Crafty. What he seems to be saying is: you have to confess to being "in Kentucky" show some kind of prima facie evidence that he can without a doubt construe you to be "in Kentucky". Perhaps he isn't relying on evidence in the sense of overt evidence, because he is relying on mere presumption. That might explain "logical" as in "LOGIC: unrebutted presumption - rebuttal or contrary evidence = presumption stands as truth". I wouldn't say that it proves any hostility of the alleged government there. But instead it proves that you either bite or don't.He did confirm that he operates under the common argument that if one is physically in Kentucky, then the constitution and laws apply. I asked him what facts, if any, he relies on to support his argument. Larry stated it, “is not a matter of evidence.” He insisted it was “logical” though.
A better question is: "What does 'in Kentucky' mean?"
Reply With Quote