Drug and Prostitution Laws dont apply to me except.......

Questions
 
Question:  #1
Were the prostitution laws or marijuana laws inacted by the people or by our public servant?
 
Question: #2
Am I the person under statutes?
 
Question: #3
Am I subject to the laws of the legistators or the laws of the people's referendum?
 
Question: #4
How can public servant govern their masters?  Masters can govern masters?
 
Question: #5
Where is the grand jury indictment?  “Infamous” in Webster 1828 Dictionary means vice or bad report.  Why do I have to answer to public servant?  If the judge is my public servant, why is the judge allow to sentence me?  Do I have the right to have a jury of sovereign to sentence me?  The government carries out the will of the sovereign not the other way around.
 
Definitions
 
“7.  Words used in this code in the present tense include the future as well as the present; words used in the masculine gender include the feminine and neuter; the singular number includes the plural, and the plural the singular; the word "person" includes a corporation as well as a natural person; “ –California Penal Code SECTION 2-24
 
“Well …… well as 1. In additional too: the museum provides hours of fun and a few surprises as well | a shop that sold books as well as newspaper. …” –The Oxford American College Dictionary
 
“Include (Lat. Inclaudere, to shut in, keep within.) To confine within, hold as in an inclosure, take in, attain, shut up, contain, inclose, comprise, comprehend, embrace, involve.” –Black's Law Dictionary 6th edition  ***Note: It cannot be excluded.
 
“2-4-401. Definitions The following definitions apply to every statute, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) "Child" includes child by adoption.”  -C.R.S. 2-4-401 (2013)
“(6) “Public servant” means:
(a) Any officer or employee of a state, county, municipal, or special district agency or entity;
(b) Any legislative or judicial officer or employee;
(c) Any person, except a witness, who acts as a general or special magistrate, receiver, auditor, arbitrator, umpire, referee, consultant, or hearing officer while performing a governmental function; or
(d) A candidate for election or appointment to any of the positions listed in this subsection, or an individual who has been elected to, but has yet to officially assume the responsibilities of, public office.”-  Florida Statutes Title XLVI CRIMES Chapter 838 BRIBERY; MISUSE OF PUBLIC OFFICE
 
“(3) The word “person” includes individuals, children, firms, associations, joint adventures, partnerships, estates, trusts, business trusts, syndicates, fiduciaries, corporations, and all other groups or combinations.” -Florida Statutes  Title I CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTES Chapter 1 DEFINITIONS
 
“(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.”   -1 US Code Section 8
 
“individual, adj. (15c) 1. Existing as an indivisible entity. 2. Of or relating to a single person or thing, as opposed to a group.” –Black's Law Dictionary
 
“entity. An organization (such as a business or a governmental unit) that has a legal identity apart from its members or owners.”   -Black's Law Dictionary
 
 
Court Rulings
 
Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but, in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts. - Yick Wo v. Hopkins - 118 U.S. 356 (1886)
 
It nevertheless does not follow that the "white persons" to whom will be shifted the burden of proof in title litigation with Indians also include the sovereign States of the Union. "n common usage, the term 'person' does not include the sovereign, [and] statutes employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude it." -Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe - 442 U.S. 653 (1979)
 
The idea that the word "persons" ordinarily excludes the sovereign can be traced to the "familiar principle that the King is not bound by any act of Parliament unless he be named therein by special and particular words." Dollar Savings Bank v. United States, 19 Wall. 227, 86 U. S. 239 (1874). As this passage suggests, however, this interpretive principle applies only to "the enacting sovereign." United States v. California, 297 U. S. 175, 297 U. S. 186 (1936). See also Jefferson County Pharmaceutical Assn., Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, 460 U. S. 150, 460 U. S. 161, n. 21 (1983). Furthermore, as explained in United States v. Herron, 20 Wall. 251, 87 U. S. 255 (1874), even the principle as applied to the enacting sovereign is not without limitations:
 
"Where an act of Parliament is made for the public good, as for the advancement of religion and justice or to prevent injury and wrong, the king is bound by such act, though not particularly named therein; but where a statute is general, and thereby any prerogative, right, title, or interest is divested or taken from the king, in such case the king is not bound, unless the statute is made to extend to him by express words." - Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police - 491 U.S. 58 (1989)
 
 
 
Declaration of Independence
 
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
 
Liber LXXVII
 
"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." -AL. I. 40
"thou hast no right but to do thy will. Do that, and no other shall say nay." -AL. I. 42–3
"Every man and every woman is a star." -AL. I. 3
There is no god but man.
 
1. Man has the right to live by his own law-
    to live in the way that he wills to do:
    to work as he will:
    to play as he will:
    to rest as he will:
    to die when and how he will.
2. Man has the right to eat what he will:
    to drink what he will:
    to dwell where he will:
    to move as he will on the face of the earth.
3. Man has the right to think what he will:
    to speak what he will:
    to write what he will:
    to draw, paint, carve, etch, mould, build as he will:
    to dress as he will.
4. Man has the right to love as he will:-
    "take your fill and will of love as ye will,
    when, where, and with whom ye will." -AL. I. 51
5. Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights.
 
"the slaves shall serve." -AL. II. 58
 
"Love is the law, love under will." -AL. I. 57
 
Final Thought
 
We don't have to vote on everything. We only vote for laws that pertain to us. The elected public servant governs the government's properties.  How about voter fraud? Or the majority votes the rights of the minority away? The grand jury and the trial jury are the people who guard against unjust laws. Also the courts can rule against unjust laws. As long as the people are adults and understand what Sovereignty according to Aleister Crowley is, there will be no rights infringed.
 
Switzerland is doing just fine. The people in Switzerland have more freedom and wealth that United States. Our elected representatives are not going to do any better than the people. They are doing allot worse than the people voting. Are you the government's property? This is my belief. If you want to believe differently, you can go ahead. I am realistic and not promising some magic bullet.
 
 I am NOT guarantee that you will not be arrested or prosecuted for violating statutes. If enough people realize it, the system will change.
 
To make the title correct, the Marijuana referendum of Washington State and Colorado applies to me when I am in one of these state.
 
Gerald Celente - Let The People Vote
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFGHfsYJE8Y&hd=1

 

The cops don't know the difference so they will arrest you. If enough people say the statutes don't apply to them, then we will get our freedom. If you think that your public servant can govern you, then it is your choice.

Voters inacting laws don't create anarchy or unregulated society. I am not a fanatic that believe we don't need licenses, regulations, or don't pay taxes. I believe the government need to stay out of our private lives. What we drink, smoke, eat, drugs we uses, healthcare, and how we have sex (pay or not pay) are none of the government's business.

There are no requirements for grand jury indictment and sentencing by jury in many states. This expose us to mandatory minimums and harsh sentences to victimless crimes.

Public servants are bond to the UN treaty on narcotics, Model Penal Code, and/or other policies. They cannot get you these rights because they are bonded by treaties or private agreements. You can wait until hell freezes over to get the public servants to get you these rights or claim it yourself.

 

 
Yes. Other masters order it. The police arrest someone for violating a referendum law. The police is doing the will of the people. The grand jury indict and the prosecutor carry out the will of the grand jury. The trial jury sentence and the public servant carry out the will of the jury.
 
What we have now is the people are the servant and the government is the master. The politicians pass laws and the police carry out the will of the politicians. The grand jury is a rubber stamp for the prosecutor if you get one. In many state and small crimes, there are no grand jury indictment available.  The trial jury is a rubber stamp for the judge. Many state and the fed don't allow sentencing by jury for non-capital offenses.
 
The patriot are arguing for jury nullification. The jury instruction is under the discretion of the judge. It is too easy for the judge to not give instruction on jury nullification. The best way to deal with the matter is sentencing by jury. If the jury don't want to sentence, the defendant is free to go.

 

Don't have to worry about ultimate user defense. The statutes don't apply to me so why should I care about using ultimate user defense. The judge can deny that defense.   Why do I want to play their game? I want to exit the game.
 
If you claim to be the corporation, legal entity, or infant adopted by the state, the statutes do apply to you. Why should I claim to the the government's property?
 
Ultimate user defense is for the subject and not for the sovereign. Why should I bow to my public servant? I only answer to other sovereigns.
 

 

There are sovereign citizens that get free from the court system. It is not a dead end. More people become sovereign, the better for us. Just like Gandhi and social disobedience. Go onto Youtube and watch them in court. Some of them walk away from the court.  
 
Yes, it is a headache for the government. But that what they are paid to do. Handle headaches from people.
Why should I believe that I am a corporation or other legal entity? That is a lie. I never applied for a corporation or organization charter from the Secretary of State. 
 
If you want to believe the system and the sovereign tactics don't work, it is your choice. It is not mine. I decided to travel on the road of the sovereign. The road of the sovereign is not for everyone. It is for them that spend time to study the law and want to devote their time to walk on that road. You have to accept the victories with the defeats. 
 
It is a choice that is not for everyone. There are many sovereigns that don't pay income tax. They fought the IRS hard enough and the IRS leave them alone.  20 years ago when there were less sovereign citizens, the chances of getting away from paying taxes were slim. Now the opportunity is greater thanks to other sovereigns. 
 

 

 Join me at the Sui Juris Forum if you want to know more.  A person is an legal entity or an infant. If you are not a legal entity or an infant, you are not a person.

 

I just want to be clear that sovereign citizen movement is NOT for everyone. If you are not going to devote to it, it is not for you. You have the right not to believe in it and not to join it. It is your choice and a hobby.
 
If you don't have interest in the law, the movement is not for you.
 
YOU MUST FIND THAT READING LAW BOOKS is a fun hobby before  you can consider the sovereign citizen movement is something that is right for you.
 
I post this information not to force my beliefs on other people. I just write to present information on the new hobby.
 
It is like growing weed or any other hobby. You have to devote to it and know what you are doing. You cannot be ignorant, hurt yourself, or alert the police by not taking care of the smell from the flowers.
 
If reading law books doesn't interest you, then don't join the movement. Find a hobby that is right for you.
 
The word "individuals" is singular. The rules of construction is that singular include plural and plural include singular. So you are right to say that individuals is singular.
 

This is what I posted on the Sui Juris Forum
 
" “View Entire Chapter
607.01401 Definitions.-As used in this act, unless the context otherwise requires, the term:
(11) “Entity” includes corporation and foreign corporation; unincorporated association; business trust, estate, partnership, trust, and two or more persons having a joint or common economic interest; and state, United States, and foreign governments.

(15) “Individual” includes the estate of an incompetent or deceased individual.”
    -Florida Statutes Title XXXVI BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS Chapter 607 CORPORATIONS

“(28) "Individual" means:  (a) a natural person; ( B) the estate of an incompetent individual; or   (c) the estate of a deceased individual.” – Utah Code 16-6a-102    

“natural person n. a real human being, as distinguished from a corporation which is often treated at law as a fictitious person.
Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.” –The Free Dictionary by Farlex

“(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.”   -1 US Code Section 8

“individual, adj. (15c) 1. Existing as an indivisible entity. 2. Of or relating to a single person or thing, as opposed to a group.” –Black's Law Dictionary

“entity. An organization (such as a business or a governmental unit) that has a legal identity apart from its members or owners.”   -Black's Law Dictionary

“Natural - Black's Law Dictionary 6th Edition, pg. 712, defines 'Natural' as follows: "Untouched by man or by influences of civilization; wild; untutored, and is the opposite of the word "artificial". The juristic meaning of this term does not differ from the vernacular, except in the cases where it is used in opposition to the term "legal"; and then it means proceeding from or determined by physical causes or conditions, as distinguished from positive enactments of law, or attributable to the nature of man rather than the commands of law, or based upon moral rather than legal considerations or sanctions." – From http://www.assemblyoftrueisrael.com/TruthPage/Iamnotaperson.html

Possibilities of the definition of “individual”
1.    An organization doesn't issue stock.  When an organization issue stock and owned by other legal entities, it is considered a corporation and not an individual.
2.    An estate of an incompetent or dead person.
3.    Natural is wild and untouched by man. So it can be a native American Indian.
4.    A real infant.

 Tell the cop that you are none of these. List out the possibilities in court and tell the court that you are none of these. You can deny in an affidavit you are not a trust, estate, infant, Native American Indian that not touch by man, corporation, organizations, associations, DBA (fictitious business name), partnership, government unit, government agency, employee of the government, public servant, etc."