Why not put his name out here – let him reap what he sows… Probably a lot like a two bit town near by with 2 new cop cars, 6 officers, a mayor, a dog catcher, 4 council members, & a jail & all 12 of them reporting to the 12 town citizens

Yes and in NYC a drug pusher is only fined 150 bucks for a intent to sell violation. Where’s the justice?

It’s this sort of abuse of authority by cops that surveys here in Seattle show that the average citizen is more afraid of the police than the criminals and they believe that the only difference between them is the cops carry badges.

Promissary Note

I, ( state your name ), promise to pay to__________________________________
________________________________dollars, in the “lawful money of account” of the United States in accordance with 31 USC 371, and Article One, section 10 of the Constitution of the United States which states in pertinent part that; “no state may coin money, nor make any THING a payment of debt, except gold and silver coin.”

As a natural born citizen of the united States, from the town of ……….., in the State of ………… and currently residing in the State of ………., I hereby declare that I shall not voluntarily violate the “Supreme Law of the land” and will consider any attempt to compel me to do so, a “Deprivation of Rights under Color of Law” 18 USC 242, and should this action involve more than one individual, an act of “Conspiracy”, under 18 USC 241.

Should either of these events occur, I shall seek both criminal and civil relief within all relevant jurisdictions.

Submitted with all DUE respect:

( John Doe ), “without prejudice”, UCC 1 -207, 308 UCC 1-203 104 NRS 1207/308

Greeting fellow citizens of the “united States of America”. While I certainly agree that the Article Two of the Bill of Rights is an important one, it is one that should be considered by responsible citizens as a last resort. Also, rhetoric is easy, as is sophistry……but for those who truly wish to restore the Constitution of the United States, and “legitimate government”, which “derives it’s just powers from the CONSENT of the governed”, then two things are of primary importance in deciding who are the legitimate voices and potential leaders in this fight and do they have “skin in the game”.

The means of “resistance” are many, and the primary one that is available is to “deny” as much revenue as possible to “government” at every level……….the closer to home, the better, and Article One, section ten can be an appropriate means to do so.

On the signature line, you will note the citation UCC 1 -207 which is a “reservation of rights” under the Uniform Commercial Code, whose effect “declares” that unless this reservation of rights is in place, before you need them, you have no access to them, after the fact. ( Whatever “rights” you do have, are those which government ( and the courts, ultimately ) allow to remain.
( just enough to create the “illusion” of justice.)
104 NRS 1-207 is the State of Nevada equivalent of the Federal version, and the UCC has been adopted by every State and Commonwealth in its entirety, ( except Louisianna which only adopted some of it, due to it’s napoleanic origins ) and each one has this section, which has the same legal effect. ( which is to eliminate all common law and equity courts and replace them with admiralty and maritime courts, which are essentially federal in nature, thereby removing the protection of the Constitution and Bill of Rights from “ordinary citizens”, so that making the attempt to access obvious parts of it, such as Article One, Section Ten as difficult as possible.

This was done by the Social Security Act, the adoption of Postal Codes, and finally the UCC and Codification of US Law, in 1939. You will note that all legal id, licences and court documents are in uppercase letters, John Doe from the State of Nev ( legal abbreviation) became, JOHN DOE from NV. ( federal citizen/slave/property of/asset ) of the UNITED STATES.

Now it is interesting to here the term “statesman” used, but a statesman would be showing ordinary people the means to resist government tyranny by methods that are directly beneficial to the individual and easily undefrstood and implimented.

To divest yourself of slave status, you need to inscribe every legal form of ID you have with the Federal and State, reservation of rights under UCC 1 207 with the words “without prejudice” or “all rights reserved”. I prefer the first one, because its meaning is subtle and most government flunkies have no clue as to its meaning, including cops, lawyers, and sadly many judges. 1939 was a long time ago. You should also include this on everything you sign and if you are questioned regarding it, simply say that it represents your commitment to “equal rights and protections under the law”. To further establish your “reservation”, filing notorized affividavits with local city and county office of record would also be a prudent step.

