[BOBT12]

ozma wrote on Apr 2 2009, 02:59 PM:

yeah, did some of those things. hmm. isn't there a way to retract things that you've done/signed? i mean, if you did it without knowledge of what they were contracting you into, doesn't that like… make it invalid?

Well, they may be void or voidable. These things must be raised as Affirmative Defenses, however.

I am in court on various issues, however, the courts are not favorable towards individuals proceeding pro se. It is important to try to understand the rules of the court before you get there.

Quote:

“Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no Constitution, no Law, no Court can save it… Where do you stand Citizen?” –Judge Learned Hand (1961)

Thus, it helps to have liberty in ones heart.

Quote:

“If these Commentaries shall but inspire in the rising generation a more ardent love of their country, an unquenchable thirst for liberty, and a profound reverence for the constitution and the union, then they will have accomplished all that their author ought to desire. Let the American youth never forget that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors; and capable, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence. The structure has been erected by architects of consummate skill and fidelity; its foundations are solid; its compartments are beautiful as well as useful; its arrangements are full of wisdom and order; and its defences are impregnable from without. It has been reared for immortality, if the work of man may justly aspire to such a title. It may, nevertheless, perish in an hour by the folly, or corruption, or negligence of its only keepers, THE PEOPLE. Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people in order to betray them.”–JOSEPH STORY, “Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States”, 2d ed., vol. 2, chapter 45, p. 617 (1851); Justice Story served in Congress 1808-1809.

Keep in mind, the End of Law is to support justice and freedom.

[BOBT12]

Author #2 wrote on Apr 2 2009, 01:24 PM:

Franklin,

Great response. Mega dittos.

I agree. 😉

[BOBT12]

Admin wrote on Mar 22 2009, 08:46 PM:

Peter Schiff Channel on YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/user/PeterSchiffChannel

Dire predictions of economic collapse

Peter Shiff is on point, this is a “Ponzi Economy”. The stimulation only makes matters worst. The economy needs to rebuild based upon honest money. Otherwise, it looks like “Hyperinflation” is coming soon. Unfortunately, this appears to be an economy that is being destroyed by (Federal Reserve) scientific design.

The question is why?

Quote:

China Voices Support For New Global Currency To Replace Dollar

Paul Joseph Watson

Prison Planet.com

Monday, March 23, 2009

China has expressed support for Russia’s proposal to hand the IMF the power to create a new supra-national global currency in response to the call for an alternative to the U.S. dollar as the world reserve currency.

Last week the Kremlin called for the “creation of a supranational reserve currency to be issued by international institutions as part of a reform of the global financial system.”

The Russian proposal stated that the IMF should take the lead in establishing a “superreserve currency accepted by the whole of the international community.”

http://www.infowars.com/china-voices-suppo…replace-dollar/

[BOBT12]

Admin wrote on Mar 21 2009, 04:15 PM:

A government that Can't Remember ANYTHING

http://crooksandliars.com/2007/03/20/a-gov…ember-anything/

Good work.

Quote:

Pressuring federal prosecutors to play political games is serious business. The president says he's not happy about it, and the attorney general says mistakes were made. Well, of course they were. But confirming the obvious is not enough. From the top down, the word must go out this will not be tolerated, and those responsible must be held accountable.

Sadly, this is what today's government is all about.

Quote:

Even an alien from outer space can see that or smell it, because this one stinks to high heaven.

Who can disagree?

[BOBT12]

Admin wrote on Mar 11 2009, 12:00 AM:

Do YOU know how much a TRILLION is?

http://famguardian.org/Subjects/MoneyBanki…on/Trillion.htm

. . . and Nancy Pelosi is already talking about a second stimulus package. Wow !!

It must be what the government wants to spend every couple months. 😡

[BOBT12]

Admin wrote on Mar 9 2009, 10:46 AM:

Congress trying to criminalize organic farming!

1. Bill

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-875

2. Video

http://www.voteronpaul.com/newsDetail.php?…ganic-Farms-222

This is a clear outrage. It uses a voluntary system to make everything mandatory via fraud! Where have we heard of this occurring before?

Quote:

”He who is accountable to no man will do justice to no man.” –Sidney, “Discourses”, ii. 11

Please contact Congress, let them know this bill is no good.

BOBT12 Letter to Congress wrote:

Please do everything in your power to stop the Department of Agriculture from

implementing or promoting the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). “The

contention that NAIS was authorized by the AHPA is wrong. NAIS implementation

has never been authorized by any Congressional legislation. It's a bureaucratic

initiative.

This false assumption gives NAIS the aura of Congressional approval. Instead . .

.

“This is another step on the road to converting NAIS from a “voluntary” program

to a mandatory one.

[…]

“H.R. 875 is a de facto “authorization” of NAIS. It makes the penalties laid out

in the AHPA applicable to participants of NAIS. It also presumes that NAIS can

be “required,” or made mandatory for all owners of livestock and poultry — even

exotic pets.” DownsizeDC.

Please don't allow this bill to pass. The people do not need to mark their beast!

Who will be next? :ph34r:

[BOBT12]

Admin wrote on Mar 3 2009, 12:45 AM:

Did you see this? Text of H.R. 45: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-45 The commies are coming after our guns!

Indeed.

Quote:

(3) to the extent that firearms trafficking

intrastate in nature, it arises out of and is substan

tially connected with a commercial transaction,

which, when viewed in the aggregate, substantially

affects interstate commerce; –H.R. 45

Quote:

“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.”

— Samuel Adams, Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of 1788

[BOBT12]

franklin wrote on Feb 28 2009, 10:57 AM:

http://rense.com/general85/give.htm

Article alleges that the (illegal) Sec'y of State's recent trip to Asia was to give Chinese eminent domain over American real estate as collateral for the infinite US debt it holds. And goes on to suggest that state governors who know about the deal are now asserting the 9th and 10th Amendment declaring Acts of Congress and Executive Orders not consented to are null and void.

This is very interesting:

Quote:

In early February nine U.S. States began the process of re- asserting their Sovereignty pursuant to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the US Constitution; declaring null and void any actions by Congress that violated the Constitution.

 

The states took action to make certain the feds couldn't give away cities or the states themselves!

 

This situation is going to get VERY ugly, VERY fast as one sovereign power (the feds) try to literally give away the land of other sovereign powers, (the states). This is the type of thing that starts Civil War.

 

Our present federal government makes the treachery and betrayal of Benedict Arnold look like child's play.

I still find it amazing that no major media seem to cover this 9th and 10th Amendment issue which involves over 50% of the states taking formal action.

Quote:

If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed

in our meat and in our drink,

in our necessaries and our comforts,

in our labors and our amusements,

for our callings and our creeds,

as the people of England are, our people, like them,

must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four,

and give the earnings of fifteen of these

to the government for their debts and daily expenses;

And the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread,

we must live, as they now do,

on oatmeal and potatoes,

have no time to think,

no means of calling the mismanagers to account;

but be glad to obtain subsistence

by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks

of our fellow sufferers;

And this is the tendency of all human governments.

A departure from principle in one instance

becomes a precedent for a second,

that second for a third,

and so on till the bulk of the society

is reduced to be mere automatons of misery,

to have no sensibilities left

but for sinning and suffering…

And the forehorse of this frightful team is

public debt. Taxation follows that,

and in its train wretchedness and oppression.

-Thomas Jefferson

Emphasis added.

The OP helps to understand why the USG may want the US military to “help” with police power within the states.

Quote:

For several years, the federal government has been accumulating to itself more and more authority that was historically understood to reside within the states and local communities. More and more, our police departments have taken on the image and tactics of the armed forces. And to a greater and greater degree, the rights and liberties of the American people are being sacrificed on the altar of “national security.” It seems to me that to now ascribe law enforcement duties to the U.S. Army only serves to augment the argument that America is fast approaching police state status.

If Hurricane Katrina is the template that our federal government is using as a model for future events, Heaven help us! Do readers remember how National Guard troops were used to confiscate the personal firearms of isolated and vulnerable civilians shortly after that hurricane devastated the New Orleans area? Do you remember how representatives of the federal government were calling upon pastors and ministers to act as spokesmen for gun confiscation? Is this what the new Army brigade is preparing for? And do President Bush and his military planners envision an even broader role for military troops on American soil?

Add to the above rumors of thousands of plastic caskets–along with thousands of portable prison cells–being shipped and stored across the country, and one is left to ask, Exactly what is it that our federal government is planning?

I think there is an even bigger question, What exactly will members of our armed forces do if and when they are commanded to seize Americans' firearms, arrest them at gun point, or even fire upon them? How many soldiers and Marines love liberty and constitutional government enough to resist such orders, should they be given? And how many officers would resist issuing such orders?

Remember, it is the job of the armed forces to kill people and blow up things, not to do police work. Then again, Presidential administrations from both major parties have been using the U.S. military as U.N. “peacekeepers” for decades now. So, was all of this preparation for what is yet to take place in the United States? –Chuck Baldwin, “U.S. Army Troops To Serve As U.S. Policemen?” (10/1/2008)

A New World Order coming into view?

A glimpse of hope:

http://www.suijurisclub.net/videos/4003-mi…nstitution.html

[BOBT12]

I just came across this article, it seems that revolution will not be televised. I don't wish to condone this action, however, I feel that it is interesting to some. It suggest there is much more going on then CNN, Big Media, Inc., are covering.

Quote:

Homes of Minnesota politicians vandalized for supporting the fraudulent banker bailout

October 23rd, 2008 | Breaking News

By: D. H. Williams @ 1:49 PM – EST

Six Minnesota politicians who each supported the fraudulent banker bailout, robbing the U.S. taxpayers of $5 trillion dollars got a wake up call Wednesday morning when they awoke to find spray painted warnings on the side of their homes and garages.

Unknown person(s) spray painted: Scum, Criminal, Traitor, Fraud,  U R A Sellout, Psalms 2 and Resign on garage doors and the homes of Democrats and Republicans who supported the unpopular Wall Street Bailout sometime in the early morning hours of October 22nd.

In a bizarre twist of priorities the destruction of the U. S. economy and theft of trillions of dollars from generations of Americans is somehow insignificant compared to some minor vandalism on the homes of the gods.

The incident is being called disturbing, threatening, hateful, and terrorism. Local, state and federal law enforcement has been called upon to investigate. Too bad the people can’t get this level of response when Congress commits serious crimes against The Constitution.

Reporting for ABC Eyewitness News 5 Tim Sherno says “It’s that refrence to Psalms 2 that elevates this vandalism from graffiti to a series threat.”

Sherno interviews Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN) who said “I thinks it’s clearly a terroristic threat.”

http://www.dailynewscaster.com/2008/10/23/…banker-bailout/

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Feb 24 2009, 11:06 AM:

Awww man!!!

This is great news!!! 🙄 I simply had no idea this was going on today.

I am stoked that some state governments appear to be standing up to the corrupted Federal Government.

It is long overdue.

We need to put the lying, corrupted US Government back in its box.

As usual, you are on point, Bing. Isn’t it strange that you don’t see any of this on CNN, or MSN, etc.? I wonder why, hmmm?

Quote:

”In all battles it is the eye which is first vanquished.” –Tacitus, “Germany”, 43

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Feb 24 2009, 11:32 AM:

franklin wrote on Feb 22 2009, 05:10 PM:

When I was a student…friends and I where passing through Reno on our way to California. To keep customers from counting cards…the blackjack dealers… all women…wore sheer nylon blouses and no bras! No joke!

Yep.

And I understand that all the gay card counters from Vegas moved to Reno and won tens of millions of dollars.

Go figure. 😕

What, not all “men“, are “men“? 😮

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Feb 24 2009, 11:24 AM:

Hardening of Police and fire stations against possible “high winds”??

WTF!?

Hypothetically speaking, I listened to the audio tapes and it sounds to me as if the FEMA guys are expecting a nuclear device to be detonated.

I sure hope people will wake up and smell the coffee.

Indeed. The device might be in the 10-kiloton range, hypothetically speaking. :ph34r:

[BOBT12]

Admin wrote on Feb 23 2009, 07:01 PM:

World Bank Manipulating Gold and Silver Markets,

http://wisdommagazine.net/index.php/compon…anipulates-gold

This is what one comes to expect from the PTB. Since the money printers are cranking up their machinery, gold, silver, and the like, are the best value for money. The choice is clear, should we trust gold, or trust con-men? I don't know about you, however, I am leaning towards gold. 🙂

[BOBT12]

Admin wrote on Feb 23 2009, 05:33 PM:

BobT12,

As far as the proper role of juries, the following Jury Summons Response, in section 1, powerfully illustrates the proper role of a fully informed jury:

Jury Summons Response, Form #06.015, Section 1: Status of This Request to Act as a Jurist, Acrobat p. 4

http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

I love the language there. Well done, SEDM. Below is a retype of that language.

