Common Law.

Topical debate
User avatar
P_Trembath
Posts: 2161
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:55 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by P_Trembath » Sun Sep 02, 2012 10:01 am

"English Magistrate fails to prove juristiction"

The court?

Cwmbran. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cwmbran )

This raises so many questions................................


PS, whats the difference between "juristiction" and "jurisdiction"?
Everyone, Cornish or otherwise, has their own particular part to play. No part is too great or too small; no one is too old or too young to do something.

User avatar
GrahamHart
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by GrahamHart » Sun Sep 02, 2012 4:32 pm

As I've said. I'm only the messenger. If you really want to learn more about being a freeman, research it. I'm not doing it for you. I've given you plenty of links to do so. Otherwise, stay a slave to the system. My last word.

Rosko
Posts: 587
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:45 am

Re: Common Law.

Post by Rosko » Sun Sep 02, 2012 8:59 pm

On the whole, probably not far wrong, factotum... Sadly...

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Mon Sep 03, 2012 12:10 am

The meme "Common Law overrules Statute Law" seems to be powerful and spreading, but completely wrong in fact both here and in the US. What do you call people who believe something that's easily proved false and refuse to be moved by either evidence of reason? Deluded, might be the most charitable term. Many things governments would like us to believe are clearly untrue, since they may for instance contravene basic laws of physics like the conservation of energy, so anyone who accepts them must be deluded. However that doesn't mean that any bizarre idea that conflicts with the 'official line' must also be true. Furthermore introducing unnecessary looney ideas into the mix simply discredits the whole anti-establishment trend. Some suspect the dirty tricks dept. at work, who knows?

Crowsanwra
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:02 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by Crowsanwra » Mon Sep 03, 2012 10:32 pm

I did tax our car because the insurrance might be cancelled if I didnt and then what happens if you smack into someone? But the tele licence is up next month and I am hard up so like a lot who live around me, I might not pay it. More and more arent bothering too. Load of rubbish on it anyhow.

User avatar
GrahamHart
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by GrahamHart » Tue Sep 04, 2012 2:58 am

Firstly, In terms of your Car Crowsanwra :
It's not your Car. You gave it away to the DVLA when you registered with them. As you will note on the vehicle document, you are the "REGISTERED KEEPER"[ not the owner.] There is a process where you de-register you car and not need any documentation. However, with that, comes the duty of being a totally responsible road user.....and for the time being, continue to be harassed by the police.

As for your TV licence: No you most certainly DON'T have to pay £145 or whatever it is to fund the BBC propaganda machine.
:) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n54_XK77vX8
:) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n54_XK77vX8

You will find plenty of help at http://tpuc.org/forum/index.php?sid=968 ... 43c45e0f19 Or go to the link in the video.

Rosko
Posts: 587
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:45 am

Re: Common Law.

Post by Rosko » Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:01 am

You can be a totally responsible road user, and then some drugged up, speeding uninsured twat hits you and writes off your car. Before coming to a halt, your car takes out two pedestrians. One of them dies. Then what? You owe millions and go to jail? Or do you get off because the judge believes you when you tell him you're a responsible road user, with no tax, no insurance and presumably no MOT...??

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:35 am

The problem here is the spurious claim of some kind of right. For instance if you don't like the tele license there are many good reasons why you might want to refuse to pay with justification. The system is inappropriate now there are so many other sources of 'moving pictures', the BBC no longer have a monopoly or even a near monopoly as they did in the '50s, they are clearly very biased now (ask the Scots for a start!) even if that wasn't always so, and the collection system whereby they accuse people of breaking the law without a shred of evidence amounts intimidation. I'm only surprised there hasn't been a widespread campaign against this long ago. So you could (1) organise a campaign to abolish the license fee, or (2) refuse to pay and take the consequences, or (3) not have a tele (my choice btw). What you can't do with a clear conscience is simply claim to be above the law especially when you encourage others to follow your example by telling them they can't get into trouble (admittedly perhaps not too serious in this particular case). All this does is muddy the water and make it even more difficult for anyone to promote a legitimate campaign for reform. And likewise in all the other more important areas.

Btw. there may be a legal argument for objecting to fixed penalty fines and similar, especially if they seem disproportionate. However it depends on a single appeal verdict a few years ago which may or may not stand in the long run.

Rosko
Posts: 587
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:45 am

Re: Common Law.

Post by Rosko » Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:35 pm

If I were a fluent Cornish speaker, which obviously I'm not - I would not pay my full tv licence on the basis that I'm not getting my language broadcast on the bbc, so only getting a part service, in English, which my family & I do use, on occasion.

I also remember a few years ago, Mike Chappell publicly tearing up his own licence, down Malpas, in front of the bbc studios, in protest at the biased anti-Cornish coverage. I dont think they've dared do anything about it, so in a way, that proves that even one man can stand up and refuse to pay one particular tax, and do it for a good (Cornish) cause, successfully.

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Wed Sep 05, 2012 7:12 pm

Look, all you need a tele license for is to watch programs as they're transmitted (or possibly after the few seconds delay you get with digital services). Why bother when you can watch almost anything you like anytime you like over broadband quite legally? It makes no sense to me. Even before the net people had got into the habit of setting the timer on their VCR to record their favourite programmes for watching later at their own convenience. If you don't like the system then stop feeding it. Same with banks and many other things. If you have money to invest then invest it in your own community not the international money system which will spirit it away to who knows where and use it for who knows what, quite probably something to your detriment.

User avatar
GrahamHart
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by GrahamHart » Thu Sep 06, 2012 4:27 am

One question for you factotum: How do you think the world is doing under the present system ?
One question. That's all I asked. How many have you asked me ? This not about a TV licence factotum.
So. How do you think the world is doing under the present system ?

Rosko
Posts: 587
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:45 am

Re: Common Law.

Post by Rosko » Thu Sep 06, 2012 4:58 am

Shit... Same as before

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Thu Sep 06, 2012 7:04 am

To Hell in a handcart Graham ... but rabbiting on about all this Freeman nonsense is not helping anyone. If you're going to use the law then you have to use the law that is, that is that most people believe in and that the state enforces (which it can because most people believe in it and more or less agree with it). I've done more research and the whole Freeman business can be traced back to various ultra-right neo-nazi groups in the States, various con-men and violent unsavoury characters. Do you really and truly want to be associated with such people? Or with their watered-down British imitations? You'd be better off claiming that the Queen's writ doesn't run this side of the Tamar, there may at least be more than a grain of truth in that.

Rosko
Posts: 587
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:45 am

Re: Common Law.

Post by Rosko » Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:38 am

Yap... and more than a grain, too

Crowsanwra
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:02 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by Crowsanwra » Thu Sep 06, 2012 6:25 pm

Well like I said, I have taxed old bessie but as for the tele licence, we are hard up at the mo so were going to risk it for a few months at minimum. I have tried to understand the vrious links and looked up tele licences on the internet and you tube and more and more arent too bothered about it and some are even saying the vans cannot detect anything and you dont have to answer your door to the tele ppl or let them in or speak to them so begger it. Rubbish on the box anyhow.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest