Iconoclasm
New Member
I know that you may think this crazy, but I have never been alright with the idea that just because I was born in a given location, that I am subject to its laws. I am also not comfortable with the idea that I am "assumed" to be a US or Wisconsin "citizen" simply because I was born in the confines of North America. If I had been born at Disney World, would that make me subject to Disney Law? Further, I would love someone to show me where the law or even statute is that says that just because I was born in any given geographical location, that I am subject to its laws. It is not possible to be born under the auspices of an artificial entity, it is only possible to be brainwashed into believing one can be. I believe the Law of Trespass is the only true natural law. Common sense dictates that one does not violate the law of trespass, such as stealing, from another, walking upon another's property without their permission, or raping, beating or murdering another. I never willingly, intelligently or knowingly signed up for, nor was asked to sign up for, US or Wisconsin citizenship
If I was not born with any special authority to command you, and you were not born with any special (God given or any other means) authority to command me, nor was any other person on this planet born with that inherent power, then how do two or more combine their "non-existent" authority to tell the third person that they cannot do a thing beyond the law of trespass? What gives, (or from where is derived), the authority to even vote somebody out of their right to do a certain thing, just so long as one is not violating the law of trespass?
It is my understanding that Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time. I am at a loss for why attorneys do not attempt this argument. Does it result in disbarment? I also understand that the few who have endeavored to utilize this ploy, are usually acting pro se, and they don't actually win, but are released on some strange technicality, and their charges are swept under the rug. It would seem that the powers that be do not wish to contaminate their control over society by allowing a record be made of this defense. This defense seems entirely sensible to me. I would, like, at the very least, to know your perspectivess and viewpoints on this.
Lastly, I recently signed up to be a "World Citizen." I did this knowingly, willingly, and intelligently. World citizenship is acknowledged by both the United Nations, and the United States? For the record, if I was asked by a court if I was renouncing my citizenship, I could only reply by saying "how can I renounce that which I never applied for?" To me, this is a real quandary, and I am incensed at the idea that citizenship, and therefore jurisdiction can be assumed!
If I was not born with any special authority to command you, and you were not born with any special (God given or any other means) authority to command me, nor was any other person on this planet born with that inherent power, then how do two or more combine their "non-existent" authority to tell the third person that they cannot do a thing beyond the law of trespass? What gives, (or from where is derived), the authority to even vote somebody out of their right to do a certain thing, just so long as one is not violating the law of trespass?
It is my understanding that Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time. I am at a loss for why attorneys do not attempt this argument. Does it result in disbarment? I also understand that the few who have endeavored to utilize this ploy, are usually acting pro se, and they don't actually win, but are released on some strange technicality, and their charges are swept under the rug. It would seem that the powers that be do not wish to contaminate their control over society by allowing a record be made of this defense. This defense seems entirely sensible to me. I would, like, at the very least, to know your perspectivess and viewpoints on this.
Lastly, I recently signed up to be a "World Citizen." I did this knowingly, willingly, and intelligently. World citizenship is acknowledged by both the United Nations, and the United States? For the record, if I was asked by a court if I was renouncing my citizenship, I could only reply by saying "how can I renounce that which I never applied for?" To me, this is a real quandary, and I am incensed at the idea that citizenship, and therefore jurisdiction can be assumed!