What effect does this have? It essentially allows you to claim your “common law and equity law rights”, in the US and State constitutions, to challenge the jurisdiction of any “court” and force them to try you under “common or equity law”, ( no such courts exist ) to demand a jury trial ( in all cases over $20 ), to obtain free assistance of counsel, ( you have no income, since for you there is no “lawful money”, although always insist that any “lawyer” you get, is merely a co-counsel as they are largely useless for these types of strategies ) and also, you can challenge the law directly, as well as the facts.
( Georgia v. Brailsford )

As I probably have put you all to sleep, I will end this by saying that the “promissary note” above, is a devious instrument…….it is not a refusal to pay, it is an inquiry for the authority in question ( and eventually a judge ) to resolve the problem of payment, without violating the “supreme law of the land”……and to force payment, the judge would have to rule that ‘federal reserve notes’ were “constitutional”, ( lawful money ) Any such decision, would be subject to “appeal”, which would become precedent…..and this has not and will not ever happen.

The easiest way to test this, is to sign the next traffic citation you receive, with the above reservation of rights ( also add this to the front of your SS card, and put a sticker on the back of your drivers licence and/or state id.) If you have not caused injury or damage, you should avoid penalty……challenge the jurisdiction of the court in a pretrial motion, and go from there.

Warning: This can be scarey, you will be threatened and bluffed, but let me ask you ALL a serious question……..if you can’t be bothered to take this rather minimal risk and learn from it…….please do not expect anyone to believe, that if a “violent revolution” is the only remedy, you will be leading from the front…….or be anywhere near it.

http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/freeman/freeman4.htm

WARNING and Disclaimer: this information is for informational purposes only and is not to be construed as “legal advice” by an attorney at law, duly licensed by the “bar association” of any particular state and/or federal district.

@ GALT An excellent comment. What has happened quietly regarding the switch from equity courts to admiralty courts is fastenating and frightening. That hardly anyone outside the legal system is aware of what has happened and how the change has strengthened the federal government’s power while nullifying citizens’ rights is frightening. The topic is involved, lengthy and not easy to understand for a layman. But, if one is willing to put the mental, and time-consuming, effort into studying this change in our legal system, it’s a big eye opener and is hair-raising. To protect one’s rights without being thoroughly versed in the basis of his adversarial move against the established bureuaracy can be a daunting task. I’m not sure that I could withstand a blustering judge. But, that’s just me. I’m more sheep than mustang, I’m afraid. However, we all should be willing to protect our rights to equitable justice.

To be afraid is quite understandable…….but there are two points to be considered here.

1.) This is not a confrontational approach…….once one has taken the preliminary
steps of placing the UCC reservation of rights on the appropriate I.D. and signing
any legal document with this reservation……..you have effectively removed yourself
from the jurisdiction of the “admiralty and maritime” court………and you would be in a position of simply asking a “question” regarding the “authority” of any judge to
proceed against you.

2.) From this point any proceedings must involve the court ( in this case a judge )
establishing jurisdiction over you……….and this can only be done by asking you
to plead to the charges………which you can refuse to do based on your reservation
of rights…….which will be “evidenced” on the “complaint”……….

Now I am assuming that in the normal course of events……one would be testing all of
this with regard to a traffic citation………or even in an instance like the above one
in this article……..and even if you do not get it right…….the penalty isn’t going to be
any worse than what you are already facing……..

You also need to remember that for most of the people involved in this process
ignorance abounds……….so until you get to the “judge”…..you just say nothing…..
although you may find that……..a 2500 dollar fine becomes a 50 dollar fine
before you actually get to a judge…….. ( it’s magic )

Also, even if the “judge” is not completely aware of what is going on, when you
finally stand before him…….your refusal to plead, based on your reservation of rights,
will bring the matter into focus for him…….because this is dangerous territory
and for the reasons cited……that this has the potential to be made public as
well as become part of the record……….needs to be avoided…..( so once again
a magical result at least to those observing will be the most likely outcome )

You will find some of the potential dialog in the link….although as described there,
it is way more complex than what will be needed…….

You are after all, not some criminal who has committed a heinous act…..you are simply
asking an inconvenient question…..and one which needs to be “disposed” of……rather
than answered……..and that THREAT is far more powerful than you can imagine….
at the moment……but even if you never act on this for whatever reason, just knowing this may be useful………who knows, maybe you can hang a jury by simply refusing to convict,
just don’t tell anybody why you are doing it……..