Is a name property ??

[Goldi]

I believe the basis of being detained on the street is probable cause.

Well if that's the case, we need to drill down exactly what probable cause is, and what it isn't. Probable cause is defined in the 4th amendment at the state and federal level as that which is supported by oath or affirmation. Further to that, there must be a major premise under scrutiny, not simply a minor premise "violation".

[Goldi]

Is a name, an appellation property?

I believe it is "unclaimed" property. Have you ever made a public claim? I think one could do that easily and then effect a quiet title on the name and establish a fee schedule for the use of it without your express written permission. If you keep it under the Small Claims limit in your state, you could be having some real fun with that. Because after all, isn't it always all about right, title and interest?

[Goldi]

[QUOTE="Forward to creator and owner of the name" then i put vital statistics address on it from the province in which i was born,
its been 7 months and i have not had another statement sent to me...crossing fingers still and hoping for the best, but it looks like i hit a nerve,[/QUOTE]

I've heard of at least 3 people claim to have made a visit to/called either the Sect'y of State or the Vital Stat's dept. in their state and ask who owns the name on the birth certificate. The answer was the agency owned the name. Then one guy got smart and said "excellent because I've got about several grand worth of bills to that name I need to pass along to you." He was asked to come back the next day which is when the agency clerk said, "sorry, my mistake, you own the name".

[shikamaru]

I believe it is "unclaimed" property. Have you ever made a public claim? I think one could do that easily and then effect a quiet title on the name and establish a fee schedule for the use of it without your express written permission. If you keep it under the Small Claims limit in your state, you could be having some real fun with that. Because after all, isn't it always all about right, title and interest?

Interesting idea !

[Michael Joseph]

Interesting idea !

David Merrill, was it Leroy Michael that was particularly adept at the King's Bench? I seem to recall him giving a lecture concerning how that works.

Shalom,
MJ

[EZrhythm]

I've heard of at least 3 people claim to have made a visit to/called either the Sect'y of State or the Vital Stat's dept. in their state and ask who owns the name on the birth certificate. The answer was the agency owned the name. Then one guy got smart and said "excellent because I've got about several grand worth of bills to that name I need to pass along to you." He was asked to come back the next day which is when the agency clerk said, "sorry, my mistake, you own the name".

I hope he didn't fall for their "mistake". There are a number of us who have been discharging accounts with, "This name and account number are property of the United States. Please forward to the owner in care of The Treasury of the United States."

We put those words across the statement and mail it back to whomever it was from.
Sometimes I'll add, "Demand is made for a true bill payable in lawful money pursuant Title 12, Section 411."

[Chex]

Without probable cause, there is no requirement for anyone to even utter a word nor provide any information to a cop during a "field interview". Nor is there any requirement for anyone to have a legal name or last name.http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ull=1#post7117

I would still like to see how this works from a law and officer standpoint.

Rich and Tom discussing Rich's day in court
http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web...=122402&cmd=tc

[walter]

I would still like to see how this works from a law and officer standpoint.

here is a good video of what the law does with out probable cause.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=1tLjKn6gLy8

[Michael Joseph]

How many argue Section 1 article 8 - lawful money is gold/silver. But there is a HUGE difference between a State and a District. File any cause in the USDC and you will find that on North Carolina the style will be as such:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

Notes are fine all day long within the Districts.

The contract was made in the District of Columbia; was to be there performed; and respected real property in Washington. Within this District, Congress has power to exercise exclusive legislation, in all cases whatsoever. Art. I, sec. 8, ch. 17

These terms unquestionably include the power to make treasury notes legal tender for all debts. Willard v Taylor, 8 Wall. 557 (1869) inhabitants of districts of a country occupied and controlled by an invading belligerent. The rules which would apply in the former case would apply in the latter; and, as in the former case, the people must be regarded as subjects of a foreign powerThorington v. Smith, 75 U.S. 1, 12 (1868)


Now therefore the Military Commander was tasked to create DISTRICTS - and notice that Within the Bounded Survey known as the DISTRICT of [INSERT NAME] we see notes.

Can you say WARD?

Have you been Re-Venue[ed]. Consider, have you been moved from one trust to another in your Undertakings? A venue is a place.

In my opinion, Re-VENUE is sort of like Re-PUBLIC-[ing] a people. Commercial warfare being waged in a mailbox.

[walter]

Have you been Re-Venue[ed]. Consider, have you been moved from one trust to another in your Undertakings? A venue is a place.

In my opinion, Re-VENUE is sort of like Re-PUBLIC-[ing] a people. Commercial warfare being waged in a mailbox.

i like to go to the oldest definitions I can find of the word to by-pass years of manipulation.

venue (n.)
early 14c., "a coming for the purpose of attack," from Old French venue "coming," from fem. past participle of venir "to come," from Latin venire "to come," from PIE root *gwa- "to go, come" (cf. Old English cuman "to come;" see come). The sense of "place where a case in law is tried" is first recorded 1530s. Extended to locality in general, especially "site of a concert or sporting event" (1857). Change of venue is from Blackstone (1768).


The mailbox (address) becomes the venue.

What cares more liability? the NAME or the address?

