Where to stamp a FRN

[Delawarejones]

Where does one place one's redemption stamp on a FRN? I've seen front and back placement. Ultimately, I do not think location is that important, only showing the fact that redemption has occurred.

Personally, I place mine on the front and over the legal tender language for two reasons.
1. Because of this link from the SF fed bank. Scroll to bottom and under did you know to read the second bullet:

More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender, and only the front of a dollar bill is valuable. If you could separate the front of a bill from the back, only the front half would be considered "money."

That is why I stamp the front of each FRN.

2. I choose to place it over the legal tender language because in my mind I am changing the nature of the FRN and therefore potentially altering the validity of the legal tender language.

Click on FRN to see enlargement or click on attachment 127 to download pic.

Delawarejones

[David Merrill]

Very good! I had not thought that through. I stamp the backsides so as not to put off cashiers. I am thinking that you might be charged with felony destruction of money/tender if you get to pushy about it. The Code reads that if you render the currency to have no value, then you are guilty of the violation. So that might simply mean you have made the bills unacceptable to a cashier somewhere.

I suggest you use water-based red ink. If you get a complaint then wash the notice out with soap.

The redemption, you understand is worthless on the bill itself. By the time you are holding cash, you have already made your demand; or not. That is important to understand. I am only stamping the bill for edification purposes.

However, it is indicated that when ordering transcripts and paying for court cases, the stamp on the bills may be quite effective to own the material instead of the state.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[motla68]

Good explanation, I like it. May I suggest another thing though, is to put a line through the serial number.

I had discussion with a friend who made demand for lawful money at the bank, after speaking with the bank manager the bank employee recorded the serial numbers to take them out of the system so the intent could really be for lawful money [ Public Money } and also that it could not be reissued, reducing the debt liability for everyone.

5. Deposit to Reduce Liability for Outstanding Notes
Any Federal Reserve bank may at any time reduce its liability for outstanding Federal Reserve notes by depositing with the Federal Reserve agent its Federal Reserve notes, gold certificates, Special Drawing Right certificates, or lawful money of the United States. Federal Reserve notes [12 USC 415. As reenacted by act of June 21, 1917 (40 Stat. 237); and as amended by acts of Jan. 30, 1934 (48 Stat. 339); June 30, 1961 (75 Stat. 147); March 18, 1968 (82 Stat. 50); and June 19, 1968 (82 Stat. 189). The act of June 30, 1961, is the Old Series Currency Adjustment Act.]
Source: http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section16.htm

4. If a taxpayer provides evidence that a remittance has been stolen and/or altered.

A. Obtain a written statement from the taxpayer that the original negotiable instrument was made payable to the United States Treasury (or Internal Revenue Service (IRS)) and sent to IRS.
Source: http://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-001-002.html

Also I had a discussion with an IMF employee about the contract forms within their system, they said it is illegal to completely remove words from the form and place new ones, this is like counterfeit securities, BUT it is ok to renegotiate the terms in a sense of putting a line through the words and write above it.

[Delawarejones]

Very good! I had not thought that through. I stamp the backsides so as not to put off cashiers. I am thinking that you might be charged with felony destruction of money/tender if you get to pushy about it. The Code reads that if you render the currency to have no value, then you are guilty of the violation. So that might simply mean you have made the bills unacceptable to a cashier somewhere.

I have had no complaints. No one questions them. A handful of cashiers will look at it, scrunch their face and usually put them in the cash drawer. One however, did pull out a marker to check the validity of the currency, i.e. 50FRN or 100FRN (this was a 20FRN). It was real, so she put in her drawer. Even the courts have taken them without question.


EDITED TO ADD: I am not worried about defacing/destruction of the FRN. I am doing neither. A FRN has value as long as there is 50% or greater of the note (it's not a note) remaining. Destruction is not occurring. Defacing? Nope, as the FRN has been redeemed, I am acting in "good faith," letting those who can comprehend its meaning to have the ability to make a choice regarding acceptance of public money. Good faith is what the law requires. If there is a problem, then the law can show me the proper way.

