Are you the “person†in statutes? Do you or your name own these legal entities? Did you file an affidavit of corporate denial when you are drag into court? If you read the “include†to be expansive and omit the components mentioned, then you can read the sentence “The wedding party include my dad†as your dad can be omitted from the wedding party. Include can be restrictive or expansive but omitting or excluding the components will make the sentence incorrect. “As well as†means in addition or and. Look up the dictionary. How am I bound to statutes when I don't own or my name don't own these legal entities? Is the court system accepting presumption that the defendant is a "person" in the statutes when the defendant didn't say anything? Ҥ8. “Personâ€, “human beingâ€, “childâ€, and “individual†as including born-alive infant (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 “personâ€, “human beingâ€, “childâ€, and “individualâ€, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.†- 1 USC Section 8 “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;â€- California Penal Code Section 2-24 “SECTION 2-7-30. Construction of words. (A) The words "person" and "party" and any other word importing the singular number used in any act or joint resolution shall be held to include the plural and to include firms, companies, associations, and corporations and all words in the plural shall apply also to the singular in all cases in which the spirit and intent of the act or joint resolution may require it. All words in an act or joint resolution importing the masculine gender shall apply to females also and words in the feminine gender shall apply to males. And all words importing the present tense shall apply to the future also. ( B)(1) In determining the meaning of any act or joint resolution of the General Assembly or in a regulation promulgated pursuant to Article 1, Chapter 23, Title 1, unless otherwise defined in the act, joint resolution, or regulation, the words "person", "human being", "child", and "individual" must include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.†-South Carolina SECTION 2-7-30. Construction of words. “(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 Ҥ 43-3-6 "Person" defined. – The word "person" extends to and includes co-partnerships and bodies corporate and politic.†-Rhode Island SECTION 43-3-6 Marc Steven asked the city attorney and the city council on how the city codes applies to him. He didn't get an answer. http://youtu.be/yNT_M28tNiU
You are bound because you are a person standing on the ground owned by the government that makes the law. A person can argue that the government does not own the land but considering they'll harm you if you try to disobey you dont have much of a choice but to be bound. They have enslaved you. Deal with it or die.
Then it is OK to applies the Marijuana law on me when the law is not addressed to me. Something is wrong with this. I refuse to let them get away with this sh*t. I will fight this injustice.
You yourself are meant to be represented by those words. If you are not a living homosapien then the law does not apply to you
Are you an English major, trying to ease your way out of a possession charge by using language skills?
[quote name="Ninjaballs" post="19415074" timestamp="1390822266"]Are you an English major, trying to ease your way out of a possession charge by using language skills?[/quote]No he's a bullshit major who specializes in semantic on law and calls it being a sovereign citizen. It's all bullshit advice that has no legal standing.
Why fight it here? Do you think we are the ones making or enforcing the law? We be as powerless as you but you keep coming back here looking for arguements. What's up with that?
I challenge you to fight this in court and put your money where your mouth is. You wont do anything but babble off some bullshit on the internet
He could get lucky and run into a judge that's like "You are right I dont see your name in the statue. Laws do not apply to anyone.Case dismissed. Bailiff, rape the prosecutor."