48776

Court Invalid

Social, economic and environmental issues in our ever-changing world.

Re: Court Invalid

Postby Walking Wounded » Oct 25th, 2017, 8:23 pm

sundancer1bc wrote:If the court is invalid, the judge has no rights over you, you're not a Canadian citizen, and that is not your name,
Then please stop cashing those cheques!

If that's not his name, isn't that fraud if he is cashing cheques? And one doesn't have to be a Canadian citizen to be charged and convicted of a crime in Canada. He committed a crime by attempting to smuggle guns into Canada, any person of any nationality can be charged if they commit a crime in any country.
User avatar
Walking Wounded
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 704
Likes: 3382 posts
Liked in: 865 posts
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2009, 10:25 pm

Re: Court Invalid

Postby alanjh595 » Oct 26th, 2017, 7:13 am

I also wonder if he carries a Canadian Passport to get into the USA?
User avatar
alanjh595
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 798
Likes: 246 posts
Liked in: 463 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 4:18 pm

Re: Court Invalid

Postby Bsuds » Oct 26th, 2017, 8:00 am

alanjh595 wrote:I also wonder if he carries a Canadian Passport to get into the USA?


They are not required to have one when crossing on land.
User avatar
Bsuds
The Wagon Master
 
Posts: 40920
Likes: 7084 posts
Liked in: 8915 posts
Joined: Apr 21st, 2005, 9:46 am

Re: Court Invalid

Postby LordEd » Oct 26th, 2017, 7:52 pm

Don't forget the fee schedules... Or saying their name is trademarked so any legal document using their name has a fee of x million payable in silver or gold.
LordEd
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3360
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 1869 posts
Joined: Apr 3rd, 2008, 8:22 am

Re: Court Invalid

Postby Green-light » Oct 27th, 2017, 11:20 am

The system is reaping the rewards of its own doing/undoing.
Playing devil's advocate:
If he nor his people have ever signed a treaty, then he is still on his own property nationwide.
This land was stolen, and taken under duress and falsified documentation. Under today's law(s) that needs to be dealt with back to the point of theft, or unlawful sale. That's the right thing to do.
If he does not belong to the Monarch formed country, on stolen land, then where is he at fault for not abiding by the laws of governing/government of a foreign country with no right(s) or jurisdiction over this land?
By the very law(s) of this lawless country, we have to give him his time and allow him to present his case. In his case, we do indeed have a situation that has been long set to the back burner. The simmer is gone and it's starting to scald. Time to deal with it.

So, how far do we go back to return stolen goods?
I presented a "my bike" scenario in another thread where I ask the questions:

If I buy a bike today and copy down the serial number, only to have my bike stolen tonight.
If I find that bike being ridden a day later, a week later, a month later, a year later, by someone that bought it off Craigslist, who is the rightful owner of the bike?

It's me.
Clear and simple case closed I get my bike back, thief gets fined for being a thief. Middle person gets fined for buying stolen goods.

Without complicating things, explain to me why each of you land owners is not holding onto stolen property?
Explain to me how this property is now yours or the Monarch's when the First Nations can PROVE beyond the shadow of doubt that this land was stolen from them by many unlawful and often sickeningly brutal means?
Whether coerced under duress, through language barriers/illiteracy, pedophiles, rapists, murderers and sadists running amok, these lands were not won in a war. They were not taken through a fair or free trade agreement.

This country is a farce as far as legitimacy.
A pedophile with a big boat lands on this side of the pond and calls it his.
He sadistically rapes, abused tortures and burns the people that have lived in balance on this turf, then goes back to sell his findings as though he owns the land.
Now, the forefathers of many of you agree to buy the land that is not theirs to buy, and the ball starts rolling.

Now a few hundred years go by and you all think the land and what they called a country, complete wit borders is rightfully yours?

Please explain.

From the devil's advocate perch, I can totally see this guys view.
Why shouldn't he have a couple hand guns?
He has no plan to sell them or use them on anyone or anything that he doesn't plan to eat.
Why should he concern himself with borders if he truly believes in his RIGHTS as a human being?

I put myself in his shoes (to an extent).
When I was young and liked to hunt small game, I made illegal firearms and used them.
Slamfire shotguns are easy to make and effective.
They're fun to make, and exciting to use to get some dinner.
Different sense of satisfaction to shoot a firearm you made yourself, loaded with a shell you packed and fetching dinner for tonight's meal.

Now, I can just imagine how that would have looked if I ever got caught with that firearm.
First off it wouldn't have been a home built firearm.
It wold have been a dangerous illegal weapon.
Secondly it would have been presented in such a way as to make it seem like I had a penchant for illegal weapons.
After all, in my teens I also had butterfly knives and nunchucks and tonfas.
Come to think of it, I also had duct tape, a ski mask and guitar strings.
Had a big dog too.

In the end, I liked my toys.
Never intended to harm anyone.
Never shot anything I didn't eat.
Always played safe (had to if I wanted to stay under the radar)

Who's to say this guy isn't just as innocent of malicious intent, but just as chock full of rebellion ?

For those interested, YouTube Slamfire Shotgun.
They're easy to make, effective and are not traceable.
What's not to like?
Green-light
Fledgling
 
Posts: 148
Likes: 8 posts
Liked in: 71 posts
Joined: Jun 3rd, 2009, 4:11 pm

Re: Court Invalid

Postby alanjh595 » Oct 27th, 2017, 11:51 am

To address your concerns about the character of the "person" here, just look at his long criminal record. This person is not a stable and worthy of trust by what his prior history is. To allow someone to have such powerful and accurate weapons, including the car he was driving is not in the public's best interest.
If he wants to hide behind his native heritage then he should live the life that his forefathers have provided and be void of ALL of the influences that the Europeans have developed and supplied to the rest of Canadian inhabitants, like cars, guns, roads, free medical, toilets, TV, internet, telephones, electricity, etc, ad infinitum.
He should have proven that he is as his ancestors had intended and stick to bows and arrows and riding bare back horses to get around and stay off the roads that he didn't build.
User avatar
alanjh595
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 798
Likes: 246 posts
Liked in: 463 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 4:18 pm

Re: Court Invalid

Postby Green-light » Oct 27th, 2017, 12:47 pm

alanjh595 wrote:To address your concerns about the character of the "person" here, just look at his long criminal record. This person is not a stable and worthy of trust by what his prior history is. To allow someone to have such powerful and accurate weapons, including the car he was driving is not in the public's best interest.
If he wants to hide behind his native heritage then he should live the life that his forefathers have provided and be void of ALL of the influences that the Europeans have developed and supplied to the rest of Canadian inhabitants, like cars, guns, roads, free medical, toilets, TV, internet, telephones, electricity, etc, ad infinitum.
He should have proven that he is as his ancestors had intended and stick to bows and arrows and riding bare back horses to get around and stay off the roads that he didn't build.


Let's be correct right off the bat:
I have no concerns about this person's character.

I saw a long list of offenses that all seemed to stem from one incident.
Aside from that deceptive list, I did not see a long list.

I have crossed paths with the law, and can speak from experience when I say:
You think you're doing one thing, but in the court of law, it takes you ten offenses to get there.
Long lists mean little these days.
One incident can fetch a "list from wrist to elbow".

You go on to speak of his gun offenses and driving to be a big concern. How have you determined that he is unsafe? If you are merely considering his charges, then I'd say in fact that you are drinking the juice. Text does not determine a person's character. Text is flawed as is it written by a person with an agenda. When judging someone's character, there is no room for flaws. Only if you know this person can you determine intent.

He is clearly not hiding behind his First Nations heritage. He is clearly displaying that. Stop misdirecting the conversation by adding your hate in between the lines.

Because of the desecration of this land, First Nations can no longer sustain themselves from the land as they once did. It's time for the weak and pathetic argument to die like the children warmed by diseased blankets not so long ago.
He is no longer able to follow the annual movements of food, nor the seasonal fruits, roots and veggies that his people once followed. You can stop speaking as though that should be an expectation for First Nations to live free from the lies, troubles and disrespect they have endured.

There are ways to live together on this land, but it takes growing pains.
People like this guy have to be the sacrificial lambs.
He will push boundaries that need to be pushed, and when the dust settles, we will be an inch or so closer to that point of balance.
It takes people willing to break laws, before laws will change.
Some, not all laws need to be put under review and sometimes it takes a seemingly unrelated incident to make that point.
That is to say that until Senk’lip's actions show their final repercussions, we won't know of what benefit his stand will show, if any.