To date, no one has refused them. If they did, I would need them to state in writing that my FRNs were refused, signed and dated, and if possible company policy guideline and/or code. With that, I can make a legal determination of my own regarding my next course of action.
Delawarejones

[Delawarejones]

Good explanation, I like it. May I suggest another thing though, is to put a line through the serial number.

I had discussion with a friend who made demand for lawful money at the bank, after speaking with the bank manager the bank employee recorded the serial numbers to take them out of the system so the intent could really be for lawful money [ Public Money } and also that it could not be reissued, reducing the debt liability for everyone.

Also I had a discussion with an IMF employee about the contract forms within their system, they said it is illegal to completely remove words from the form and place new ones, this is like counterfeit securities, BUT it is ok to renegotiate the terms in a sense of putting a line through the words and write above it.

Good idea. After thinking about though, I do not think I would cross out the serial number. Here is why: if the FRN gets NOTICED by a fed bank employee, I want them to strike out the serial number or in whatever fashion they extinguish the notes. By striking through the serial number, I could see a determination made stating since the number is unrecognizable (eventhough it may not be), there is NO need to treat it as redeemed and to okay a reissue. I want the FRN to be redeemed on their books without giving them a reason to deny the redemption.

I am merely hypothesizing and assuming a fed employee will take ACTUAL NOTICE of the FACT the FRN has been redeemed.

Delawarejones

[martin earl]

"Because of this link from the SF fed bank. Scroll to bottom and under did you know to read the second bullet:
More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender, and only the front of a dollar bill is valuable. If you could separate the front of a bill from the back, only the front half would be considered "money."

You are missing one important nuance of the above statement:

More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender, and only the front of a dollar bill is valuable.

Those are 2 separate statements.

1."More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender".

2. "Only the front of a dollar bill is considered valuable."

If you will look more closely at any bill larger than the 1, you will find there are 2 notes, separated by a curved line and/or artistic curved lines, but there is always a solid line between the left side and the right side of the bill.

The left side NOTE (50%) is the FRN, all the lettering and the seal and the "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER...."

There is nothing on FRN side of the note that crosses the line to the NOTE on the right side, which is clearly titled "THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" has the Treasury seal and nothing about it being legal tender. The serial numbers match, but even they are separate registration numbers, one for the FED books, the other for the Treasury.

Notice the above quote is for "A" dollar bill. That definition does not speak for anything but the 1 dollar bill. Certainly nobody would agree "A DOLLAR BILL" is the same thing, legally or lawfully as "A 5 (five) DOLLAR BILL".

Now, compare again the 1 dollar bill to any other, the 1 is unique in that only it has no physical separation of Notes (boxes) from left side to right side.

I would be very careful about defacing the Federal Reserve NOTE (which only is the NOTE in the box to the left) in any way. Or the face of any 1 dollar FRN.

However, the US Treasury Note on the right of the FACE is already properly TITLED as what it is (Again, for everything above the 1 dollar denomination) and does not even need the "Redeemed Lawful money stamp".

Maybe since there is a 1 dollar coin already available, there was no need to have 2 separate Notes on the 1 dollar note, it is easy enough to redeem in coin?

Also, make no mistake, the Treasury Note is still on the right side of the face is still FIAT (not gold backed) UNTIL our demand for redemption per 12-USC 411. (If that were not true, the serial number on the US Note would be RED in color, not green) and there would be no way of knowing which of the 2 NOTES was being endorsed/used in any transaction.

After all, 300 million is still the max lawful amount of money mandated to be in circulation any given year. That is also the amount of GREENBACKS (the first FIAT national currency) that were backed by Gold in the 1800's.

Nearly all of those greenbacks were redeemed in Gold coin at Banks and were not seized again until FDR and the Gold seizure of 33/34, and then, US BANK NOTES (RED SEALS AND SERIAL NUMBERS) were issued, in that amount, and the people could take their FRN to any bank and redeem them for US BANK NOTES dollar for dollar.

I believe that gold coin, in that amount, is what "backs" our demand for redemption, since the FRN of today serves 'essentially the same purpose' as the US BANK NOTES did. (Still FIAT, but backed by Gold).

