13 replies to this topic

[Ca11um]

Hi,

What would you do in a situation like this :




I have seen a large number of similar videos and just wanted your opinion on these...

Cheers

C

Edited by Ca11um, 01 August 2012 - 05:07 PM.

[MikeBrum]

Harassment? That's a statute isn't it?!

Basically only consent to the laws that you're not about to break and try and confuse the police when they call you up on it - freeman way of thinking!

[Judge Dread]

Is bad spelling an offence?

[Kilo Sierra]

Its actually 165 RTA '88, not 185 (unless I'm hearing him wrong) but then again, he knew he could require them, thats good atleast. Its rather easy to critise whilst at home too.

I would have explained that his behaviour was evasive, as the officer clearly had purpose to the questions and he was purposefully refusing his details.

I would have confirmed that he was not wanted or missing or had conditions on him in relation to sexual offences etc, such as not to visit certain areas e.g. that street. I would have explained this.

The use of the HO/RT 1 is quite a interesting ways and means approach, but certainly legal and serves it's purpose.

Think the officer was calm though and give opportunity to conform, which whilst were largely ignored, were atleast in the correct direction IMHO.

Just another example of how the freeman (what a joke that is!) like to act all above the law as they have opted out, but they still are controlled by it and tow the line when they realise that their gobby, evasive and onstructive behaviour is not going to work on all (most) officers.

Their freedom of expression is given to them, so in reality isn't even free, its granted.

Back on topic though, wouldn't have done much differently, though might have highlighted the reasons for the information more.

J

[jvt1]

Might go to North Korea and try all this freeman stuff. See how far it gets me there.

[Judge Dread]

I'm not sure what the purpose of the freeman stuff is?

To get out of answering some questions (and end up getting arrested)?

Evade taxation, and end up getting arresting?

It's hardly like they're standing up to mighty injustice!

[Mayday]

In relation to his question of "Why didn't the police just request to see the video", we can't ask/demand to see any photos/videos taken can we?

[Ducky]

Did they mention the usual?

I only obey the common law
What is a law officer?
You've betrayed your oath!
That's admiralty law!
Assault, assault!

I'd watch it, but it's annoying.

[Chewie]

In relation to his question of "Why didn't the police just request to see the video", we can't ask/demand to see any photos/videos taken can we?

You can ask, they just don't have to show you (in the same way you can ask for their details, but they don't have to tell you).

[crunchybits]

I'm not sure what the purpose of the freeman stuff is?

"Freemen on the land" are people who believe that all statute law is contractual, and that such law is applicable only if an individual consents to be governed by it. They believe that they can therefore declare themselves independent of government jurisdiction, holding that the only "true" law is common law, as they define it. The "Freeman on the land" movement has its origins in various United States-based groups in the 1970s and 1980s, reaching the United Kingdom soon after 2000

Wikipedia is your friend for these poorly informed people - the list of cases they have lost makes for some interesting reading

http://en.wikipedia....men_on_the_land

As far as I can see Libertarians and Freeman are different sides of the same coin. The difference is, Libertarians ask permission for freedom, where as Freeman just do it. Not much time for them really as their understanding of the law is gibberish although it sounds plausible.

Edited by crunchybits, 01 August 2012 - 09:29 PM.

[rosco]

"Freemen on the land" are people who believe that all statute law is contractual, and that such law is applicable only if an individual consents to be governed by it. They believe that they can therefore declare themselves independent of government jurisdiction, holding that the only "true" law is common law, as they define it. The "Freeman on the land" movement has its origins in various United States-based groups in the 1970s and 1980s, reaching the United Kingdom soon after 2000

Wikipedia is your friend for these poorly informed people - the list of cases they have lost makes for some interesting reading

http://en.wikipedia....men_on_the_land

http://rationalwiki....man_on_the_land makes for interesting reading on the whole Freeman concept.

[special123]

they really do talk a whole load of rubbish.

"are you acting under oath bla bla bla"
"my fear got the better of me"

get a job, and a life, and actually contribute to society.

[Mr45G]

This guy is great. I am going to go to my local Libuary tomorrow and read up so I can be as intelligent, wise and knowledgable as him.
Seriously though, why can't we just take the example of European countries, that seem to have avoided becoming North Korea, and make it a legal requirement to carry, and produce at the request of a police officer, a piece of ID?

[gordon]

You must be pretty stupid to go somewhere planning to refuse to give your details (which may be your right), and then stand next to your own unlocked car.