It is true at the very least, that we need to address things in a different manner than we have in the past.
We need to have more consideration given from both sides of the issue.
We need to have more open minds and hearts matched with open dialogue in order to start to tip the scales.

It's unfortunate that there are lambs to be sacrificed, but until we develop into better, more mindful creatures it will always be the lambs that bleed who instigate the conversations that lead to change.

That all said, I'd just like to make a point for the record:
I do NOT support Senk’lip's attempt to cross the USA/Canada Border with two hand guns wired up under his car.

Everyone knows they go in the speaker boxes in the back window of your '78 T-bird.

geez

JayByrd likes this post.
Green-light
Fledgling
 
Posts: 148
Likes: 8 posts
Liked in: 71 posts
Joined: Jun 3rd, 2009, 4:11 pm

Re: Court Invalid

Postby GordonH » Oct 27th, 2017, 12:55 pm

GordonH wrote:Absolutely no one is above the law

Green-light wrote:who's law?


The law of Canada which covers from the Pacific to Atlantic to Arctic oceans.
User avatar
GordonH
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 18142
Likes: 1790 posts
Liked in: 5617 posts
Joined: Oct 4th, 2008, 6:21 pm
Location: Second star to the right and straight on 'til morning

Re: Court Invalid

Postby Green-light » Oct 27th, 2017, 1:30 pm

GordonH wrote:
GordonH wrote:Absolutely no one is above the law

Green-light wrote:who's law?


The law of Canada which covers from the Pacific to Atlantic to Arctic oceans.



says who?
Green-light
Fledgling
 
Posts: 148
Likes: 8 posts
Liked in: 71 posts
Joined: Jun 3rd, 2009, 4:11 pm

Re: Court Invalid

Postby GordonH » Oct 27th, 2017, 1:37 pm

GordonH wrote:The law of Canada which covers from the Pacific to Atlantic to Arctic oceans.

Green-light wrote:says who?

Okay, who says not to follow the laws of this country.
User avatar
GordonH
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 18142
Likes: 1790 posts
Liked in: 5617 posts
Joined: Oct 4th, 2008, 6:21 pm
Location: Second star to the right and straight on 'til morning

Re: Court Invalid

Postby alanjh595 » Oct 27th, 2017, 1:47 pm

His record goes back to 2003.

snip 3.JPG


Is 14 years worth enough evidence to be of poor character?
User avatar
alanjh595
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 798
Likes: 246 posts
Liked in: 463 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 4:18 pm

Re: Court Invalid

Postby LordEd » Oct 29th, 2017, 5:38 am

Two people making the same action in the same spot should have the same consequence.

If he truly believed he was outside the law, why even hide the guns?

Bsuds likes this post.
LordEd
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3360
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 1869 posts
Joined: Apr 3rd, 2008, 8:22 am

Re: Court Invalid

Postby Ka-El » Oct 29th, 2017, 6:41 am

GordonH wrote:
GordonH wrote:Absolutely no one is above the law

Green-light wrote:who's law?


The law of Canada which covers from the Pacific to Atlantic to Arctic oceans.

:up: Also known as the Criminal Code of Canada.

Green-light wrote: says who?

The only people I’ve ever seen try and dispute this condition of being subject to law are conspiracy theorists and those so-called “freeloaders off the land”. The great thing about the freeloaders is that sometimes a person might get the opportunity to watch one spit and sputter as they are taken away by Sheriffs after the Judge gets tired of listening to their silliness in Court.

Entertaining stuff. :smt045
Donald Trump: woefully unsuitable, unqualified and unfit to be president

Bsuds likes this post.
User avatar
Ka-El
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3331
Likes: 1573 posts
Liked in: 2568 posts
Joined: Oct 18th, 2015, 8:19 am

Re: Court Invalid

Postby alanjh595 » Oct 29th, 2017, 9:26 am

Even if someone was to just visit another country, they would be required to live by the laws of that country. When you go to China for a visit and took a gun, would you not expect to be imprisoned for the rest of your life when caught? If you take a political poster as a souvenir in North Korea you will get 5 years of hard labour and you can consider yourself very lucky to get out again still alive.
User avatar
alanjh595
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 798
Likes: 246 posts
Liked in: 463 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 4:18 pm

Re: Court Invalid

Postby Old Techie » Oct 29th, 2017, 9:31 am

Green-light wrote:The system is reaping the rewards of its own doing/undoing.
Playing devil's advocate:
If he nor his people have ever signed a treaty, then he is still on his own property nationwide.
This land was stolen, and taken under duress and falsified documentation. Under today's law(s) that needs to be dealt with back to the point of theft, or unlawful sale. That's the right thing to do.
If he does not belong to the Monarch formed country, on stolen land, then where is he at fault for not abiding by the laws of governing/government of a foreign country with no right(s) or jurisdiction over this land?
By the very law(s) of this lawless country, we have to give him his time and allow him to present his case. In his case, we do indeed have a situation that has been long set to the back burner. The simmer is gone and it's starting to scald. Time to deal with it.

So, how far do we go back to return stolen goods?
I presented a "my bike" scenario in another thread where I ask the questions:

If I buy a bike today and copy down the serial number, only to have my bike stolen tonight.
If I find that bike being ridden a day later, a week later, a month later, a year later, by someone that bought it off Craigslist, who is the rightful owner of the bike?

It's me.
Clear and simple case closed I get my bike back, thief gets fined for being a thief. Middle person gets fined for buying stolen goods.

Without complicating things, explain to me why each of you land owners is not holding onto stolen property?
Explain to me how this property is now yours or the Monarch's when the First Nations can PROVE beyond the shadow of doubt that this land was stolen from them by many unlawful and often sickeningly brutal means?
Whether coerced under duress, through language barriers/illiteracy, pedophiles, rapists, murderers and sadists running amok, these lands were not won in a war. They were not taken through a fair or free trade agreement.

This country is a farce as far as legitimacy.
A pedophile with a big boat lands on this side of the pond and calls it his.
He sadistically rapes, abused tortures and burns the people that have lived in balance on this turf, then goes back to sell his findings as though he owns the land.
Now, the forefathers of many of you agree to buy the land that is not theirs to buy, and the ball starts rolling.

Now a few hundred years go by and you all think the land and what they called a country, complete wit borders is rightfully yours?

Please explain.


From the devil's advocate perch, I can totally see this guys view.
Why shouldn't he have a couple hand guns?
He has no plan to sell them or use them on anyone or anything that he doesn't plan to eat.
Why should he concern himself with borders if he truly believes in his RIGHTS as a human being?

I put myself in his shoes (to an extent).
When I was young and liked to hunt small game, I made illegal firearms and used them.
Slamfire shotguns are easy to make and effective.
They're fun to make, and exciting to use to get some dinner.
Different sense of satisfaction to shoot a firearm you made yourself, loaded with a shell you packed and fetching dinner for tonight's meal.

Now, I can just imagine how that would have looked if I ever got caught with that firearm.
First off it wouldn't have been a home built firearm.
It wold have been a dangerous illegal weapon.
Secondly it would have been presented in such a way as to make it seem like I had a penchant for illegal weapons.apparently you do.
After all, in my teens I also had butterfly knives and nunchucks and tonfas.
Come to think of it, I also had duct tape, a ski mask and guitar strings.
Had a big dog too.

In the end, I liked my toys.
Never intended to harm anyone.
Never shot anything I didn't eat.
Always played safe (had to if I wanted to stay under the radar)

Who's to say this guy isn't just as innocent of malicious intent, but just as chock full of rebellion ?Ummmm.... his arrest record.

For those interested, YouTube Slamfire Shotgun.
They're easy to make, effective and are not traceable.
What's not to like?


Do you have a proof of purchase for this bike in order to confirm ownership?

I mean if we're going to go the devil's advocate route then anyone can copy down a serial number. That doesn't mean they own the item in question.

If that were the case I could run down to the local car dealership and take down a few VIN numbers. :biggrin:

The situation isn't quite as cut and dried as you make it sound.

The bike in your example was originally not purchased but rather found, hence it could be said that possession is nine tenths of the law, but the same applies to anyone owning land now, though they actually have a deed.
"Fools multiply when wise men are silent!" - Nelson Mandela
User avatar
Old Techie
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2182
Likes: 1791 posts
Liked in: 2961 posts
Joined: Apr 27th, 2013, 2:47 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Social Concerns

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests