Real laws

[pods]

This argument boils down to one simple term. Jurisdiction.
You are not subject to the statutes until you provide jurisdiction.
How have you provided jurisdiction? Most of us have provided jurisdiction to corporate law a thousand times.
And if you fight it in court, unless you are exceptionally smart, you will be pulled into their jurisdiction in the first 10 minutes. Then you are done.
https://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/jurisdiction.htm
I have researched this for countless hours. The common law vs. corporate law (statutes).
It deals with jurisdiction. And it is very difficult to avoid their juris (oath or law depending where you look) and diction (spoken).
Sounds crazy, and I was lambasted when I spoke of it here, but it indeed is correct.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tom_in_CA]

reply

..... What caused the stigmas placed on Metal Detecting?......

Eureka, I think you know the answer to this. It's almost always racked up to either of the two following "connotions" that detecting obviously has:

a) digging (you might leave a scar, or an open hole, or a mark, etc....).

b) cultural heritage (you are taking historic artifacts that deprive a future archie, who *might* dig a pit there, from finding some day.

And I don't care how long you sing dance and beg, you simply can not deny that each of the above scenarios has truth in it. Sure, we "dig". And while YOU may be certain you'll leave no trace, yet to the person watching you, you can hardly blame them for the image of the end result. And yes we "take" things. And while you and I might rationalize that the item will rot till eternity, and ... no archie is ever likely to dig every inch, yet...... it's one of those "camel's nose-in-the-tent" psychologies, in their mind's eyes.

 

[cudamark]

HOW CAN THIS BE DONE?
How can you eat an Elephant? answer: ONE BITE AT A TIME......[/QUOTE]

Trying to eat a large animal, "one bite at a time" can be a two edged sword. If they're not totally dead, they can turn around and eat you too.....in much larger bites!

 

[Ripsaw]

This argument boils down to one simple term. Jurisdiction.
You are not subject to the statutes until you provide jurisdiction.
How have you provided jurisdiction? Most of us have provided jurisdiction to corporate law a thousand times.
And if you fight it in court, unless you are exceptionally smart, you will be pulled into their jurisdiction in the first 10 minutes. Then you are done.
https://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/jurisdiction.htm
I have researched this for countless hours. The common law vs. corporate law (statutes).
It deals with jurisdiction. And it is very difficult to avoid their juris (oath or law depending where you look) and diction (spoken).
Sounds crazy, and I was lambasted when I spoke of it here, but it indeed is correct.

It's not an argument, just a discussion. While I agree that you are not subject to the statutes, it is not when 'you' have provided jurisdiction. You do not give someone the power to attack you further. That makes no sense at all. The jurisdiction issues must be proven by the one prosecuting you, to the court, in order for the court to take, or have jurisdiction over you to tell you anything.

Subject matter and personam jurisdiction both must be proven to the court, by the prosecution, before anyone can proceed. He who makes the allegation, bears the burden of proof. Nobody in their right mind would supply proof of jurisdiction to the court, to be used against them by the courts.

I understand what you are trying to convey for others, that unless you challenge it, they assume it in less than ten minutes, which is true, and how it usually goes during a standard railroading job. That goes back to the supreme court decision about if you don't know your rights, they sure don't have to tell you. If you don't challenge the jurisdiction they claim to have over you, ... you are done ! And I can guarantee everyone here, they have no proof, proving jurisdiction of any type, over anyone. If you don't believe it, next time you are in court for whatever reason, unless it is murder, or rape, or robbery, or kidnapping, ask them for the proof, and watch what happens. The only thing they have are opinions, with no corroboration or witnesses to back it up. case dismissed.

 

[MichiganMan]

snip --- or ticket writers collecting taxes to feed the giant machine of tyranny... FACT !

I think if you dialed back a little on the conspiracy end of your posts then people would take you seriously: And you merged what you are trying to say within the context of metal detecting. I see a lot of good information and passion [in your posts]: But the trouble is... that information is given in the form of jailhouse-lawyer-speak [in my opinion because I've been to jail] like Jason, and those who liked his post, said.
One cannot paint the whole Government with the proverbial corrupt paintbrush.

So what should law enforcement do when people speed? Or break metal detecting laws?

 

[Ripsaw]

I think if you dialed back a little on the conspiracy end of your posts then people would take you seriously: And you merged what you are trying to say within the context of metal detecting. I see a lot of good information and passion [in your posts]: But the trouble is... that information is given in the form of jailhouse-lawyer-speak [in my opinion because I've been to jail] like Jason, and those who liked his post, said.
One cannot paint the whole Government with the proverbial corrupt paintbrush...........



Thank you for your insight and opinion that nobody takes me seriously, I assure you the judges and prosecutors I have faced in court do.

One needn't make "any" broad generalization, such as the whole of government is corrupt, when it easily provable with facts that they are. It needs no demonstration to be recognized. Any people that work in government positions, that act outside of their actual authority, are criminals, plain and simple.



What should the cops and government do to speeders or metal detectors ?

Absolutely nothing, unless and until, they can prove someone has an honest and actual antagonistic assertion of rights in a real court, and that those rights have been violated by someone. This is a maxim of true, Black Letter Law, the only real law there is, that actually exist. All the rest are merely opinions of legislators and carry no weight of law, and certainly no factual evidence to prove them. This is easily demonstrable in court.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

If politics continue in thread it will end up being locked or moved to politics forum under charter membership.






American by birth, Patriot by choice.

I would rather die standing on my two feet defending our Constitution than live a lifetime on my knees......

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Thread locked and will be deleted due to politics since OP is not CM want move it to Politics forum under the CM forum..






American by birth, Patriot by choice.

I would rather die standing on my two feet defending our Constitution than live a lifetime on my knees......