Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 03-31-2017, 01:10 AM
Martini Enfield Martini Enfield is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
I say that we pay Chad (the country, not the douche) $1B per year and anyone claiming to be a SC (or variation such as FoTL, Article 4 traveller, etc.) in open court has hereby given up their US citizenship, becomes a Chadian citizen and is immediately deported.
It'd be interesting to see what happened if every country with a Sovereign Citizen movement basically said "Fine, you're not a citizen of our country now. Get out."

Australia, for example, is well-known for throwing people who show up here without the correct paperwork into unpleasant tropical island concentration camps detention centres for extended periods of time.

It'd be very interesting to see what happened if one of these SovCit nutters pulled their shit and a High Court Judge said "OK then, you're not an Australian citizen, which means you're not legally allowed to be in our country since you hate it so much, so enjoy a horrible, unpleasant life in offshore detention."

Obviously the whole thing would get tied up in appeals and a lot of public argy- bargy for a very long time, but it might encourage a few of the "My name is not spelt in capital letters and that's a legal fiction so your rules don't apply to me, nyah" crowd to pull their heads in.
  #52  
Old 03-31-2017, 02:39 AM
Derleth Derleth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Missoula, Montana, USA
Posts: 19,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martini Enfield View Post
It'd be interesting to see what happened if every country with a Sovereign Citizen movement basically said "Fine, you're not a citizen of our country now. Get out."
The rich would immediately use it as a literal get-out-of-jail-free card, and land somewhere tropical where they can buy citizenship. The poor would end up stateless, and there are UN conventions limiting statelessness, because the world doesn't need any more refugees. (The US is not a signatory to those conventions, however.)

Of course, people usually become stateless because their home country is racially discriminatory against their race and refuses to grant citizenship to members of that race.

The major problem with statelessness is precisely what makes it so appealing as a pseudo-solution to the problem of SCs: It limits access to the legal system. That's great if the shitheel is going to use the legal system to shit on the checkerboard and parade around like they just won, but it's a major invitation to destruction of their civil rights. The fact statelessness is usually coupled to racial discrimination makes the whole situation worse, but, even if the SCs largely aren't going to be discriminated against in that fashion, they still might end up with legitimate complaints they'd be unable to address were they stateless. It's the whole "outlaw" problem all over again.

And, for all that, it doesn't go far enough: Non-citizens still have to obey American law if they're in America. Non-citizens still have to pay American tax if they work in America. Non-citizens still have to have some kind of driver's permit that America recognizes to drive in America. They're still going to have contact with the police and the courts, only now, that contact is going to be made more complicated by the fact they're not American citizens.

Quote:
Australia, for example, is well-known for throwing people who show up here without the correct paperwork into unpleasant tropical island concentration camps detention centres for extended periods of time.

It'd be very interesting to see what happened if one of these SovCit nutters pulled their shit and a High Court Judge said "OK then, you're not an Australian citizen, which means you're not legally allowed to be in our country since you hate it so much, so enjoy a horrible, unpleasant life in offshore detention."
Offshore detention is a different matter, and a much more dangerous one, especially if it's coupled to losing your citizenship. Because... where does it end? Is it a fixed sentence? If not, they've been condemned to Devil's Island for life, because, unlike the Australian refugees, they don't have anywhere they could even theoretically be shipped back to. If it's a fixed term, you've either created a punishment unknown in the history of law (to my knowledge), temporary loss of citizenship, or you've permanently deprived someone of citizenship, temporarily interned them on an island, and then released those stateless people back into the country they used to be citizens of.

Quote:
Obviously the whole thing would get tied up in appeals and a lot of public argy- bargy for a very long time, but it might encourage a few of the "My name is not spelt in capital letters and that's a legal fiction so your rules don't apply to me, nyah" crowd to pull their heads in.
I doubt it. The dupes, the ones who've bought in (in every sense), lack the sense to not do it, and are precisely the kind of stupid arrogant jackass who won't be able to imagine it happening to them.
  #53  
Old 03-31-2017, 03:04 AM
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 11,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derleth View Post
Offshore detention is a different matter, and a much more dangerous one, especially if it's coupled to losing your citizenship. Because... where does it end? Is it a fixed sentence? If not, they've been condemned to Devil's Island for life, because, unlike the Australian refugees, they don't have anywhere they could even theoretically be shipped back to. If it's a fixed term, you've either created a punishment unknown in the history of law (to my knowledge), temporary loss of citizenship, or you've permanently deprived someone of citizenship, temporarily interned them on an island, and then released those stateless people back into the country they used to be citizens of.
No, it works like this:
You have hereby declared that you are not a citizen of this nation. We accept your declaration and have determined that you do not have a visa. Therefore, you are not legally entitled to remain in this country. If we are unable to ascertain your actual legal citizenship, you shall be transferred to a sanctuary island. There, you will be provided with the means to petition other nations for admittance and will be transported to such a nation as will accept you. Until that happens, you will remain on the sanctuary island.
I do not see any particular danger. If you do not refute your local citizenship, you will not end up on that island. And if you are able to overcome your SCDS (Sov Cit Dementia Syndrome), you might be able to draft a rational petition to reclaim your original citizenship.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017