Does Canada have rules about the distribution of dangerous fluids and/or human body parts?
Do they actually mail blood?
This could get interesting…
I think that calling the list “comprehensive” would be more fitting.
I love this:
Emphasis mine.
I came here to post this too. Justice Rooke, in dealing with this FOTL case (Meads v Meads, a divorce settlement case), recognized that this FOTL assnuttery needed to be refuted once and for all, so he took it upon himself to make a massive study of the subject, well beyond the circumstances of the immediate case at hand. He wrote all of this into his decision, which covers the territory like a Master’s Dissertation. Definitely a recommended (and entertaining) read for anyone interested, and especially for lawyers and judges. AIUI, this decision made quite a splash, not only throughout Canadian jurisprudence circles, but in American jurisprudence circles as well.
Northern Piper, do you cite this in your lectures? Do you recommend it as Required Reading for all lawyers and judges who might deal with this stuff? For American lawyers and judges too?
ETA: Here are two articles I found, discussing or summarizing Rooke’s decision:
Meads v. Meads, the Vexatious Litigants Case
The Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument (OPCA) Litigant Case
That’s the devil’s signature that is fire, God’s signature is red, white and blue. That’s why our money, and no other country’s money, says “In God We Trust.”
Then how do you explain the burning bush, huh? I run rings around you logically.
Yes. I’ve never heard of “Freemen” but I guarantee you my dad would eat this shit up. Whenever we get together (maybe twice a year) he starts spewing conspiracy theories at me, and when I don’t know what the hell he’s talking about, it’s only evidence of my ignorance and the evil liberal media. I can’t argue with the man, because we live in alternate realities, or something. Sigh. So much fun, my dad.
Maybe without Dad or I knowing. But I think Mom is in on it.
That’s where the real craziness comes from. It would be one thing if these nuts just refused to recognize the authority of the American legal system. It wouldn’t work in the real world because the American legal system is backed up by a lot more power than any group of nuts is capable of defying. But at least their beliefs would be logically consistent.
But these nuts are constantly citing various laws in support of their beliefs. They seem to believe that the American legal system is telling them that they don’t have to accept the authority of the American legal system. How can you win that argument? If you prove your case then you’ve destroyed the means you used to win it.
In my opinion, the very nuttiest part is how they regard the UCC as a magical, near-divine construct. I would love to know how that got started.
Kind of. It’s more like an elaborate joke constructed in such fashion as to extract money from suckers.
One section in Meads vs. Meads is on “gurus”. These are the people who sell these nutters pamphlets and books and tickets to hear speakers telling them what they want to hear. The gurus have a financial incentive for keeping the crazy train on track.
OP you ask for help debunking. You need to adopt the same strategy as for astrologers, dowsers & psychics. They typically want to, and will, talk forever about how it is all supposed to work. What they won’t and can’t do is what they say they can.
Debating such people about the details of why what they say is untrue or won’t work is pointless. They will just drown you in neverending whargarble.
You need to say this, and stick to it. “I don’t believe any of this. What can you actually, practically DO to test whether what you say is effective? What would constitute success or failure in that test?”
The response will probably be more endless whargarble about how effective what they are saying is. To which you should just repeat your first question.
If you want to have more fun, help them out a bit; if they say they can get out of criminal charges using their mad Freeman skilz, invite them to demonstrate by speeding past a speed trap. Tell them if they can get out of the ticket using their techniques, you’ll pay the fine. If they say they can get free stuff from shops by quoting a supa-sekrit codenumber, offer to meet them at the shops for a demonstration tomorrow at 10am.
Watch them run away, then point and laugh at them.
I thought a birth certificate means you are a chattel slave?
At least that is what the FMOTL nut in a radio interview claimed.
Can’t go wrong with a bet like that!
This nuttyness seems to be confined to the US of A. Is anyone aware of people in other countries taking it up?
I understand there are Canadian FotL - probably due to proximity.
But I also know there have been a few cases in New Zealand, Australia and the UK. These are countries that have an entirely different history and legal system, and do not have some of the key concepts - like a Social Security Number.
How anybody can justify this, I have absolutely no idea.
Reptilians. It’s lizards all the way down.
The gurus are sending out “missionaries”, I’ve heard them on talk radio in the Caribbean.
There are certainly cases in the UK - see running coach’s list of freeman successes (!) up thread. I guess the common factor is the common law system the US, NZ, UK, and Canada share. Does anyone know of Freemen in a non-common law jurisdiction?