley, 1 Scam., Ill., 178; Appeal of Fox, 112 Pa. 337 ; 4 A. 149 ; but as a rule corporations will be considered persons within the statutes unless the intention of the legislature is manifestly to exclude them. Stribbling v. Bank, 5 Rand., Va., 132.
A county is a person in a legal sense, Lancaster Co. v. Trimble, 34 Neb. 752, 52 N.W. 711; BUT A SOVEREIGN IS NOT; In re Fox, 52 N.Y. 535, 11 Am.Rep. 751; U. S. v. Fox, 94 U.S. 315, 24 L.Ed. 192
Persons are the subject of rights and duties; and, as a subject of a right, the person is the object of the correlative duty, and conversely. The subject of a right has been called by Professor Holland, the person of inherence; the subject of a duty, the person of incidence. "Entitled" and "bound" are the terms in common use in English and for most purposes they are adequate. Every full citizen is a person; other human beings, namely, subjects who are not citizens, may be persons. But not every human being is necessarily a person, for a person is capable of rights and duties, and there may well be human beings having no legal rights, as was the case with slaves in English law.
A person is such, not because he is human, but because rights and duties are ascribed to him. The person is the legal subject or substance of which the rights and duties are attributes. An individual human being considered as having such attributes is what lawyers call a natural person. Pollock, First Book of Jurispr. 110. Gray, Nature and Sources of Law, ch. IL
Bottom line - if a man or woman WITHOUT a title and NOT a "person" (rights and duties and obligations prescribed) these do not apply. As a federal citizen one is a "person" with duties and obligations. A state national is a man or woman with a domicile on the land (Ohioan for example), no title, that is an American, not a federal citizen. As such, you have a lawful framework to refute all legal codes, rules, acts and statutes as they do not apply to you as a man or woman.
Ok, good luck with that. I’m not trying to be sassy, but with the judicial element clearly biased, the results from any questioning seems not in our favor. I appreciate your finding though and will tuck it away. Let’s keep digging or finding a way to reestablish our own government.
If you look into how to deal with a narcissist, ( which is what I consider this scam in its entirety), often it’s suggested to respond “ your reality is not my reality.” Maybe we create our own reality, our own military, & our own way to counter this countermeasure. If we are truly at war, than let’s fight back without the court system, instead with our courage.
I am actively pressing a claim AT court for a trespass by false witness, theft extortion, harm to good name, etc... Coming forward as a man and pressing claim against others of mankind for said trespasses. There is a peaceful way to address these things, but it is best to press claim for harm against an individual man or woman with evidence, facts, and conclusions of law. The key is not allowing them to gain jurisdiction. That is done by knowing who you are and that you are NOT a title in any fashion (including MR or MRS), plaintiff, defendant, pro se, member, partner, party, etc... You are a man by the name of (_______). The others of mankind who did trespass are now interested in negotiating since the alternative is a trial by jury that is final.
This is not sexist. It is equal opportunity biological gender. The original question was asked as a man, by a man. Substitute woman as appropriate. Anything else?
So you basically must state if/when the federal law is being enforced that you are an “Ohioan” (insert state resident name) and that precludes the particular enforceable federal quarantine edict? Not that it will make much difference because the “authorities” doing the arresting/enforcing aren’t hip to such law nuance so you’re going to go wherever they are taking you unless you are planning to resist at all costs.
You actually need to come forward as a man. Which can be done at any time. However, it is harder as a federal citizen due to the evidence created within the system that you did not realize captured you as a "person". There are other adhesion contracts that make this problematic (all part of the ruse) and they will claim these adhesion contracts prove you are in fact a "person". They are:
Voter Registration (would need to remove your registration and not participate in their corporate elections - each state has a form)
Birth Certificate (need to take back your name with Declaration of Political status and complete the Foreign Sovereigns Immunity Act Notice 18 USC 2333 18 USC 1341 and 1342 and remove all powers of attorney and and complete a Deed of Re-conveyance to make you the beneficiary of all trade names as a competent man not requiring representation)
Social Security Number (optional as it belongs to you as a man and is a trust account and you are the beneficiary)
Drivers License (optional - if you know and understand the "commercial vehicle" designation versus private property which can be used at any time if using your private property for travel with companions and not for commercial corporate use)
Conversion to a Ohioan is through the status change process with the Foreign Sovereigns Immunity Act.
Long answer - but - if you know you are a man and how to stand as a man AT court, these other changes are added proof of who you are. But, you need to be prepared.
They stopped teaching Common Law (soil and land jurisdiction) in schools by the 50s in any capacity.
I suggest (I get ZERO benefit from this recommendation and I do not know them personally) taking the law for mankind full knowledge share course to start and get a copy of Black's Law Dictionary 4th Edition to start. That is the best way to get started. Also learn all you can from these three sites:
wo/man - Good to go. Bottom line, be a step away from the Creator. Once you take on a title, you are diminished. This is the reason for the pronouns, titles, re-definitions. They are attempting to keep people (man and woman) diminished and less than a creation of the Creator who creates.
When considering the reality, their goal is for all to not be accountable or responsible. The last thing the legal society wants is for your yeahs to be yeahs and your nays to be nays. Calling out another man or woman for trespass is biblical. It is safer for the liars and thieves to argue and complain like trained children and make things ambiguous rather than accept accountability and providing remedy for said trespass.
How do you make an entity take the stand and testify to how it did you harm? "It" cannot. But, a man or woman, they had to make the final decision. Your doctor, the nurse, the teacher, the administrator. Call them out as a man or woman, not as their title. Then they are responsible and accountable. No immunity. Does an entity autograph a document? No...
A corporation cannot contract with a living soul (man or woman). Only a corporation can contract with a corporation (maritime and admiralty law) and a man or woman can contract with a man or woman. So, call out those of mankind who do trespass.
Now, I see why govt. officials are neither capable, nor required to have any going definition for the word "woman". There''s no such legal entity, it's all "man".
\
Well, the last still-on-the- books-version of the Rule/Law of Thumb having been abandoned no sooner than the early nineties in Switzerland,
I can see how this simplifies the conondrum of trying to explain how chattel came to have human rights.
Naw. CHD threw me off their site two years ago, when I pointed out that lawyers make a lot of money from fining pharms, yet never seem to stop them, but just enable them until they've made enough "killings" for the courts and lawyers to get their share. Also pointed out how Joe...another Joe, yeah...made the Kennedy fortunes. Last I heard, alcohol is poison.
Had a beer tonight , tho. Grappling with the beast. Love to wrestle.
https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/state-quarantine-and-isolation-statutes.aspx
Take note - All quarantine codes reference "person(s)". Th first sentence implicates a man (or woman) based on a title. If you do not take a title with duties and obligations, then this DOES NOT APPLY.
Black's Law Dictionary -4th Edition:
PERSON: A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the right to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes. People v. R. Co., 134 N.Y. 506, 31 N.E. 873.
"Persons" are of two kinds, natural and artificial. A natural person is a human being. Artificial persons include a collection or succession of natural persons forming a corporation; a collection of property to which the law attributes the capacity of having rights and duties. The latter class of artificial persons is recognized only to a limited extent in our law. Examples are the estate of a bankrupt or deceased person. Hogan v. Greenfield, 58 Wyo. 13, 122 P.2d 850, 853.
PERSON New York, 7 S.Ct. 108, 119 U.S. 110, 30 L.Ed. 342; and a statutory requirement of such conditions is not in conflict with the XIVth Amendment. (added for clarity - this is in reference to a 14th amendment citizen "person")
It has been held that when the word person is used in a legislative act, natural persons will be intended unless something appear in the context to show that it applies to artificial persons, Blair v. Worley, 1 Scam., Ill., 178; Appeal of Fox, 112 Pa. 337 ; 4 A. 149 ; but as a rule corporations will be considered persons within the statutes unless the intention of the legislature is manifestly to exclude them. Stribbling v. Bank, 5 Rand., Va., 132.
A county is a person in a legal sense, Lancaster Co. v. Trimble, 34 Neb. 752, 52 N.W. 711; BUT A SOVEREIGN IS NOT; In re Fox, 52 N.Y. 535, 11 Am.Rep. 751; U. S. v. Fox, 94 U.S. 315, 24 L.Ed. 192
Persons are the subject of rights and duties; and, as a subject of a right, the person is the object of the correlative duty, and conversely. The subject of a right has been called by Professor Holland, the person of inherence; the subject of a duty, the person of incidence. "Entitled" and "bound" are the terms in common use in English and for most purposes they are adequate. Every full citizen is a person; other human beings, namely, subjects who are not citizens, may be persons. But not every human being is necessarily a person, for a person is capable of rights and duties, and there may well be human beings having no legal rights, as was the case with slaves in English law.
A person is such, not because he is human, but because rights and duties are ascribed to him. The person is the legal subject or substance of which the rights and duties are attributes. An individual human being considered as having such attributes is what lawyers call a natural person. Pollock, First Book of Jurispr. 110. Gray, Nature and Sources of Law, ch. IL
Bottom line - if a man or woman WITHOUT a title and NOT a "person" (rights and duties and obligations prescribed) these do not apply. As a federal citizen one is a "person" with duties and obligations. A state national is a man or woman with a domicile on the land (Ohioan for example), no title, that is an American, not a federal citizen. As such, you have a lawful framework to refute all legal codes, rules, acts and statutes as they do not apply to you as a man or woman.
Ok, good luck with that. I’m not trying to be sassy, but with the judicial element clearly biased, the results from any questioning seems not in our favor. I appreciate your finding though and will tuck it away. Let’s keep digging or finding a way to reestablish our own government.
If you look into how to deal with a narcissist, ( which is what I consider this scam in its entirety), often it’s suggested to respond “ your reality is not my reality.” Maybe we create our own reality, our own military, & our own way to counter this countermeasure. If we are truly at war, than let’s fight back without the court system, instead with our courage.
Yeah for sure. Put on your God Courage pants because this fight is for all the marbles.(paraphrasing Catherine Austin Fitts)
I am actively pressing a claim AT court for a trespass by false witness, theft extortion, harm to good name, etc... Coming forward as a man and pressing claim against others of mankind for said trespasses. There is a peaceful way to address these things, but it is best to press claim for harm against an individual man or woman with evidence, facts, and conclusions of law. The key is not allowing them to gain jurisdiction. That is done by knowing who you are and that you are NOT a title in any fashion (including MR or MRS), plaintiff, defendant, pro se, member, partner, party, etc... You are a man by the name of (_______). The others of mankind who did trespass are now interested in negotiating since the alternative is a trial by jury that is final.
What if you are a "woman" by the name of?
Great question. The same applies. Stand as a man or woman. Not a person or any title.
BUT, IT NEVER SAYS "WOMAN" , ONLY "MAN" .
WERE THERE NO WOMEN THEN?
This is not sexist. It is equal opportunity biological gender. The original question was asked as a man, by a man. Substitute woman as appropriate. Anything else?
The terms have distinct definitions. Law depends on that.
Sure it's sexist!!! What ain't?"man" mean "man" Nothing else!!
No one else? No one else important?
Learn your history. It's totally sexist.
Was "more military" too subtle , folks?
More military, that's a great idea!!
Interesting!
So you basically must state if/when the federal law is being enforced that you are an “Ohioan” (insert state resident name) and that precludes the particular enforceable federal quarantine edict? Not that it will make much difference because the “authorities” doing the arresting/enforcing aren’t hip to such law nuance so you’re going to go wherever they are taking you unless you are planning to resist at all costs.
You actually need to come forward as a man. Which can be done at any time. However, it is harder as a federal citizen due to the evidence created within the system that you did not realize captured you as a "person". There are other adhesion contracts that make this problematic (all part of the ruse) and they will claim these adhesion contracts prove you are in fact a "person". They are:
Voter Registration (would need to remove your registration and not participate in their corporate elections - each state has a form)
Birth Certificate (need to take back your name with Declaration of Political status and complete the Foreign Sovereigns Immunity Act Notice 18 USC 2333 18 USC 1341 and 1342 and remove all powers of attorney and and complete a Deed of Re-conveyance to make you the beneficiary of all trade names as a competent man not requiring representation)
Social Security Number (optional as it belongs to you as a man and is a trust account and you are the beneficiary)
Drivers License (optional - if you know and understand the "commercial vehicle" designation versus private property which can be used at any time if using your private property for travel with companions and not for commercial corporate use)
Conversion to a Ohioan is through the status change process with the Foreign Sovereigns Immunity Act.
Long answer - but - if you know you are a man and how to stand as a man AT court, these other changes are added proof of who you are. But, you need to be prepared.
They stopped teaching Common Law (soil and land jurisdiction) in schools by the 50s in any capacity.
Also, so I can stand as a man at court what schooling would you think would be necessary?
I suggest (I get ZERO benefit from this recommendation and I do not know them personally) taking the law for mankind full knowledge share course to start and get a copy of Black's Law Dictionary 4th Edition to start. That is the best way to get started. Also learn all you can from these three sites:
https://tasa.americanstatenationals.org/
https://states.americanstatenationals.org/
http://www.annavonreitz.com/
Right on thank you. Good luck on your case. Please share how it turns out
www.thesovereignsway.com - should have provided you the web link.
What about if you aren't a "man" , but a "woman". ???????
wo/man - Good to go. Bottom line, be a step away from the Creator. Once you take on a title, you are diminished. This is the reason for the pronouns, titles, re-definitions. They are attempting to keep people (man and woman) diminished and less than a creation of the Creator who creates.
When considering the reality, their goal is for all to not be accountable or responsible. The last thing the legal society wants is for your yeahs to be yeahs and your nays to be nays. Calling out another man or woman for trespass is biblical. It is safer for the liars and thieves to argue and complain like trained children and make things ambiguous rather than accept accountability and providing remedy for said trespass.
How do you make an entity take the stand and testify to how it did you harm? "It" cannot. But, a man or woman, they had to make the final decision. Your doctor, the nurse, the teacher, the administrator. Call them out as a man or woman, not as their title. Then they are responsible and accountable. No immunity. Does an entity autograph a document? No...
A corporation cannot contract with a living soul (man or woman). Only a corporation can contract with a corporation (maritime and admiralty law) and a man or woman can contract with a man or woman. So, call out those of mankind who do trespass.
Amendment: I have lots of friends here!! I finally found intelligent people!!
Epiphany , peeps, and Full Moon.
It's cake night!! Enjoy@!!
Fuck 'em. We;ll party.
This discussion has taught me loads.
Now, I see why govt. officials are neither capable, nor required to have any going definition for the word "woman". There''s no such legal entity, it's all "man".
\
Well, the last still-on-the- books-version of the Rule/Law of Thumb having been abandoned no sooner than the early nineties in Switzerland,
I can see how this simplifies the conondrum of trying to explain how chattel came to have human rights.
fucking cool. I think I do that all the time...is that why I have few friends?
if your friends are lawyers...
Naw. CHD threw me off their site two years ago, when I pointed out that lawyers make a lot of money from fining pharms, yet never seem to stop them, but just enable them until they've made enough "killings" for the courts and lawyers to get their share. Also pointed out how Joe...another Joe, yeah...made the Kennedy fortunes. Last I heard, alcohol is poison.
Had a beer tonight , tho. Grappling with the beast. Love to wrestle.
"First, we'll kill all the lawyers" Shakespeare.
He's my "daddy". Haha
Thanks for the thorough explanation!