If you're not familiar with it, there is a movement of "sovereign citizens" who weirdly claim that they are above (or outside) the law, and are thus not accountable to law enforcement officers. When pulled over, there is a standard recipe wherein they claim:
- they have no obligation to provide their identity
- they have no need for a license or vehicle registration
- they are not "driving", they are simply "travelling"
- their vehicle is not a vehicle, it is merely "private property" and thus outside the law
It goes on, but the funniest part is that these yobs seem obsessed with taping their run-ins with the law, which almost always ends badly for them. Here's one example, wherein the "sovcit" runs into an officer who just doesn't have the patience for this kind of shit.
There's way more entertainment like this on Van Balion's YouTube channel.
BONUS TRACK: Here's what happens when a "sovcit" tries to pull this kind of bullshit in Canada. And it gets funnier when these idiots end up in court.
BY THE WAY, if you watch enough of these sovcit videos, the common denominator in all of them is that these dumbass sovcits never, ever, ever let a police officer finish a sentence. Check for yourself -- one interruption after another.
6 comments:
That defendant reminds me of Patrick Ross, you posted a transcript of him trying to get the court to strike Peter Skinner's defense, and Patrick made a total ass of himself. Do you still have a copy of that transcript? Is it still online?
I don't understand how they imagine any of this is going to work out. Like, they think that their country was set up in such a way that it has a secret code and anyone who knows the code is ungovernable. And, in all the years since, nobody ever thought "Hey, we'd like to be able to successfully prosecute crimes, let's, you know, make legislation to fix that!"
I mean really, how likely does that seem? Why would you build a country with laws and spend billions of dollars on cops and prosecutors and judges, just to have none of it apply to any fathead who learns a couple of key catchphrases? I can imagine an ideology that says the country's laws have no legitimacy and so morally, I need not obey them. But where does someone get the idea that the legal apparatus is going to agree with that and be set up to internally invalidate itself? It's beyond moronic.
(Side note: There is actually a a code that makes you largely immune to the law. You say "Look at this bank account. See all the zeroes?" Or rather, you get your people to say it for you)
Hmm... hasn't worked for me. Whenever I show my $0.00 bank balance they laugh. You think I should add more zeros, and if so, should they go before or after the decimal?
It's very much a "Patrick" strategy, based on a Patrick delusion - that what counts is "winning" the immediate interaction. And that's okay on twitter or in a bar or at the dinner table. It's a fencing match. It works as long until suddenly your interlocutor is a large, inflexible system, completely indifferent to YOUR rules of engagement, and with unlimited power to force your compliance.
In fact, it's a good summary of Trump's current strategy. He authentically doesn't seem to understand the difference between a campaign, where the points he scores with his primitive trolling can in fact be a "win", and a criminal case, where the only question that matters is "Did He Do It?"
I believe you want uninterested.
See: https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/uninterested-or-disinterested
It's magic; you make the right gesture and say the right words and you are magically shielded from legalese. Tell them to try Expelliarmus next.
ValJ
Post a Comment