More sovereign citizen goodness

I’m not big on link bombing the dope, but this is too good not to see.

eta: I know this is a couple years old but I’m not sure it’s ever made the rounds. Someone on reddit dug it up yesterday and now it’s on its course.

I saw this posted on another site recently. I agree with one of the posters there, her voice should be an arrestable offense.

I googled “article 4 free inhabitant” to see where that particular magic word may have come from, and found the site of one Paul J Hansen, a sovereign citizen type from Omaha who claimed (as of 2011):

Seems like a good deal, and he’ll sell you all his secrets for only $45!

Apparently one of his properties wasforeclosed on in 2013 for failure to pay taxes. And then he got tied up with none other than Kent Hovind, although the conspiracy charges were ultimately dismissed without prejudice.

Good stuff, good man to learn from.

Sovereign citizens are pretty much my favorite type of lunatic.

Wait… they’re invoking the authority of the Articles of Confederation? That’s pretty good. Even if it wasn’t considered outdated, it would only apply in the few states that actually adopted it. It would be like trying to invoke the Magna Carta because we’re a former British colony.

The “Sovereign Citizen” game is like a cargo cult of superstition and magic. The flawed assumption that if you do the right rituals, if you speak the right words, you can ‘magic’ the system and not be forced to play the game by the same rules as everyone else.

Apparently this Paul Hansen guy bases his beliefs on the AoC and the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which still doesn’t cover his home state of Nebraska. It’s truly a wonder. (eta: And sure as shit doesn’t cover CA).

He did an interview with a local Omaha station where he says that article 4 of the AoC creates two separate classes of people, free inhabitants and US citizens. Setting aside the irony of using a defunct legal document to define a US citizen, it’s clear from the reading that the actual classes of people are free inhabitants (with some defined exceptions) and slaves.

Not that this is necessarily relevant to the video which takes place in California, like I said I was just trying to figure out where the legal scholar that took the video got her specific magic words and came across this Hansen nutter.

Hopefully one of those is how he doesn’t pay state sales tax. “Oh, just leave that off… don’t ring it up, I won’t be paying it.”

Yeah, that’ll work.

“You’re raping me! This is rape! EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE”

It’s like a 5 year old who throws a tantrum because she doesn’t want to brush her teeth.

These Free Citizens would have better luck claiming they were emissaries from some unheard of micronation.

I mean, it still wouldn’t work, but at least diplomatic immunity is a thing that exists in the US in The Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Fifteen. (Diplomats can still get traffic violations tho)

I should really get around to writing my Congressman about getting that Letter of Marque…

This is AMAZING.

Also: If her voice and logic were played over and over as an interrogation/method of torture…I would totally squeal. I would give up all the information. I could barely get through the video.

“Come see the violence inherent in the system! Help! Help! I’m being repressed!”

What was the stuff about the bag about?

By resisting the impulse to shoot a tazer down her throat, that officer has single-handedly improved my opinion about the police.

Special snowflakes, man.

This pretty much illustrates the fundamental flaw in the sovereign free inhabitant argument.

You may sincerely believe that you are immune to the laws of the United States.

But the police officer who arrests you will believe you are subject to those laws. And the judge who presides over your trial will believe you are subject to those laws. And the guard in the prison where they send you will believe you are subject to those laws.

Don’t give them any ideas.

That was the best part! I’m guessing she had the bag slung over her shoulder and he was trying to remove it so he could cuff her. She objected repeatedly, finally stating that he didn’t have to remove the bag in order to cuff her. He agreed, put the handcuffs on her, and then proceeded to cut the straps of the bag in order to remove it. Oops!

But she’ll get the last laugh because he’s going to get in trouble.

Why not? I’d love to give them more ideas.

It’s funnier that way.