____________________________

1. I will insist that every right asserted by the government in a case involving the government as either plaintiff or defendant shall also be possessed by the opponent of the government. This is an unavoidable consequence of having a government of finite, delegated powers only. Such EQUAL powers include:

1.1. Sovereign immunity.

1.2. The right to bear arms, firearms, etc.

1.3. The right to establish franchises or anti-franchises by the same mechanisms used by the government.

2. I will insist that if the requirement for equal protection is violated, that the alleged “government” as party to the suit in question is not a government, but rather a private corporation operating in equity.

3. I will enforce the separation of powers against the government by nullifying any attempt to enforce anything but the following constitutional subject matters within a sovereign state of the Union:

3.1. Postal fraud. See Article 1, Section 8, Clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution..

3.2. Counterfeiting under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 6 of the U.S. Constitution.

3.3. Treason under Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution.

3.4. Interstate commercial crimes under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution.

3.5. Slavery, involuntary servitude, or peonage under the Thirteenth Amendment, 42 U.S.C. §1994, 18 U.S.C. §1581. and 18 U.S.C. §1589(3).

“Other authorities to the same effect might be cited. It is not open to doubt that Congress may enforce the Thirteenth Amendment by direct legislation, punishing the holding of a person in slavery or in involuntary servitude except as a punishment for a crime. In the exercise of that power Congress has enacted these sections denouncing peonage, and punishing one who holds another in that condition of involuntary servitude. This legislation is not limited to the territories or other parts of the strictly national domain, but is operative in the states and wherever the sovereignty of the United States extends. We entertain no doubt of the validity of this legislation, or of its applicability to the case of any person holding another in a state of peonage, and this whether there be municipal ordinance or state law sanctioning such holding. It operates directly on every citizen of the Republic, wherever his residence may be.”

[Clyatt v. U.S., 197 U.S. 207 (1905)]

4. I will insist that rights in relation to the government are “unalienable” as declared in the Declaration of Independence, which means that they cannot be sold, transferred, or bargained away through any commercial process, including any license, franchise, or contract:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -“

[Declaration of Independence]

The word “unalienable” is defined as follows:

“Unalienable. Inalienable; incapable of being aliened, that is, sold and transferred.”

[Black's Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition, p. 1693]

5. If the case involves a United States District Court or United States Circuit Court, I will insist that the the court is not an Article III Court, but a franchise or property court that can only lawfully officiate over federal property, franchises, and territory pursuant to Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution.

“The United States district court is not a true United States court established under Article III of the Constitution to administer the judicial power of the United States therein conveyed.

It is created by virtue of the sovereign congressional faculty, granted under Article IV, § 3, of that instrument, of making all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory belonging to the United States.

The resemblance of its jurisdiction to that of true United States courts, in offering an opportunity to nonresidents of resorting to a tribunal not subject to local influence, does not change its character as a mere territorial court.”

[Balzac v. Porto Rico, 258 U.S. 298, (1922)]

6. I will insist that if the government is party to any suit and it does seek to enforce any license, privilege, or franchise against a private party, that:

6.1. The government produce evidence of consent to participate in writing.

6.2. That the party consenting maintained a domicile on federal territory not protected by the Constitution at the time he or she consented.

6.3. That if the government violates the above two constraints, it implicitly waives sovereign immunity because it is not acting as a de jure government if operating upon lands protected by the Constitution or upon those domiciled and present on said lands. Rather, it is operating in equity like any other private corporation because operating outside of its corporate charter and trust indenture, the U.S. Constitution:

See also Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States, 318 U.S. 363, 369 (1943) (“`The United States does business on business terms'”) (quoting United States v. National Exchange Bank of Baltimore, 270 U.S. 527, 534 (1926)); Perry v. United States, supra at 352 (1935) (“When the United States, with constitutional authority, makes contracts, it has rights and incurs responsibilities similar to those of individuals who are parties to such instruments. There is no difference . . . except that the United States cannot be sued without its consent“) (citation omitted); United States v. Bostwick, 94 U.S. 53, 66 (1877) (“The United States, when they contract with their citizens, are controlled by the same laws that govern the citizen in that behalf“); Cooke v. United States, 91 U.S. 389, 398 (1875) (explaining that when the United States “comes down from its position of sovereignty, and enters the domain of commerce, it submits itself to the same laws that govern individuals there“).

