Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: The natural guy,fishing w/o license - I like this guy ~ judge should rule on obj.

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    The natural guy,fishing w/o license - I like this guy ~ judge should rule on obj.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...urt-testimony/

    The judge should just rule on the guy's objections and continue. I like the guy's statement about putting in a pleading ...“I never plead, animals plead, sounds like baaaa, oink oink,” he said.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...urt-testimony/

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    The State required this man to have a license to feed himself.... Do the officials of the state have no shame. The gentleman clearly embarrassed the state and the kangaroo court.

    Most folks simply pay the fine and fees and or obtain a license thereby giving the state the authority to have jurisdiction over them. The state counts on folks not to question the licensing fee in the first place, folks just say oh ok let me get a license to exercise my right to feed myself/fish etc
    This man is not a commercial fisherman fishing for a profit, he is simply a man that was hungry. Tyrants cant stand a man that will argue and question their authority and their senseless lawless taxes,fees etc, they will label this man a tax protester or now the new term they throw around " Sovereign Citizen"
    Question their unconstitutional statutes,fees, and rules and they give you a label. The dumb confused judge wanted to charge the guy with contempt of court, that is what tyrants try to do when their so called authority is questioned. Tyrants have no time for the rule of law or the Constitution, they simply want to collect fees, and line their pockets with the fruits of hard working citizens labor.

    Now, what this gentleman incorrectly did was appear in the first place. He should have simply filed a motion to have the case dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. A local court does not have proper legal standing to rule on a case if the defendant argues common law, natural law or constitutional law. The second he entered the court room he basically gave them authority/jurisdiction to rule on the issue.

    My .02

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post

    Now, what this gentleman incorrectly did was appear in the first place. He should have simply filed a motion to have the case dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. A local court does not have proper legal standing to rule on a case if the defendant argues common law, natural law or constitutional law. The second he entered the court room he basically gave them authority/jurisdiction to rule on the issue.

    My .02

    CCJ
    I agree that some of that makes perfect sense ... a motion to dismiss ... but I think he made it clear that he felt that the court had no jurisdiction. A motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter can be noted at any time ... even upon an appeal for the first time.

    Its almost always the first motion I file in almost every case....make them show it.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 11-26-2013 at 01:27 AM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    I agree that some of that makes perfect sense ... a motion to dismiss ... but I think he made it clear that he felt that the court had no jurisdiction. A motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter can be noted at any time ... even upon an appeal for the first time.

    Its almost always the first motion I file in almost every case....make them show it.
    Hi Davidmebeth

    Yes I agree with what you say, however by not being present and not acknowledging their jurisdiction you do not subject yourself to being led away in cuffs for contempt of court... Tyrants like to put you in "contempt". I simply avoid the building completely.

    Thank you and best regards.

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  5. #5
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post
    Hi Davidmebeth

    Yes I agree with what you say, however by not being present and not acknowledging their jurisdiction you do not subject yourself to being led away in cuffs for contempt of court... Tyrants like to put you in "contempt". I simply avoid the building completely.

    Thank you and best regards.

    CCJ
    By not appearing you may just set yourself up to have a warrant issued and then led away in cuffs or held until your next court date. Probably not sound legal advice...

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    By not appearing you may just set yourself up to have a warrant issued and then led away in cuffs or held until your next court date. Probably not sound legal advice...
    Filing the written motion to dismiss should take care of any warrants, also should you be ******** ** ****thrown into jail, then you sue for constitutional rights violations under USC 42 section 1983..

    This method is what I would do, however you and others, results may vary.

    Best regards and stay safe.

    CCJ
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 11-26-2013 at 02:29 AM. Reason: Castigation of law enforcement edited
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  7. #7
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    On OCDO our Forum Rules cover that, including in the Social Lounge.

    (15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.
    IMO championing someone that choses to break or ignore the law is little different.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    On OCDO our Forum Rules cover that, including in the Social Lounge.



    IMO championing someone that choses to break or ignore the law is little different.
    The defendant probably signed a notice to appear in this case. He could have refused. Signing a notice to appear ... does that infer jurisdiction? I'm guessing yes, until a motion to dismiss is filed.

    He could have filed a motion to dismiss, making the appearance date moot.

    Of course, one would need to chk the state's body of case law ... which I have not ...

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post
    Hi Davidmebeth

    Yes I agree with what you say, however by not being present and not acknowledging their jurisdiction you do not subject yourself to being led away in cuffs for contempt of court... Tyrants like to put you in "contempt". I simply avoid the building completely.

    Thank you and best regards.

    CCJ
    I don't think that you claiming the court does not have jurisdiction over you could result in contempt. Clearly a court needs to have this and should welcome clearing the matter up one way or the other.

    I think continually re-arguing it might ... as any re-argument of the same point...but most judges give a wide birth to pro-se litigants.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    On OCDO our Forum Rules cover that, including in the Social Lounge.



    IMO championing someone that chooses to break or ignore the law is little different.
    Who is ignoring the law other than the government thugs?

    The courts have ruled that there can be no license required to exercise a right. You have the right to live and earn a living that is not a full list of the rights you have but they do pertain in this instance.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  11. #11
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    Who is ignoring the law other than the government thugs?

    The courts have ruled that there can be no license required to exercise a right. You have the right to live and earn a living that is not a full list of the rights you have but they do pertain in this instance.
    The words used were "IMO championing someone that chooses to break or ignore the law is little different."

    Perhaps I would have been more clear to have stated, "IMO championing someone that chooses to break the law violates Forum Rules - ignoring the enforceability of law is little different."

    The man fishing w/o a license did break the law intentionally AND ignored the enforceability of it in his conduct - although that was his apparent intended action. He did not utilize the court to affect change. He used it as a forum to further his political/legal views and in the end accomplished nothing beneficial to himself or us.

    Called decision made. Forum rules apply in the Social Lounge equally as in the other sections/sub-forums of OCDO. Yes, called decisions have the same weight as the written rules.

    Just to be clear, let's look at the rule one more time.

    (15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

    ad·vo·cate tr.v. ad·vo·cat·ed, ad·vo·cat·ing, ad·vo·cates
    To speak, plead, or argue in favor of. See Synonyms at support.
    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/advocate
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 11-26-2013 at 09:10 AM. Reason: formatting
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •