MugzyBrown: I just don't agree with the idea that some guys signed a contract 250 years ago and everybody who happens to be born within imaginary lines are forever bound by that contract.

That's the thing.  You can leave.  You are not forced to stay within those imaginary lines.  I have yet to see a sovereign citizen case that is about actual rights or individual independence.  All of them are about avoiding responsibility.  If you don't want the responsibility of obeying traffic laws, don't drive.  If you don't want the responsibility of paying property taxes, don't own a home.  You aren't forced to do these things by that contract signed 250 years ago.  These sovereign citizens aren't advocating revolution or the toppling of a corrupt government.  They're advocating gaming the system, the same system that gives them the right to try and game it.  If their arguments were based more on solid principles and less on semantics, they might gain more respect.

MugzyBrown: I just don't agree with the idea that some guys signed a contract 250 years ago and everybody who happens to be born within imaginary lines are forever bound by that contract. Sure the idea of every single person being its own nation sounds silly, especially if you look at it through the context of our current government, but the idea of there being an independent nation of the Eastern Shore of Maryland isn't crazy at all.. and the idea if those people felt strongly enough about being its own nation should be killed or jailed, I do reject.

So your proposal is that we pass a new Constitution and/or overthrow all laws and the government every time someone is born.

Curry and beer: Day_Old_Dutchie: He said it is a violation to have the high beams on within 500 feet of an approaching vehicle and within 300 feet of a vehicle you are trailing.

I hate it when drivers are inconsiderate like this.


I accidentally left my high beams on the other day.   Someone flashed me to let me know.   I thought to myself  "Shall I turn them off,  wave a friendly apology and get on with my life?  Or shall I be an ass and take it all the way to court?"  Decisions, decisions.

I've come across a lot of morons driving with high beams on all the time lately.  And many will not turn them off even if you flash to let them know.  Not sure if dumb or passive-aggressive.

geekbikerskum: sprgrss: Which is incredibly stupid because you would never fly a fringed flag on a ship because the fringe would be ripped off in a heartbeat.

Does anyone know what the gold fringe actually *means* and why it's there?  Is there a historical context for it?  Did it have some meaning in the past that's now vestigial?  Unfortunately trying to search for this stuff on Google turns up nothing but pages with so much derp about Freemasons, sovereign citizens, and the non-validity of the Sixteenth Amendment that it makes my eyes bleed and my brain hurt.

From what I've read, it's just an aesthetic thing. Yellow is a nice contrasting color, and frames the flag nicely against any background. It's found on indoor-use flags.

stevetherobot: SpdrJay: I think when you call yourself "sovereign" it's like asking the government to "come at me bro!"

Not at all. When you call yourself sovereign, the government is powerless to act against you.

Which worked so well in this case, I see.

cefm: Saying it doesn't make it farking so!

Which is why I'm not getting daily knob jobs from Yuma Asami, despite all my best efforts.

heypete: Sure, but in those cases you generally should -- as a courtesy to the officer -- indicate in some way that you acknowledge that he's requiring you to stop but that you're briefly proceeding to a safe area: put on a turn signal, slow down, or acknowledge the demand to stop in some other way. In some cases, particularly in lonely roads without anyone else around, you can call the police dispatch line, say that you're being signaled to stop by a police officer but you prefer to proceed to a well-lit area like a gas station, and they'll radio that to the officer. Simply continuing to drive on like normal is generally a bad idea.

Of course, then you run the danger of pissing off cops for not pulling over soon enough.

MugzyBrown: I just don't agree with the idea that some guys signed a contract 250 years ago and everybody who happens to be born within imaginary lines are forever bound by that contract.

But that's the way it has always been.  We are lucky to even have a contract.  Most people throughout history were born into a kingdom or an empire and were subject to whatever the ruler wanted.  Everyone in the history of civilization has been born into a 'system' of some kind or another, and they have the choice to either stay or leave.

These people are more than welcome to form their own country in the same way countries have always been formed.  They can buy land from another country and then set up whatever, or they can invade and conquer land from another country, or they can discover new land and claim it.  I'm sure with enough money some south pacific country would sell an island free and clear.  Then they can defend their new country, set up an economy, and build diplomatic relationships just like it's been done for 10,000 years.  It'll be like Civ 6: Reality Edition.

Why these people feel they are entitled to reap the benefits of living in an organized society without paying into the system or being held to its rules is beyond me.

ignatius_crumbcake: But that's the way it has always been. We are lucky to even have a contract. Most people throughout history were born into a kingdom or an empire and were subject to whatever the ruler wanted. Everyone in the history of civilization has been born into a 'system' of some kind or another, and they have the choice to either stay or leave.

These people are more than welcome to form their own country in the same way countries have always been formed. They can buy land from another country and then set up whatever, or they can invade and conquer land from another country, or they can discover new land and claim it. I'm sure with enough money some south pacific country would sell an island free and clear. Then they can defend their new country, set up an economy, and build diplomatic relationships just like it's been done for 10,000 years. It'll be like Civ 6: Reality Edition.

Why these people feel they are entitled to reap the benefits of living in an organized society without paying into the system or being held to its rules is beyond me.

Because it's not fair!  We should have a new government/social system installed every time a person is born.

kth: JohnAnnArbor: Cargo-cult law.  They think if they say long, legal-sounding words, their case is airtight.

That's the best way I've ever heard anyone explain this.  I'm so stealing it.

I didn't have original idea:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science

Private_Citizen: If you really want to be a Soveriegn Citizen, buy a private island that's outside any nations borders. Then, you really do have the right to do whatever you want.

But when you live within the defined borders of a Sovereign Nation, your ability to claim land or rights from it is directly related to wether or not you can take that nation in a fight.

I don't think any islands are unclaimed anymore, except in the Antarctic.

PYROY: It seems unlikely that a person could ever receive a fair trial when going up against the police since the judge and cops are on the same team.

Yeah, pretty much. Justice ain't blind here in America.

That said, it's still a hell of a lot better than other places, so it's not like the system needs a total overhaul or something, we just need to reform the police system\maybe give judges some incentive to not hang out around cops. Which is not that much compared to where we could be.

Tyrosine: If one draws a venn diagram illustrating the relation of Tea Party Members, people who have no understanding of the U.S. constitution, and those with mental illness and/or developmental impairment, right in the nexus where the three sets overlap you will find the Sovereign Citizens.

Wouldn't that just be one circle?

JohnAnnArbor: I don't think any islands are unclaimed anymore, except in the Antarctic.

I'm sure some shiatty island nation would agree to sell an uninhabited island for enough money.  This one looks nice: http://www.privateislandsonline.com/islands/kanacea-island.  I bet the Koch brothers could offer Fiji a few billion dollars and buy the island with an agreement to secede after purchase and get official diplomatic recognition thrown in with the deal.

Citrate1007: Has a sovereign citizen ever won a case?

I can think of several ways that a sovereign citizen could 'win a case' and then go tell all his buddies which leads to more people thinking hey this works.

Sovereign pulled over for speeding constests the case Arresting officer unable to make it to the JP's that day, yeah Sovereign really showed those fascists.
Sovereign has some minor case and the judge or prosecuting attorney decides it is not worth the hassle to go to trial.

Yeah but winning on a legal arguement that is not going to happen.

Discordulator: So, to anyone wanting to declare sovereignty. From the moment of declaration, you should hereby forfeit any and all claim to contract or legal redress as a member of the nation you are declaring sovereignty from.

As of that moment you are trespassing on foreign soil, and should be subject to the same laws as undocumented immigrants. We will extradite you to any nation that will acknowledge your citizenship, of your choosing, and bill you for the costs (including infrastructure costs, like roads) that your trespass has incurred.

Failure of any nation's soil being willing to accept you will result in a lifelong garnishment of wages to cover the cost you incur to the people whose land you are a foreign visitor to.

No, see, the really funny part is that these yahoos claim that they still enjoy all protections of the Constitution up through the 13th Amendment. Part of their mystic legal incantations is that the 14th Amendment created some distinction between "State Citizens" and "US Citizens" such that you can choose to be one without being the other. So, all Constitutional rights and protections before that point count for the "original" "State Citizens" portion and, provided you maintain that you are a citizen of your state but not a US citizen, you still get all those sweet, sweet protections.

Of course, they also believe that each State Citizen Who Is Not A US Citizen is legally owns a secret bank account of gold (I swear I am not making this up) and that any debts they owe to a "legitimate" government authority can simply be drafted against this bank account. So, take their status as being rational human beings with a grain of salt roughly the size of Iowa.

Endive Wombat: theorellior: I'd love to meet a "sovereign citizen" some day, it'd be even funnier if they asked to bum a cigarette and I could ask them for their customs paperwork and charge them an export tariff.

Go to a gun show, I am sure you can find more than one there

I went to my first gun show a few months ago and saw my first "Impeach the Usurper" bumper sticker in the parking lot. I LOL'd.

parasol: i hope for some witty officer to reply to this sort of thing "sovereign citizen? without diplomatic immunity, you must obey traffic laws and? where are your diplomatic plates? and where is your passport to enter THIS
sovereign nation?"

but i doubt any LEO wants to feed this sort of behavior

Like I mentioned earlier, that's when these nutballs start invoking their Constitutional rights for being "State Citizens" -- they don't need such documents, you see, because they can still claim all protections granted in the Constitution from the Articles up through the 13th Amendment.

Cake, eat, still have. As noted by others in this thread, it's 100% about wanting all the protections and benefits of society, but none of the responsibilities. So, they engage in magical thinking and "cargo-cult law" (a perfect description) to delude themselves into believing that they have gamed the system.