- Messages
- 1,443
- Reactions
- 1,490
wow. and I think some of this is the basis for income tax protestors defense in tax evasion trials.Well here goes.....
During the AWB under the Clit On Admin
I got to meet Roland Jacobs & Mike McNall....
In my Driveway...
Bubba Clit had caused massive visits to 01 FFLs, etc.
& the Enforcement Gun & Badge guys were having to look into "Compliance" side issues.
I lived on property in the family since 1888, 1 driveyway, 2 houses, 1 old , 1/ 1925.
Strangers ask
"Is this 4758xx?"
I pointed to the Old House.
I had lived there since 1973, had my business there, used my ODL w/ that addy for everything incl 4473s.
"Are you RW?"
I turned my head, looked at them quizzically, and the younger one said
"We're Special Agents w/ the ATF... We'd like to talk to you...You're not under arrest or anything..."
For 20 min we had a kinda fun conversation.
I had bought a bunch of guns at a close by FFL store,
did all the gun shows, and an egotistical Storefront FFL way out in east pdx had told them to check me out. He made a habit of that & even bragged abt it.
So there we were. These 2 agents were gun guys, really didn't like what they were having to do. I asked at one point that if their jobs were such a PITA why did they keep it? Did it have a good retirement plan?
They both hung thier heads, pointed a finger up and muttered Touche!!
They let me know in NO Uncertain way that they couldn't stand Bubba.
We yakked abt a lot of things, and they stated that their concern was keeping guns out of the hands of BAD GUYS.. the kind that would go do harm to good people. I'm OK w/ that..
At some point my wife came walking out of the 1925 house, and of course they took note.
They told me that they didn't care if I had 5000 guns in the detached garage, they just wanted to be assured that I wasn't selling to Bad Arses & that They couldn't easily get them from me.
NOT Once had the discussion involved them coming to take our guns..
So the guy on the passenger side said
"Richard, Who's going to come & take your guns? .......
It ain't gonna be us, because there aren't enuf of us..., & besides...,
None of us want to get Killed!!!"
After a momentary pause they eased their way down the driveway, then he said Richard..,
should a man spend 5 years in Federal Prison for signing his name to a government form???"
my head sorta tilted & he said;
"IT DEPENDS."
We parted old friends who had just met.
Go to their web site. Study it.
Look at the definitions on the back of the 4473.
Find the one that has to do w the 1st question you fill out on the front. {The Straw Purchase thingy.}
18 USC??? defines Straw Purchase.
Whatever the Item, in order to be guilty of Straw Purchase you have to KNOW that you are purchasing said item for a Person who is OTHERWISE PROHIBITED BY LAW From purchasing that item,
& be doing it intentionally.
ATF quite simply REDEFINED US CODED LAW & plunked that onto the back of the 4473.
Look Just above the Signature block on the form.
You will find that you are SIGNING UNDER THE PENALTIES OF PERJURY.
That applies to any of the questions..
Then Go to UCC 1-207 [now 1-308] ;
" (a) A party that with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved. Such words as "without prejudice," "under protest," or the like are sufficient. "
{Why would any US citizen NEED to Write "UNDER PROTEST" ANYTIME YOU DON'T WANT TO LOOSE YOUR RIGHTS???
And don't let anybody tell you this Only Applies to Commercial Law.
YOU ARE A COMMERCIAL PIECE OF PROPERTY.
Without Prejudice UCC 1.207
When you use "without prejudice UCC 1-207" in connection with your signature, you are saying,
"I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial agreement that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally. I do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement."
[A 4473 IS a Contract]
UCC 1-207 goes on to say…
"When a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a reservation thereof,
causes a loss of the right, and bars its assertion at a later date." (UCC 1-207.9)
You have to make your claim known early. Further, it says:
"The Sufficiency of the Reservation: any expression indicating an intention to reserve rights is sufficient, such as "without prejudice". (UCC 1-207.4)
And at some point further on it states that if you Fail to Reserve said rights you can't come along in ANY COURT IN THE LAND & claim YOU HAVE ANY CONSTITUTIONALLY SECURED RIGHTS..
More HERE
This is all because in 1871 or 73 Congress UNLAWFULLY passed an Act Creating a Corporation to be Gvmnt for Wa DC.
The name of the act is gone in my mind,, something like the use of lefthanded portzebies or whatever.
The name of the Corporation???
"THE UNITED STATES, INC"
IF I AM fULL OF IRISH SHYTE, THEN WHY IS IT THERE?
Our beloved country is a Constitutional Republic.
But one hack at a time THEY have turned it into a Corporation,
kidnapping us into IT & IT's JURISDICTION by FRAUD &/ OR DECEIT making us CHATTLE PROPERTY!
We have traded our Constitutionally Secured Rights for Licensed Privilages.
And guess what??
Your Certificate of LIve Birth IS YOUR LICENSED PRIVILAGE TO LIVE!!!
Where is the Constitution For the States United Under IT?
Down in the cellar behind the stove where Grandma hid the Axe!!!
Rememeber, Some thing can be Legal but Not Lawful. Oregon's ORSs are mostly that!!!
[I had many examples stashed away & they has somehow vanished..].
HERE
EXAMPLE
The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:
The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.
Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.....
A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.
No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.
Strictly speaking, an unconstitutional statute is not a "law", and should not be called a "law", even if it is sustained by a court, for a finding that a statute or other official act is constitutional does not make it so, or confer any authority to anyone to enforce it.
All citizens and legal residents of the United States, by their presence on the territory of the United States, are subject to the militia duty, the duty of the social compact that creates the society, which requires that each, alone and in concert with others, not only obey the Constitution and constitutional official acts, but help enforce them, if necessary, at the risk of one's life.
Any unconstitutional act of an official will at least be a violation of the oath of that official to execute the duties of his office, and therefore grounds for his removal from office. No official immunity or privileges of rank or position survive the commission of unlawful acts. If it violates the rights of individuals, it is also likely to be a crime, and the militia duty obligates anyone aware of such a violation to investigate it, gather evidence for a prosecution, make an arrest, and if necessary, seek an indictment from a grand jury, and if one is obtained, prosecute the offender in a court of law.
SORRY TO BE SO WORDY.
Ever hear of or study in school,
THE DECLARATION & PETITIONS OF THE STAMP ACT CONGRESS , OCT 1765?
It's all in there.
Used to be able to find the PETITION TO THE KING, & THE OTHER 2 on the net.Not any more..
I am too lame to figure out how, or THEY CLEANED IT OUT!!
I have a copy. I'll figure out a way to get it on here.
then things like Law of ADMIRALTY PROCESS & Gold Fringe on the Flag might start to make sense.
