Does this stuff ever actually work for so-called violators?

[Freeman Stephen]

Nope.

Just wondering what illegal activity people really get away with by denying the authority of law.

It looks to me like not much.

My chess game's pretty solid... I don't see the analogy between chess and the social contract though.

LOL @ Social Contract. There's no such thing. It's a post-facto attempt to justify the state of affairs which exist without anyone's agreement, other than the agreement of the house of wessex/cromwell/occupation forces in Iraq/etc agreeing not to kill people who dont piss them off too much. Thats right, the so called social contract is an attempt to make the continuing rape and pillage of your rights look legitimate and just but show me the signatures, the evidence of the contact, the consideration, anything at all other than the fact that people are complying with whatever demands placed upon them by those with biggest guns. People comply with bank robbers and this is no different except that the bank robber would not have the audacity to say that his victims had somehow contracted to have their rights suspended, infringed and set aside because they didn't struggle with a man with a loaded gun.

While theres no doubt that there are people who will say they consent to this monopoly of force, take the gun out the room and you will soon see exactly who consents to live under tyranny from the safety of not being threatened with a tyrant.

There is no social contract, there is simply do what your told or be attacked, although there are other paths that can be taken that the brutal oligarchs, the plundering parasites, the victorious vanquishers, the bastards are completely in the dark about, and we the free and peaceful like it this way.

[Just_Wondering]

OK interesting point. I don't define the social contract as narrowly as consent to be governed, by tyrants or otherwise. More just about getting along with each other at a group level.

Anyway we've gone off topic a bit. I really just wanted to know if people ever actually get away with legislative violations by claiming that the legislature doesn't apply to them.

Seems to be a bit of hostility to my putting this question out there. I really am asking in earnest.

[madlookin]

Nope.

Just wondering what illegal activity people really get away with by denying the authority of law.
what illegal activity are you hinting at....this statement could be taken as sarcasm
It looks to me like not much.
what are you looking at?...i posted up one vid that you seamed to ignore the content off

My chess game's pretty solid... I don't see the analogy between chess and the social contract though.
i thought the chess analogy was quite straightforward.....but it seams the opponent has got so used to making there own rules....he (gov) thinks its part of the game to make new rules (statutes + legislation) up as the game is played

i don't see any hostility toward you JW....i see folks not agreeing with you...maybe the hostility is within you....i see allot of that going on in the world,people projecting there thinking and world view onto everyone else....(in general) a thief will think that everyone else is a thief also.

since coming to this site....i've met(in real life)some really good hearted people that aren't criminals or up to illegal activity....if your genuine and earnest it will show in your post.....so i look forward to hearing "your" opinions....this isn't a "freeman" site....its a site for positive people....although from the greatest hardships can come the deepest realisations.....anyhow forgive me for going off topic

[vanilla]

Anyway we've gone off topic a bit. I really just wanted to know if people ever actually get away with legislative violations by claiming that the legislature doesn't apply to them.

This idea has been floating around for decades and I think you would have certainly noticed by now if it was true.

As Stephen points out, monopoly of force is all that is needed to govern, not consent.

[Freeman Stephen]

Is it governance or slavery when there is no consent?

[vanilla]

Is it governance or slavery when there is no consent?

I would say it's not simply a choice of one or the other, either could exist without explicit consent.

For me consent isn't what separates those two things, because on the one hand yes, restrictions on your actions could be considered a form of slavery, but on the other effective governance would be very difficult to achieve if explicit consent was required (e.g. if a person had to agree to be punished).

Would you consider the relationship between parent and child as slavery since there is no consent?

[madlookin]

Would you consider the relationship between parent and child as slavery since there is no consent?

good question!
personally,i would answer that this relationship should be based on love from the parents which... will/should...be reciprocated by the children....IF,parents treat the children like slaves,then they should be viewed as slavery....so what should be in question, is the quality of the parenting......as the quality of Governance should be checked.....if the citizens are being treated as economic slaves....then thats what they are.

This modern Big Brother society has come about over a long time very slowly....and....every one of us is responsible for the society we currently have (some more than others)....so we're also responsible for any change that comes about....i don't think i'm in any position to change another's thinking,habits or world view....i can first of all sort my own shit out (+ that aint always easy)....and hopfully one day set a good example to myself,family and neighbours....and i'm sure mistakes will be made....but,change is constant in this world....one way or the other

[Too Far Gone]

I've asked this question myself. And while all the posts are interesting, they don't cover the question being asked.

I would also like to know where the victories are for freemen?

Heavy metal started a thread about his car being taken and the steps he's had to take. This is probably the only information on the entire internet where restrictions on travel by car is being opposed. I really want him to continue the fight and ultimately gain success. So where's the council tax freemen who have totally succeeded? The PCN's seem to drag on for ever too with no concrete outcome.

I read a lot about people being put on notice for (let's say) £500 an hour, but does any ever get paid out? It all sounds great, in theory but I, for one, would like to see some wins in practice.

[madlookin]

personally.... putting the police on notice, and trying to claim £500 an hour from the police is bollox.....but if people want to try it...its up to them.....do people really believe the cops or those sorts would pay up?......and if we're not happy with how the system runs....why become like them and use the same tactics

for me....the best thing about the "freeman" info....is "No Contract" and how its applicable to many areas of our lives.....but i don't think thats really freeman info just common sense

[Freeman Stephen]

How do you define a "win"? Sounds like Im about to tell you to twist your head around into beleiving losses are victories, but all in all, the fact that there are a group of people willing to use force to demand obedience is as a starting point a loss.

Usually a victory (for lawful rebels) involves not having to pay a fine or tax or some other thing that the stick weilders claim you have a duty to do by virtue of the fact that they are weilding sticks ... oh and wrote something down on a bit of paper saying they can use their sticks to force you to obey them. There is a new type of victory though being chased aftrer by people like HVYMTL which I will go into shortly but first the usual victories.

These usual victories occur in several ways. Originally when a court upheld that some presumed duty did not subsist for some legislative reason, this was counted as a victory, but there were a lot of losses here too and it could be quite expensive and time consuming just to make the point that the judge is sovereign over the alleged duty bearer. Increasingly these days victories are being acheived through black holes in the system which cause certain demands to fall into limbo. A good example was the RTA fine and points where the system couldnt issue the endorsement until a refund from an oversized cheque was accepted. For example, a driver would get a £60 fine and would send a cheque for £61. They would be free from the three penalty points until they cashed the £1 refund cheque, which they promptly burnt. Thats a classic example, but there are alot more abstract situations where the same thing is occurring but whats the point in discussing it in front of those who would wish to close these avenues down.

Note that with the £61 payment example (I dont think this works anymore), even though there has been a victory in no points, there has been a cost of £61, which could be considered a pyrhic victory unless your loaded. So in many cases as mentioned before there are sometimes exhorbitant costs in time and money in getting your vistory. Turn this on its head, and you will find that the system will plunge in every resource it has available in promoting to you that you must do what they say. In short, they will spend alot of £61 trying to beat you and will hopefully end up as pyrhus did as we the people slowly but surely put the government back in its place beneath the people as our servants rather than the tyrants they have become.

Personally I cant recall any time in history when government has reached this stage and anything short of a bloody and violent revolution broiught about change, but thats another story.