See Jones, 1 Cl.Ct. at 85 (“Wherever the public and private acts of the government seem to commingle, a citizen or corporate body must by supposition be substituted in its place, and then the question be determined whether the action will lie against the supposed defendant“); O'Neill v. United States, 231 Ct.Cl. 823, 826 (1982) (sovereign acts doctrine applies where, “[w]ere [the] contracts exclusively between private parties, the party hurt by such governing action could not claim compensation from the other party for the governing action”). The dissent ignores these statements (including the statement from Jones, from which case Horowitz drew its reasoning literally verbatim), when it says, post at 931, that the sovereign acts cases do not emphasize the need to treat the government-as-contractor the same as a private party.

u][url url=”http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=518&page=839″]United States v. Winstar Corp. 518 U.S. 839 (1996)[/url][/u

7. I will nullify and invalidate the enforcement of any franchise, license, or privilege outside of federal territory or against those not domiciled on federal territory because it constitutes:

7.1. An unconstitutional invasion of the sovereign states and a deprivation of a republican government in violation of Article 4, Section 4 of the United States Constitution.

7.2. An unconstitutional deprivation of equal protection mandated by Article 4, Sections 1 and 2; Fourteenth Amendment Section 1; and the Declaration of Independence.

7.3. The establishment of an unconstitutional Title of Nobility in violation of Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution.

On this subject, the U.S. Supreme Court held:

“Congress cannot authorize a trade or business within a State in order to tax it.”

[License Tax Cases, 72 U.S. 462, 18 L.Ed. 497, 5 Wall. 462, 2 A.F.T.R. 2224 (1866)]

8. I reserve the right and will insist on exercising the right as a jurist to judge both the facts and the law.

9. I will insist on my right to read and interpret the law while serving as a jurist, including accessing the law library while I am serving.

10. I will insist that the judge answer my questions about the law as a jurist on the record.

11. I will insist that the context and definition of every geographical “word of art” such as “State” and “United States” be disclosed to every party involved in the proceeding by the judge on the record.

12. I will insist that if this matter involves any government franchise, privilege, or license, such as

12.1. Income taxes.

12.2. Motor vehicle violations.

12.3. Social Security.

12.4. Statutory (but not constitutional) “U.S. citizen” status pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §1401, which is a public officer in the government.

. .that none of the jurists, prosecutors, or judges may participate in said franchises because they have a conflict of interest as a recipient of the “benefits” and “privileges” incident to said franchises in violation of 18 U.S.C. §201, 18 U.S.C. §208, 28 U.S.C. §144, and 28 U.S.C. §455.

“And you shall take no bribe, for a bribe blinds the discerning and perverts the words of the righteous.”

[Exodus 23:8, Bible, NKJV]

“He who is greedy for gain troubles his own house, but he who hates bribes will live.”

[Prov. 15:27, Bible, NKJV]

“Surely oppression destroys a wise man's reason. And a bribe debases the heart.”

[Ecclesiastes 7:7, Bible, NKJV]

Wow, that is grrrreat! 😆

When I was selected for jury duty a few years ago, I told the court that I was a “national”. They said I did not need to serve, and have not contacted me since that time. The more that we stand upon our rights the fewer jurors and people the courts (judges) can abuse.

BOBT12 wrote:

palani;18072 wrote:

The point is reason. When society stops responding to reason it ceases to exist.

I wholeheartedly agree.

Quote:

“Barbarian is a man content to believe without reason and to live without liberty.” –Durant, ii, 70

palani;18072 wrote:

You and shoonra point with glee to the prospective sentence which will likely end with death in prison for someone who, by reasoning, chooses to challenge people the likes of you, who in the end analysis display the attributes of bullies and cowards, pompous bags of wind who lack reason but have many guns (sheriffs, BATFE, FBI, standing armies, numerous nuclear weapons and one silly Secretary of State) so as to deny that reason is needed when fear can be used instead.

This is the general purpose of the 2nd Amendment. The federal government should not be pursuing this matter, based upon the Constitution. The laws (rules) that are being referred should not be enforced within the several states. See Separation of Powers for more information.

Quote:

Despotic power is the unrelenting war of an armed great robber against legally unarmed people. [L] Cato's Letters, #25, p. 183

palani;18072 wrote:

The local rag gave an example of two people attempting to board the same flight. One possessed a 5 inch scissors and the other had in his possession two 8 oz jars of mustard. Give a guess which potential weapon was seized? Reason will tell you since I am bringing the story up that the scissors were permitted while the mustard was seized.

Imagine the outcome of this standoff if Ed Brown had possessed even a single jar of mustard in his domicile. Imagine the deaths he might have caused by displaying to the marshals this potentially toxic substance available across the counter at any grocery. Ohhh, the Humanity!!!!

We are witnessing tyranny in action. The Browns hurt no one. The federal government is a much greater threat than the Browns. The federal and states just keep making enough laws (rule) that no one can live freely. This is what is happening as we speak (type). When we can't pay for all the Bailouts. Stimulus, this bill was something on the order of a 1400 page bill, which was not even read by the politicians before voting.

Quote:

“Taxation is, in fact, the most difficult function of government and that against which their citizens are most apt to be refractory. The general aim is, therefore, to adopt the mode most consonant with the circumstances and sentiments of the country.” –Thomas Jefferson: Introduction to Tracy's “Political Economy,” 1816. ME 14:460

Who will be able to read and understand this crap? Who will be able to pay for it all? Should we all go to jail? Or should we as a people stand upon the principles of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence?

Quote:

“The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.” –Thomas Jefferson

We need it now!

[BOBT12]

The issue in this case is related to weapons, thus, the 2nd Amendment. What right does the federal government have in enforcing such laws? Why isn't this a state concern, and since the state have passed on the issue, it should be dropped. What about the Separation of Powers Doctrine?

It is sad that they may not actively put up a real defense. In any case, it should be up to a fully informed jury to decide the issue. However, the jury is not likely to be fully informed, in fact, their prejudice will most probably be encouraged.

Quote:

The prerogative of nullification (jury lawlessness) is not only legitimate, but a praiseworthy right of the jury as well. Prerogative nullification is a mechanism that permits the jury as spokesman for the community's conscience to disregard the strict requirements of man-made law, as well as the “judge's” instructions to the jury where it finds those requirements cannot justly be applied in a particular case. The doctrine or prerogative of nullification “permits the jury to bring to bear on the criminal process a sense of fairness and particularized justice”. (Dougherty, cited above, at 1142.) These obviously are worthy objectives. Today in the courts this unassailable doctrine is concealed from the jury and is effectively condemned by the “judge” in the presence of the jury.

“The way the jury operates may be radically altered if there is alteration in the way it is told to operate.” (Dougherty, cited above, at 1135.) The jury's options are by no means limited to the choices presented to it in the courtroom.

The jury gets its understanding as to the arrangements in the legal system from more than one voice. There is the formal communication from the 'judge'. There is the informal communication from the total culture – literature; current comment, conversation; and, of course, history and tradition. Dougherty, cited above, at 1135.

The totality of input from the above-mentioned informal sources should be such as to convey adequately enough to jurors the idea of prerogative of nullification of their freedom to decide the guilt or innocence of a defendant according to their own consciences – regardless of the “facts” permitted by the “judge” to be placed in evidence, and regardless of his “Charge to the jury”. This final set of unasked-for and generally biased instructions will contain among other things what he (the judge) considers to be the controlling law, or what the judge wants the jurors to think is the controlling law in the particular case being tried by them.

The jurors are not told either formally or informally that they have the right to judge for themselves what the controlling law is or ought to be in any particular case, and that each individual juror has the right to decide for himself what things (even though not admitted into evidence by the judge) are to be accounted as fact and what things (even though accepted as fact by the judge) are not worthy to be so accounted.

The Browns likely felt that the federal government was acting in a tyrannical fashion, thus, resisted.

Quote:

”No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority.” — Thomas Jefferson, Speech to New London Methodists, 1809

The Founding Fathers did a similar thing, by the way. Remember, William Penn lost his trial, too. He came to the “New World” to get a little freedom. Of course, he founded Pennsylvania.

Further, the Browns have not injured anyone. Why should they die in prison?

BOBT12 wrote:

KarenM;17942 wrote:

Exactly where are the 'God-given rights' defined to manufacture bombs and place them as booby-traps?

Quote:

“Their [the militia] sword, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…. [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”–Coxe Tench (1755-1824)

Check out the Second Amendment, especially the part that says, “congress shall make no law”. Even government employees should be able to read and understanding the Supreme Law for government, don't you think?

Quote:

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government — lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”

— Patrick Henry

The rules you reference are unconstitutional and unjust. The government employees who passed this terrible legislation are either fools or despots.

Quote:

“Congress seems to want to cure every ill known to man except unconstitutional government and high taxes.” – Charley Reese

http://www.suijurisclub.net/taxation/455-a…own-case-3.html