Where to stamp a FRN

[Anthony Joseph]

No, I am not trying to JUSTIFY. Nor am I a servant of Mammon. But I do know more about Cops and their belief system than you do. The Sheriff is a SWORN SERVANT of what you call "mammons law". It is his JOB to uphold and protect that system. That is the sum of everything I have posted.

He is backed by an ARMY men, Judges, Attorneys and spiritual criminals who defy your "natural law" every day with ZERO repercussions.

You have no STANDING to make him do anything, he answers to the System he serves and gets paid very well to serve.

"In the mouths of 2 or 3 witnesses shall all truth be established."

If you put more stock in the witness of the Spirit to a fallen man in the service of the System than he does, that is YOUR error, not his.

Remember, there where Roman Soldiers near the Cross who testified of Jesus STANDING, but they did nothing to stop it.

Do not try to say I do not believe the Spirit cannot move people, I am proof it can, that is why I am here and not still strapping a gun on every day and "protecting and serving" the Spirit has witnessed to me EXACTLY what and WHO they are "protecting and serving".

Those men under-stand ONE THING, their own LAWS and STATUTES. I can use those laws and statutes just like Christ did, to show them they have no jurisdiction over ME and in their own diction and rules they do not rule over me.

Everything else is just a "patriot/religious conspiracy nut case and dangerous" because they are TRAINED that way.

You may be lucky enough to have a Sheriff who is different, but again, that is not the norm and it is not a protection for the rest of us who do not have that blessing.

In short, you have provided me nothing here from a Law enforcement stand point or a natural law standpoint that would have bound me when I was a Cop.

David has, it fits everything I know about natural law, Statutes, civil law, trust law, Scriptural Law et al.

And, more importantly THEY know it and are bound by it when I have the witness of a District Court to SEAL IT.

"Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven..."

That means truth and law it is re-cognizable no matter what "law" or god you are claiming you serve. There must be ORDER, because my God is not a God of Chaos, but one of Law and Order.

By your own statements your FAITH in your agreement has not been tested by fire. MINE HAS and not one of my former "brothers in arms" stood by me, in fact, they relished the thought of proving me wrong, including a Sheriff I once risked my own life to protect. They love the idea of seeing a "believer" fed to lions or at least, in cages with the rest of thieves and criminals. Been there, done that.

Peace be with you.

What a great asset to have you here martin earl! Were you on the old suijuris site under a different name?

I am interested in your offerings as to how you diffuse negative roadside encounters with conditioned and ignorant LEOs who attempt to impose their will over you. We already have information about properly identifying ouselves in our True Names, but I would like your perspective on the issue since you have been on the inside and know how they think and what their cognizant weaknesses/limitations are.

Great to have you here.

[martin earl]

What a great asset to have you here martin earl! Were you on the old suijuris site under a different name?

I am interested in your offerings as to how you diffuse negative roadside encounters with conditioned and ignorant LEOs who attempt to impose their will over you. We already have information about properly identifying ouselves in our True Names, but I would like your perspective on the issue since you have been on the inside and know how they think and what their cognizant weaknesses/limitations are.

Great to have you here.

Thank you! I posted as freecell on the other forums. I will be happy answer the other questions when I have more time. Just wanted to say thank you (and David) for your kind words and warm welcome to the forum.

[Anthony Joseph]

Thank you! I posted as freecell on the other forums. I will be happy answer the other questions when I have more time. Just wanted to say thank you (and David) for your kind words and warm welcome to the forum.

Aha! Freecell, I knew you were familiar to me. I enjoyed your offerings on the other forums and I look forward to your offerings here, welcome again.

[David Merrill]

Aha! Freecell, I knew you were familiar to me. I enjoyed your offerings on the other forums and I look forward to your offerings here, welcome again.

Me too. I have enjoyed Freecell's posts!

[martin earl]

Thank you all again! As for the officers standpoint on all this:

As David has pointed out, the Court takes place on the side of the road. The Officer makes a legal determination that a Statute has been violated and initiates the arrest. (The BS that it is a detention is ridiculous, detention only occurs after an arrest has been made, not the other way around).

Now, in most cases, the officer wants to get the "person" to Identify himself and sign the appearance promise. Why?

Because traffic court means 2 things to the Officer: First, a STAT, recorded on a weekly report of production. This is good for promotions and performance reviews, which means a raise or career advancement.

Second: Citations lead to traffic courts, which mean OVERTIME pay. Most courts happen while the officer is off duty, which means more money for going to court at a time and half pay rate.

Thus, David has shown us how to give the officer what he wants (or think so anyway) by giving them the Drivers license as a Drivers License (after all, nothing on the DL states it is for ID) it is what it says it is, it shows the STATE has tested the skills of an Operator of motor vehicles.

When one states "That is not to be used for ID..." he/she is in fact, RESTRICTING their ENDORSEMENT of the DL to that of its true legal nature, a DL and not ID. Thus not allowing the Officer to "fractionalize" or amend the DL into an ID.

But, the officer is not trained in law enough to see that, and since he is only looking for a STAT, goes ahead and writes the citation and gets the signature and promise to appear.

In my years of study, I have never been exposed to a better way to give the officer what he/she wants, avoid the "Sovereign Citizen" title and all its issues and set up a proper "refusal for Cause" for the man or woman to avoid the money making scam of non-injury, no-victim 'crimes' of statute infractions.

BTW, it is a common tactic of officers to LIE about who the arresting (or charging officer) is. When one officer screws up a charge, they will often bring in a higher ranked officer to actually claim the "arrest" for themselves in an attempt to salvage the case. This has ZERO bearing on the R4C nor what should be said or done on the side of the road.

In my opinion, the entire process of getting a DL should be controlled and recorded with a reservation of rights and all signatures done in True name and "without prejudice" or "all rights claimed/reserved" above that.

That way, the signature will match the DL, the application and the citation. Also, when getting the DL remember, their Birth Certificate should be used and the same thing should be said about ID:

"That is simply to get a drivers license, it is not to be used for ID nor is that paper "me or my self"". or something to that effect. When done with a smile, the clerk will most likely just get use it for ID, but not because you endorsed them to do that.

[Anthony Joseph]

Thank you all again! As for the officers standpoint on all this:

As David has pointed out, the Court takes place on the side of the road. The Officer makes a legal determination that a Statute has been violated and initiates the arrest. (The BS that it is a detention is ridiculous, detention only occurs after an arrest has been made, not the other way around).

Now, in most cases, the officer wants to get the "person" to Identify himself and sign the appearance promise. Why?

Because traffic court means 2 things to the Officer: First, a STAT, recorded on a weekly report of production. This is good for promotions and performance reviews, which means a raise or career advancement.

Second: Citations lead to traffic courts, which mean OVERTIME pay. Most courts happen while the officer is off duty, which means more money for going to court at a time and half pay rate.

Thus, David has shown us how to give the officer what he wants (or think so anyway) by giving them the Drivers license as a Drivers License (after all, nothing on the DL states it is for ID) it is what it says it is, it shows the STATE has tested the skills of an Operator of motor vehicles.

When one states "That is not to be used for ID..." he/she is in fact, RESTRICTING their ENDORSEMENT of the DL to that of its true legal nature, a DL and not ID. Thus not allowing the Officer to "fractionalize" or amend the DL into an ID.

But, the officer is not trained in law enough to see that, and since he is only looking for a STAT, goes ahead and writes the citation and gets the signature and promise to appear.

In my years of study, I have never been exposed to a better way to give the officer what he/she wants, avoid the "Sovereign Citizen" title and all its issues and set up a proper "refusal for Cause" for the man or woman to avoid the money making scam of non-injury, no-victim 'crimes' of statute infractions.

BTW, it is a common tactic of officers to LIE about who the arresting (or charging officer) is. When one officer screws up a charge, they will often bring in a higher ranked officer to actually claim the "arrest" for themselves in an attempt to salvage the case. This has ZERO bearing on the R4C nor what should be said or done on the side of the road.

In my opinion, the entire process of getting a DL should be controlled and recorded with a reservation of rights and all signatures done in True name and "without prejudice" or "all rights claimed/reserved" above that.

That way, the signature will match the DL, the application and the citation. Also, when getting the DL remember, their Birth Certificate should be used and the same thing should be said about ID:

"That is simply to get a drivers license, it is not to be used for ID nor is that paper "me or my self"". or something to that effect. When done with a smile, the clerk will most likely just get use it for ID, but not because you endorsed them to do that.

Very well stated and the added insight into the inner workings and thought process of officers and their superiors is very helpful.

I agree with your assessment and mental model in that these "things" (DL, BC, etc) do NOT identify us unless we consent or acquiesce to that falsehood. Without that endorsement, these "things" are rendered powerless and of no consequence. Along the way, the beast will reveal itself through DISHONOR in some way. When that occurs, all bets are off and all claims from that dishonorable standing become NULL and VOID. We of course are diligent and honorable record keepers as courts of competent jurisdiction rendering the only outcome possible to stay in honor; abatement. Anything else would necessitate further dishonor in order to catch and trap you into their venue. Coercion, trickery, deceit and bully tactics are the methods of choice for this type of attempted re-venuing. Societal conditioning and controlled public information and education makes for an overwhelmingly high "success" rate in this regard.

HONOR and DISHONOR; a rightful and lawful claim can only come from one of those two positions ONLY.