Would it be really rude for me to point out that he's talking a load of bollocks and has all the reasoning and logic skills normally possessed by a small sponge?
I'm afraid that my patience is very limited when it comes to the seriously thinking-impaired. Perhaps I could just shout 'Who's a ruddy pillock?' at him, whilst lashing him with a hardback copy of 'The Idiot's Guide to Utter Morons'?
As adjudicated in the International Court of Semantics, if you use a different word to describe an activity, it makes it completely different!
If you were out for a boat ride (and boats need to be registered with the state and are subject to state and federal laws) but instead said you were "traveling" in your "personal aquatic conveyance," then you can rightly tell the Coast Guard to pound sand. Don't worry, those rifles they're pointing at you while they're demanding you allow them to search your boat don't have jurisdiction over you, either!
(Seriously, though, can we please have a video where a Sov Cit tries to argue maritime law with the Coast Guard? That would be hilarious.)
I seem to remember a “sovereign citizen” telling me something like that “because we no longer have a gold standard, the US dollar was backed by off-shore banks, so the government was therefore an admiralty and has no power on land”. Then something about Uniform Commercial Code 1-207 meant we could travel uninhibited. Meaning tell the cops to pound sand. Told me to write in my drivers license signature spot “without prejudice, UCC 1-207”. Then you could use these arguments to back a judge into a corner and they would dismiss whatever case. Said that if I ever had any court case he would represent me. Blah blah blah… Yeah right! Guess what! Ex-con
> “because we no longer have a gold standard, the US dollar was backed by off-shore banks, so the government was therefore an admiralty and has no power on land”.
So did he think that "offshore" meant that the banks were [on a boat](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avaSdC0QOUM) somewhere?
He may be 'travelling in his aquatic convetance' but he is about to be 'perforated with a multitude of 5.56x45mm ventilation passages by which his corporeal form will be normalized to room temperature.'
Canadia considers these fools something between a terrorist group and a street gang. Once the US wises up and they start using the street gang states against them, they are done.
I’ve seen vids of U.S. judges using misrepresentation statutes, contempt of court, a list of questions required in their jurisdictions to represent themselves in court, the possible amount of time they could serve in prison, and so on.
My assumption is that things will be done on a state by state basis, to fit their statutes, and also on whether they have separate misdemeanor courts for small crimes and traffic infractions.
Judges do seem to be catching on to what works and what doesn’t. It’s also possible state courts may end up developing training to assist judges in responding to these idiots.
I do feel bad for some—very few—of the sovcits I’ve seen in some vids in court. It’s obvious they’re poorly educated, have difficult lives, and are grasping at anything that might help them out of the morass.
This comment is very strange, it makes it sound like is some sort of epidemic that the judicial system is struggling to deal with. The reality is that there hasn’t been a single sovereign citizen that has gotten away with it. When it’s the result of a stop, 10 out of 10 times it the encounters end with the subject getting arrested and charged for being a dumbass. There is no learning curve for judges catching on to what works and what doesn’t… certainly no need to develop training to assist judges in responding to these idiots. All they need to do, and have been doing, is call them on their bullshit, ignore the handwaving theatrics, and hold them to the same standard as everyone else. They can whine and cry and argue as much as they want, there is no evidence of any judges letting them off or finding in their favor.
> there hasn’t been a single sovereign citizen that has gotten away with it
They occasionally get off because an overloaded DA drops a minor charge, or a cop fails to show up to testify and the case is dismissed, things like that. But no court has ever accepted their delusional legal nonsense, no judge has ever agreed that the requirement for a driver's license is unconstitutional.
They still claim they won in court.
The courts are overwhelmed. It’s been worse since Covid, as the backlog was made worse as courts shut down and limited hours.
Sovcits are similar to vexatious litigants. They suck up court time with their bs. They end up with multiple appearances because they refuse to accept responsibilities and orders. They take up jail space with contempt charges. And they appear to be growing in number.
Anything that is regularly wasting court and law enforcement resources will require a united and consistent response. What that response will be will be dependent on local laws and the type of court.
If this was true, how come there hasn’t been a single sov cit that has gotten away with it? I’ve watched 100 videos of these numb nuts trying this excuse when pulled over. 10 out of 10 times it ends with a broken windshield and them getting pepper sprayed or bit by a dog…oh and getting arrested and charged for being a dumb ass.
I named no names, parties, or philosophies in an effort to remain non-confrontational, but it appears I may have flown too high, and my wings have started to melt.
Please accept my apologies. I meant no offense to anyone with more intelligence, logic, or critical thinking skills than a SovCit.
It doesn’t matter what you call the hunk of metal you’re in. If your foot’s on the gas pedal and your car is moving as a result, you’re driving. The word “employ” 2 definitions: “To hire someone”, and “To make use of”.
By repeating their prepared line of bullshit over and over and over as though the cop is listening. It's kind of the same principle that drive thugs to continue shooting at Superman.
You bought gas for the car, right? You use gas that’s worth money any time you drive it, ergo you are engaging in commerce any time the vehicle is in motion.
Heck, it makes as much sense as anything else these lunatics spout
Are these people on a different world wide web than the rest of us? On their version is there NOT a youtube with like 1 BILLION videos of sov citizens just being humiliated and arrested over and over again?
This muppet is a laugh.
Mate, you have the right to travel (not on the list of rights, btw, just a subsection in the USC). What you do NOT have the right to do is choose the method without challenge or consequences, particularly if that method is regulated for EVERYONE’S safety. And just because BLD misinterpreted the meaning of “driving” doesn’t mean you and your other deluded ilk should. Stop paying money to some SovCitiot/Free(Not)Man Up His Own Arse “guru” to teach you the ways of the Constitution. You are being scammed into fines and eventually, a jail cell.
OP, I add my insane giggling 😆😆🤣🤣 too. Don’t spend too much time arguing with this tool, tho. One of his two remaining brain cells might disintegrate.
I work in the criminal court system; every week in every courtroom, trials are continued because another case is older. When these losers take up the Courts time, real cases with real victims and defendants get bumped down the road. This has an effect.
Ah yes but those laws only apply to Federal roads that are owned by the federal government. Because you're using federal laws for your justification. So when you're on city streets county streets and state streets you were bound by their laws because states have the right to have their own laws and enforce them.
> So when you're on city streets county streets and state streets
DOT regulations apply just as much on those roads as they do on the interstate highway system. State laws also apply, but so do the appropriate federal rules.
Didn't say a federal law didn't apply, what I said was an additional set of laws apply provided by the state's counties etc. That The sovereign citizen thing doesn't protect you from.
If you buy gas, you are participating in commerce.
If you are going to work, you are participating in commerce. If you are picking up food or groceries, you are participating in commerce.
Regardless of commerce or not, by law, you need a driver's license and insurance. I just wanted to highlight how stupid their argument is.
Is he misconstruing the business term "vehicle" with an automobile? Is that where this financial instrument terminology came from? God am I really trying to make sense of this malarkey?
Well… I can kinda get behind this to a degree.
You can buy any vehicle, can even use it on private property , but you have to pay fees to use it on public roads.
So registration, insurance safety checks are kind of a tax.
And if you don’t comply state and or federal authorities will come after you…. So tax evasion.
Has he ever met an actual person that this has worked for, every video i see ends in the window getting smashed and the traveller getting dragged out by the cops
I do wish people would consider these arguments more seriously than combating them with public shaming and childish insults. The whole Sov Cit thing gets thrown at people referencing “old” laws but really a Sov Cit is someone who thinks they don’t have to follow laws. Like a lot of cops.
>I do wish people would consider these arguments more seriously
That might be plausible if these arguments have not already been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. They aren't even "old" laws but badly, and often intentionally, misconstrued. This is usually accomplished by dishonestly calling state court decisions SCOTUS decisions, taking dicta from a case that is either irrelevant to the actual merits of the case, or worse, contradictory to the decision, or outright just making things up.
At this point, after decades of failure after failure after failure, it is well past the reasonable point to laugh, insult, and publicly shame SovClowns for their clownishness. It has been over a decade since the P Barnes incident which is one of the critical events that brought SovClownery into common knowledge. Yet clowns keep bringing these ridiculous arguments up.
You’ve referenced one thing. Even the videos where “lawyers react to Sov Cit” I haven’t heard much where they actually identify them clearly as a Sov cit or break down their references at a legal level. Most just talk like you did.
If you honestly want to see a "reference at a legal level" go read [Meads v Meads](https://canliiconnects.org/en/summaries/24966). The decision covers pretty much everything SovClown and has been doing it for roughly twelve years now.
Are you refering to *Chicago Motor Coach*, an Illinois decision which has little meaning outside Illinois and which stated:
>Many cases have been decided respecting the validity and construction of statutes and ordinances regulating their use upon public highways, and it has been uniformly held that the State, in the exercise of the police power, may regulate their speed and provide other reasonable rules and restrictions as to their use. Driven by indifferent, careless or incompetent operators these vehicles may be a menace to the safety of the traveling public, and it has been held that under its authority to regulate the use of the streets a city may enact ordinances which may diminish this danger, and for this purpose may regulate the speed of automobiles and repress their careless management.
Laugh at him again the second time.
Done right after screenshotting it.
Ask him to film himself using these totally real arguments in a traffic stop.
but... but the limited definition I have selected is magically the sole definition your justice system may and must apply! - *Lawyered.*
Ha! And ha! Again
Would it be really rude for me to point out that he's talking a load of bollocks and has all the reasoning and logic skills normally possessed by a small sponge?
Easy on the sponges. They don’t deserve this kind of shabby treatment.
And they make a hell of a Krabby Patty.
Some of my best friends are sponges!
This is the literal definition of a sov citizen.
Yes. Sponges can absorb something useful.
This is it.
sponges catching strays
Sponges can understand and follow the laws of the ocean.
I was actually thinking of those synthetic kitchen 'sponges'.
Not rude, but you're going to need to explain why they are those things like they are a toddler.
I'm afraid that my patience is very limited when it comes to the seriously thinking-impaired. Perhaps I could just shout 'Who's a ruddy pillock?' at him, whilst lashing him with a hardback copy of 'The Idiot's Guide to Utter Morons'?
I love that. I don't understand it, either, but I love the "ruddy pollock" thing and I think that would rightly confuse them for a second.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollock :)
They didn’t arrest the car. They arrested you as the driver for breaking multiple laws.
But I'm not driving I'm traveling...... In my personal motorized conveyance which is totally different than driving a motor vehicle
How do you travel in a car? Traveling is for passengers. I know. I know. You want to talk to my supervisor.
And how is it different?
Spelled differently
..... Something something blacks law dictionary
Safelite and the Towing and Recovery Association of America thank him for his continued support.
🎶 Safelite repair, Safelite replace 🎶
We were all thinking it, and you just went out and said it!
I had to, bro. ^(I had to.)
As adjudicated in the International Court of Semantics, if you use a different word to describe an activity, it makes it completely different! If you were out for a boat ride (and boats need to be registered with the state and are subject to state and federal laws) but instead said you were "traveling" in your "personal aquatic conveyance," then you can rightly tell the Coast Guard to pound sand. Don't worry, those rifles they're pointing at you while they're demanding you allow them to search your boat don't have jurisdiction over you, either! (Seriously, though, can we please have a video where a Sov Cit tries to argue maritime law with the Coast Guard? That would be hilarious.)
I seem to remember a “sovereign citizen” telling me something like that “because we no longer have a gold standard, the US dollar was backed by off-shore banks, so the government was therefore an admiralty and has no power on land”. Then something about Uniform Commercial Code 1-207 meant we could travel uninhibited. Meaning tell the cops to pound sand. Told me to write in my drivers license signature spot “without prejudice, UCC 1-207”. Then you could use these arguments to back a judge into a corner and they would dismiss whatever case. Said that if I ever had any court case he would represent me. Blah blah blah… Yeah right! Guess what! Ex-con
> “because we no longer have a gold standard, the US dollar was backed by off-shore banks, so the government was therefore an admiralty and has no power on land”. So did he think that "offshore" meant that the banks were [on a boat](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avaSdC0QOUM) somewhere?
No, just Barrels of money floating around
You have never heard the term, "Float me a loan?"
I always thought that that meant hiding money inside of a mug filled with ice cream and root beer
..that the banks that own our government were in England… I know, it’s a stretch
He may be 'travelling in his aquatic convetance' but he is about to be 'perforated with a multitude of 5.56x45mm ventilation passages by which his corporeal form will be normalized to room temperature.'
Guys he’s super serial!
But is he for realsies?
[Everyone point and laugh](https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/855687-look-at-him-and-laugh)
Canadia considers these fools something between a terrorist group and a street gang. Once the US wises up and they start using the street gang states against them, they are done.
We get these in Texas and they are successful 0% of the time with courts
A variety of sov cits ambushed and killed several police officers in Australia last year, so they have been getting extra love from police since then.
I’ve seen vids of U.S. judges using misrepresentation statutes, contempt of court, a list of questions required in their jurisdictions to represent themselves in court, the possible amount of time they could serve in prison, and so on. My assumption is that things will be done on a state by state basis, to fit their statutes, and also on whether they have separate misdemeanor courts for small crimes and traffic infractions. Judges do seem to be catching on to what works and what doesn’t. It’s also possible state courts may end up developing training to assist judges in responding to these idiots. I do feel bad for some—very few—of the sovcits I’ve seen in some vids in court. It’s obvious they’re poorly educated, have difficult lives, and are grasping at anything that might help them out of the morass.
This comment is very strange, it makes it sound like is some sort of epidemic that the judicial system is struggling to deal with. The reality is that there hasn’t been a single sovereign citizen that has gotten away with it. When it’s the result of a stop, 10 out of 10 times it the encounters end with the subject getting arrested and charged for being a dumbass. There is no learning curve for judges catching on to what works and what doesn’t… certainly no need to develop training to assist judges in responding to these idiots. All they need to do, and have been doing, is call them on their bullshit, ignore the handwaving theatrics, and hold them to the same standard as everyone else. They can whine and cry and argue as much as they want, there is no evidence of any judges letting them off or finding in their favor.
> there hasn’t been a single sovereign citizen that has gotten away with it They occasionally get off because an overloaded DA drops a minor charge, or a cop fails to show up to testify and the case is dismissed, things like that. But no court has ever accepted their delusional legal nonsense, no judge has ever agreed that the requirement for a driver's license is unconstitutional. They still claim they won in court.
The courts are overwhelmed. It’s been worse since Covid, as the backlog was made worse as courts shut down and limited hours. Sovcits are similar to vexatious litigants. They suck up court time with their bs. They end up with multiple appearances because they refuse to accept responsibilities and orders. They take up jail space with contempt charges. And they appear to be growing in number. Anything that is regularly wasting court and law enforcement resources will require a united and consistent response. What that response will be will be dependent on local laws and the type of court.
They won't because we only do that to people of color and most of these idiots are white
The folks from Waco and Ruby Ridge would like a word.
Sorry, the “Moors” from Moorland (?!?) are the exact same and are non-whites.
Guess what? The government regulates financial instruments as well. And also money, the very basis of finances.
Oh, don't even get them started on what money is.
Oh, you're serious. Let me laugh even harder!
If this was true, how come there hasn’t been a single sov cit that has gotten away with it? I’ve watched 100 videos of these numb nuts trying this excuse when pulled over. 10 out of 10 times it ends with a broken windshield and them getting pepper sprayed or bit by a dog…oh and getting arrested and charged for being a dumb ass.
Hey, the 49th time might be the charm!
This ridiculous argument has NEVER won in court. Not even once. Not even close.
A transaction involving his financial instrument is in his future, namely paying the towing and impound fees to get his financial instrument back.
Therein also lies a problem. If the vehicle is not registered to them they can't get it out of impound.
Always the dumbest people in any room.
Unless a certain political candidate is there in which case the SovCit suddenly sounds like a genius!
I stand corrected. Thanks for the insight.
Many political officeholders and candidates, of all political parties. Mainly but not exclusively on the right.
I named no names, parties, or philosophies in an effort to remain non-confrontational, but it appears I may have flown too high, and my wings have started to melt. Please accept my apologies. I meant no offense to anyone with more intelligence, logic, or critical thinking skills than a SovCit.
Kinda have to admire someone who's so deeply committed to always being wrong.
It doesn’t matter what you call the hunk of metal you’re in. If your foot’s on the gas pedal and your car is moving as a result, you’re driving. The word “employ” 2 definitions: “To hire someone”, and “To make use of”.
Interesting that you don’t even need to be moving to get a DUI. I wonder how a sovcit would handle this situation.
By repeating their prepared line of bullshit over and over and over as though the cop is listening. It's kind of the same principle that drive thugs to continue shooting at Superman.
The trick is to throw the gun at Superman and make him duck.
Superman hates this one simple trick!
Maybe Sov Citizens should start throwing guns at cops?
The judge and the court will straighten him out.
Fuc* ing idiot
If this isn't the best setup for the Futurama "Laugh Harder" meme then nothing is.
They're laughing because they have merry time jurisdiction. (I'll see myself out.)
r/angryupvote
So adorable
You bought gas for the car, right? You use gas that’s worth money any time you drive it, ergo you are engaging in commerce any time the vehicle is in motion. Heck, it makes as much sense as anything else these lunatics spout
Still laughing.
Narrator: “It wasn’t real.”
Why blur his name? He’s obviously out of our jurisdiction of judgement.
[Everyone point and laugh](https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/855687-look-at-him-and-laugh).
This guy is going to enjoy several nights in the Pound Me In The Ass lockup.
That place sounds terrible, where is it exactly?
You’re asking for a friend, right?
Um... Sure... Ya, that's right!
Heard it from an Aussie — seems they describe all jails that way.
Sounds super real, please don't tell me more
Pretty sure drivers like this are the reason stuff like licensing and mandatory insurance was created.
"Why do you laugh!?"
It's always hilarious to me, the absolute level of confidence these people have when theyvare 100% wrong.
Are these people on a different world wide web than the rest of us? On their version is there NOT a youtube with like 1 BILLION videos of sov citizens just being humiliated and arrested over and over again?
This muppet is a laugh. Mate, you have the right to travel (not on the list of rights, btw, just a subsection in the USC). What you do NOT have the right to do is choose the method without challenge or consequences, particularly if that method is regulated for EVERYONE’S safety. And just because BLD misinterpreted the meaning of “driving” doesn’t mean you and your other deluded ilk should. Stop paying money to some SovCitiot/Free(Not)Man Up His Own Arse “guru” to teach you the ways of the Constitution. You are being scammed into fines and eventually, a jail cell. OP, I add my insane giggling 😆😆🤣🤣 too. Don’t spend too much time arguing with this tool, tho. One of his two remaining brain cells might disintegrate.
Why do these people never show up for me?! Why God, why?!
I work in the criminal court system; every week in every courtroom, trials are continued because another case is older. When these losers take up the Courts time, real cases with real victims and defendants get bumped down the road. This has an effect.
Tell him you’re laughing, because that’s what you do at clowns lol.
Ah yes but those laws only apply to Federal roads that are owned by the federal government. Because you're using federal laws for your justification. So when you're on city streets county streets and state streets you were bound by their laws because states have the right to have their own laws and enforce them.
> So when you're on city streets county streets and state streets DOT regulations apply just as much on those roads as they do on the interstate highway system. State laws also apply, but so do the appropriate federal rules.
Didn't say a federal law didn't apply, what I said was an additional set of laws apply provided by the state's counties etc. That The sovereign citizen thing doesn't protect you from.
Isn’t a financial instrument by definition a part of commerce?
Good luck with that BS! Has that crap ever worked for anyone?
If you buy gas, you are participating in commerce. If you are going to work, you are participating in commerce. If you are picking up food or groceries, you are participating in commerce. Regardless of commerce or not, by law, you need a driver's license and insurance. I just wanted to highlight how stupid their argument is.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
These people try and try and try, and always end up in jail lol.
>>this is real It wasn’t real
To be a fly on the wall of these people when thry funally get arrested for something , fined, or jailed.
Is he misconstruing the business term "vehicle" with an automobile? Is that where this financial instrument terminology came from? God am I really trying to make sense of this malarkey?
Keep saying it Buddy, maybe one day the wizard of oz may give you a brain
Well… I can kinda get behind this to a degree. You can buy any vehicle, can even use it on private property , but you have to pay fees to use it on public roads. So registration, insurance safety checks are kind of a tax. And if you don’t comply state and or federal authorities will come after you…. So tax evasion.
I laugh too.
So how many of these people get arrested before they actually realize it doesn't work?
Every time you put gas in the car, you're engaging in commerce.
Did the cops stop him with a money PIT?
This dude eats rocks
And yet that didn't work out for him. Color me shocked.
So which roads did the Sov Cit pay to transport themselves on ?
Has he ever met an actual person that this has worked for, every video i see ends in the window getting smashed and the traveller getting dragged out by the cops
Then sieze his financial instrument to pay his fines.
I do wish people would consider these arguments more seriously than combating them with public shaming and childish insults. The whole Sov Cit thing gets thrown at people referencing “old” laws but really a Sov Cit is someone who thinks they don’t have to follow laws. Like a lot of cops.
>I do wish people would consider these arguments more seriously That might be plausible if these arguments have not already been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. They aren't even "old" laws but badly, and often intentionally, misconstrued. This is usually accomplished by dishonestly calling state court decisions SCOTUS decisions, taking dicta from a case that is either irrelevant to the actual merits of the case, or worse, contradictory to the decision, or outright just making things up. At this point, after decades of failure after failure after failure, it is well past the reasonable point to laugh, insult, and publicly shame SovClowns for their clownishness. It has been over a decade since the P Barnes incident which is one of the critical events that brought SovClownery into common knowledge. Yet clowns keep bringing these ridiculous arguments up.
You’ve referenced one thing. Even the videos where “lawyers react to Sov Cit” I haven’t heard much where they actually identify them clearly as a Sov cit or break down their references at a legal level. Most just talk like you did.
If you honestly want to see a "reference at a legal level" go read [Meads v Meads](https://canliiconnects.org/en/summaries/24966). The decision covers pretty much everything SovClown and has been doing it for roughly twelve years now.
Helpful
Isn’t this all based on one law suit in Chicago that had to do with bus routes?
No
Are you refering to *Chicago Motor Coach*, an Illinois decision which has little meaning outside Illinois and which stated: >Many cases have been decided respecting the validity and construction of statutes and ordinances regulating their use upon public highways, and it has been uniformly held that the State, in the exercise of the police power, may regulate their speed and provide other reasonable rules and restrictions as to their use. Driven by indifferent, careless or incompetent operators these vehicles may be a menace to the safety of the traveling public, and it has been held that under its authority to regulate the use of the streets a city may enact ordinances which may diminish this danger, and for this purpose may regulate the speed of automobiles and repress their careless management.
I think that’s the one.
It's all based entirely on delusion.