A relative of mine travels for work all around the world living in hotel rooms.
When back in Canada he never had a permanent home/address.
He called the CRA and asked them what to put down as his address on his income tax forms since he had none.
He also asked if he could use his friends address as a return for his tax's.

The CRA said that he could not file his tax's with out his own address and that he could not use his friends.
The CRA told him that he would have to wait until next year to file two years in a row when he did get himself an address.

The NAME had no liability until connected to an address in this case.
It was all about venue.

[David Merrill]

Commercial warfare being waged in a mailbox.

i like to go to the oldest definitions I can find of the word to by-pass years of manipulation.

venue (n.)
early 14c., "a coming for the purpose of attack," from Old French venue "coming," from fem. past participle of venir "to come," from Latin venire "to come," from PIE root *gwa- "to go, come" (cf. Old English cuman "to come;" see come). The sense of "place where a case in law is tried" is first recorded 1530s. Extended to locality in general, especially "site of a concert or sporting event" (1857). Change of venue is from Blackstone (1768).


The mailbox (address) becomes the venue.

What cares more liability? the NAME or the address?

A relative of mine travels for work all around the world living in hotel rooms.
When back in Canada he never had a permanent home/address.
He called the CRA and asked them what to put down as his address on his income tax forms since he had none.
He also asked if he could use his friends address as a return for his tax's.

The CRA said that he could not file his tax's with out his own address and that he could not use his friends.
The CRA told him that he would have to wait until next year to file two years in a row when he did get himself an address.

The NAME had no liability until connected to an address in this case.
It was all about venue.

The model I prefer is that the mailbox is an enclave. Residential Address carries a lot of connotations though; so I will not argue against that post at all.

[ManOntheLand]

In the USA, the address itself would seem to be Federal property, as you have no authority to change the address of the house you live in, do you? The address itself belongs to the U.S. Postal Service. If you claim it is "your" address, I believe you are connecting yourself to the U.S. (presumed citizen of the federal U.S.?).

For Federal tax purposes, providing even a "mailing address" seems to create a presumption that you "reside" in the state where that address is located.

For example, every Tax Court decision I have ever seen mentions (usually at the very beginning) that "At the time of filing his Petition,the Petitioner resided in (whatever state). This appears to be a statement made up front in the Court's ruling to establish its jurisdiction.

In the Tax Court rules for filing a petition in a levy action, oddly, the petitioner is required to provide "petitioner's mailing address" and separately required to state petitioner's "State of legal residence" implying that declaring your "legal residence" is in itself jurisdictional in a levy action. But in a Notice of Deficiency action, one is not required to declare a State of legal residence.

My guess is that they want you to declare your State of legal "residence" in a levy action so they know where to go to levy against you? Or maybe somehow you are giving them permission to do so by declaring where you "reside"?

I contested a levy action recently in Tax Court and did not declare a State of legal residence in my petition; but I did give a "legal address", including the city and the state of course. The Court later claimed in its decision that I had "identified my 'legal residence' as (the same state as in the mailing address I provided). According to this Court at least then, legal address=legal residence. A "care of" in front of the address might help avoid presumptions of residency from the use of a mailing address. And I probably did not help my cause by referring to the place I receive mail as my "legal address".

[David Merrill]

Very true - which is why Redeeming Lawful Money is such a great coverall remedy. It is designed for state banks originally - 1913.

Identify the res: res-ident.

[Michael Joseph]

Very true - which is why Redeeming Lawful Money is such a great coverall remedy. It is designed for state banks originally - 1913.

Identify the res: res-ident.

I take notice that the CONSTRUCT speaks of TERMS as they relate to the CONSTRUCT. In the name of Yehoshuah - now then, that's better....I take my refuge in Yehovah and my shade in El Shaddai. No Babylonian or Egyptian state can ever protect me from, well, anything. As far as I can tell a government big enough to give one shade is big enough to make one a slave.

Therefore, I don't trust man - his chariots [mind] is weak. Including this man. I rather stay on the Ever Living - I am resident in Him - Acts 17:28. The Commonwealth of Israel.

If I make a use of a SSN or a DL - I can still truthfully say - these things are not mine. So to the question - Let me see your [insert whatever] I can truthfully answer I don't have one of those. The illusion hinges on "Your". And any slick attorner will say but it is yours to use. Just as any slick will say that Federal Reserve Notes are lawful money. As in it is lawful to make a use of FRN's as a legal tender. And it is lawful to make a use of USN's as a legal tender; yet FRN's are not lawful money - but ONLY a legal tender; and, USN's are both legal tender AND lawful money.

Lawyers like to twist words - it is their only weapon - and since words don't mean much in the end - it is just the assimilation of ego's struggling against one another for dominance. What a shame when one thinks of the wonderful building that might be accomplished in cooperation.

Shalom,
Michael Joseph

[Goldi]

The NAME had no liability until connected to an address in this case.
It was all about venue.

Exactly, because the jurisdiction always follows the venue. And the IRS needs to collect taxes on income from sources doing business within the United States in order to claim that income as taxable. And BTW, "income" is a Subtitle A tax issue (go look up 26 CFR 1.61)and guess who is liable for that? Go look up 26 USC 7701(a)(16) to find the definition of withholding agent which then leads you to 26 CFR 1. 1441, 1442, 1443 and 1461 and all of those are foreign persons, corps and orgs.