The design of the FRN was changed to include an UN-REDEEMED US Treasury NOTE and put in its own box on the Right side of the note for every denomination above the 1 DOLLAR FRN.

I believe the LAW is being fulfilled, as that is a requirement and function of law. By law, there must be 300 million Gold backed Publicly accessible "dollars".

Those Gold coins can be traced back to the 300 million in gold coins redeemed and then seized in the past and now held in Public Trust by the United States Treasury and your and use of those US Treasury Notes on the right side of the face is actually what NOTE you are using to conduct your private and public transactions.

That is how they (the Government agents) allow us and them to uphold the requirements of the law and still provide for the general welfare of the US Citizen. It is only by our endorsement and demand can they know which side of the LAW we are standing on and that dictates how they treat us, as Subjects or men and women with unalienable rights and lawful protections.

[David Merrill]

"Because of this link from the SF fed bank. Scroll to bottom and under did you know to read the second bullet:
More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender, and only the front of a dollar bill is valuable. If you could separate the front of a bill from the back, only the front half would be considered "money."

You are missing one important nuance of the above statement:

More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender, and only the front of a dollar bill is valuable.

Those are 2 separate statements.

1."More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender".

2. "Only the front of a dollar bill is considered valuable."

If you will look more closely at any bill larger than the 1, you will find there are 2 notes, separated by a curved line and/or artistic curved lines, but there is always a solid line between the left side and the right side of the bill.

The left side NOTE (50%) is the FRN, all the lettering and the seal and the "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER...."

There is nothing on FRN side of the note that crosses the line to the NOTE on the right side, which is clearly titled "THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" has the Treasury seal and nothing about it being legal tender. The serial numbers match, but even they are separate registration numbers, one for the FED books, the other for the Treasury.

Notice the above quote is for "A" dollar bill. That definition does not speak for anything but the 1 dollar bill. Certainly nobody would agree "A DOLLAR BILL" is the same thing, legally or lawfully as "A 5 (five) DOLLAR BILL".

Now, compare again the 1 dollar bill to any other, the 1 is unique in that only it has no physical separation of Notes (boxes) from left side to right side.

I would be very careful about defacing the Federal Reserve NOTE (which only is the NOTE in the box to the left) in any way. Or the face of any 1 dollar FRN.

However, the US Treasury Note on the right of the FACE is already properly TITLED as what it is (Again, for everything above the 1 dollar denomination) and does not even need the "Redeemed Lawful money stamp".

Maybe since there is a 1 dollar coin already available, there was no need to have 2 separate Notes on the 1 dollar note, it is easy enough to redeem in coin?

Also, make no mistake, the Treasury Note is still on the right side of the face is still FIAT (not gold backed) UNTIL our demand for redemption per 12-USC 411. (If that were not true, the serial number on the US Note would be RED in color, not green) and there would be no way of knowing which of the 2 NOTES was being endorsed/used in any transaction.

After all, 300 million is still the max lawful amount of money mandated to be in circulation any given year. That is also the amount of GREENBACKS (the first FIAT national currency) that were backed by Gold in the 1800's.

Nearly all of those greenbacks were redeemed in Gold coin at Banks and were not seized again until FDR and the Gold seizure of 33/34, and then, US BANK NOTES (RED SEALS AND SERIAL NUMBERS) were issued, in that amount, and the people could take their FRN to any bank and redeem them for US BANK NOTES dollar for dollar.

I believe that gold coin, in that amount, is what "backs" our demand for redemption, since the FRN of today serves 'essentially the same purpose' as the US BANK NOTES did. (Still FIAT, but backed by Gold).

The design of the FRN was changed to include an UN-REDEEMED US Treasury NOTE and put in its own box on the Right side of the note for every denomination above the 1 DOLLAR FRN.

I believe the LAW is being fulfilled, as that is a requirement and function of law. By law, there must be 300 million Gold backed Publicly accessible "dollars".

Those Gold coins can be traced back to the 300 million in gold coins redeemed and then seized in the past and now held in Public Trust by the United States Treasury and your and use of those US Treasury Notes on the right side of the face is actually what NOTE you are using to conduct your private and public transactions.

That is how they (the Government agents) allow us and them to uphold the requirements of the law and still provide for the general welfare of the US Citizen. It is only by our endorsement and demand can they know which side of the LAW we are standing on and that dictates how they treat us, as Subjects or men and women with unalienable rights and lawful protections.

That is some wonderful insight! Thanks!

[motla68]

In reference to the backing you mentioned, this was part of the New Deal F.D.R. mentioned.



I did a little searching for backing this up, I see where the changeover happened confiscating the gold, but so far as backing I have only seen information on stock commodities and not mortgages as it specifically states in the attachment, but depending on what stock commodities they could be one in the same.

[David Merrill]

In reference to the backing you mentioned, this was part of the New Deal F.D.R. mentioned.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]133[/ATTACH]

I did a little searching for backing this up, I see where the changeover happened confiscating the gold, but so far as backing I have only seen information on stock commodities and not mortgages as it specifically states in the attachment, but depending on what stock commodities they could be one in the same.

"held in trust"

[motla68]

Under president Gerald Ford:
August 14, 1974 - Congress authorized U.S. citizens to own gold; December 31, 1974 - private U.S. citizens were allowed to buy and own gold for the first time in more than 40 years.
http://www.usmint.gov/historianscorn...e&century=1900
(Click on the site and scroll down to category " 1974")

U.S. Citizens are statutory persons, subject to that trust construction. Those who have pledged themselves to the U.S. Corporate Construct Trust no matter what the circumstances. Blind ambition I guess.
http://www.manta.com/c/mm0pmlq/execu...tes-government
( Executive Office Of The United States Government in Washington, DC is a private company)

[David Merrill]

Under president Gerald Ford:
August 14, 1974 - Congress authorized U.S. citizens to own gold; December 31, 1974 - private U.S. citizens were allowed to buy and own gold for the first time in more than 40 years.
http://www.usmint.gov/historianscorn...e&century=1900
(Click on the site and scroll down to category " 1974")

U.S. Citizens are statutory persons, subject to that trust construction. Those who have pledged themselves to the U.S. Corporate Construct Trust no matter what the circumstances. Blind ambition I guess.
http://www.manta.com/c/mm0pmlq/execu...tes-government
( Executive Office Of The United States Government in Washington, DC is a private company)

If that were true, then you would know of remedy. There would be a remedy within the scope of the context you keep fabricating.

The remedy is written into the law and so the contract is with the Fed - endorsement. That is the contractual nexus you keep trying to fabricate with these bunnytrails and blind alleys.

[motla68]

If that were true, then you would know of remedy. There would be a remedy within the scope of the context you keep fabricating.
The remedy is written into the law and so the contract is with the Fed - endorsement. That is the contractual nexus you keep trying to fabricate with these bunnytrails and blind alleys.

Are we now calling the U.S. Mint a liar and Manta.com as well? If so how can I possibly work with this?

As described in previous posts I have no need for remedies, only have want for solutions:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?113-To-claim-quot-remedy-quot-or-not-to-claim-quot-remedy-what-is-the-quot-solution-quot&highlight=solution

I do not care any more about all this accounting lingo, nor did I ever give a crap about some money in some account somewhere. All I am concerned about is
energy spent, energy received. I do not believe the fruit of labor is money, what I do believe the that fruit is the time. We are talking natural law here, does a
child really give a crap about all the money and toys you can throw at them, NO, in most cases it is the time you spend with them is what counts.

The truth I know is in spirit, the only thing real to me. Lets get real here, this is not a brain trust, this is a paper trust here. I am doing the best I can to accommodate what you all seem to worship here. Unfortunately spirit cannot be put on paper, so I do with what I can, how I can. Much less all the details of conversation with a cop on the side of the road. I could have recorded it yeah, but that is acting like an attorney with a commercial interest, I am not looking to injure someone or be injured in commerce, I do not do as they do, their law is not my God.

As hard it is to believe I do not claim ownership to a name on paper, mom and dad said what she we call him NOT what shall we write him.
Seals are related to Sigil (Black Magic) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigil_%28magic%29
I have a sense that writing words down is casting spells, how do you create a form as in forming a letter? you have to cast it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spell

How do you get around this, not sure right now, but from what I have researched the Druids lived hundreds of years without a written language,
the only thing found was a Calendar which was said to be the most accurate one in the world.
Some of the most successful lawyers practice things in the mirror all the time that has nothing to do with what they learned in law school, it has to
do with reading postures and eye movements.
Through my conscious I see a lot of connections through this stuff, I allow the spirit to increase my knowledge, because knowledge is the Treasure, not this paper and metal we keep chasing after. 2 Ch 1:12 Wisdom and knowledge is granted unto thee; and I will give thee riches, and wealth, and honour, such as none of the kings have had that have been before thee, neither shall there any after thee have the like.
I know you do not give a rats behind about any of this, but I do and see a lot of connections that your not going to find in a law book anywhere,

You asked me to show some things from start to finish and I have, but where those who complain about my post you say, where is their success story? where is their completed posts start to finish? Is it fair to make the same demands upon me that they will not do themselves when it comes to a complete process? I think not.

[David Merrill]

Are we now calling the U.S. Mint a liar and Manta.com as well? If so how can I possibly work with this?

As described in previous posts I have no need for remedies, only have want for solutions:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?113-To-claim-quot-remedy-quot-or-not-to-claim-quot-remedy-what-is-the-quot-solution-quot&highlight=solution

I do not care any more about all this accounting lingo, nor did I ever give a crap about some money in some account somewhere. All I am concerned about is
energy spent, energy received. I do not believe the fruit of labor is money, what I do believe the that fruit is the time. We are talking natural law here, does a
child really give a crap about all the money and toys you can throw at them, NO, in most cases it is the time you spend with them is what counts.

The truth I know is in spirit, the only thing real to me. Lets get real here, this is not a brain trust, this is a paper trust here. I am doing the best I can to accommodate what you all seem to worship here. Unfortunately spirit cannot be put on paper, so I do with what I can, how I can. Much less all the details of conversation with a cop on the side of the road. I could have recorded it yeah, but that is acting like an attorney with a commercial interest, I am not looking to injure someone or be injured in commerce, I do not do as they do, their law is not my God.

As hard it is to believe I do not claim ownership to a name on paper, mom and dad said what she we call him NOT what shall we write him.
Seals are related to Sigil (Black Magic) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigil_%28magic%29
I have a sense that writing words down is casting spells, how do you create a form as in forming a letter? you have to cast it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spell

How do you get around this, not sure right now, but from what I have researched the Druids lived hundreds of years without a written language,
the only thing found was a Calendar which was said to be the most accurate one in the world.
Some of the most successful lawyers practice things in the mirror all the time that has nothing to do with what they learned in law school, it has to
do with reading postures and eye movements.
Through my conscious I see a lot of connections through this stuff, I allow the spirit to increase my knowledge, because knowledge is the Treasure, not this paper and metal we keep chasing after. 2 Ch 1:12 Wisdom and knowledge is granted unto thee; and I will give thee riches, and wealth, and honour, such as none of the kings have had that have been before thee, neither shall there any after thee have the like.
I know you do not give a rats behind about any of this, but I do and see a lot of connections that your not going to find in a law book anywhere,

You asked me to show some things from start to finish and I have, but where those who complain about my post you say, where is their success story? where is their completed posts start to finish? Is it fair to make the same demands upon me that they will not do themselves when it comes to a complete process? I think not.

Focusing:

As described in previous posts I have no need for remedies, only have want for solutions:

My intention in forming this Category as a Lesson Plan is to keep the Readers clarified about Remedy. That is what the 'Saving to Suitor' Club was formed around:

...saving to suitors in all cases, the right of a common law remedy where the common law is competent to provide it

If you are looking for solutions instead of remedy that makes no sense because in this context they are the same thing. If you are thinking there are solutions, that are not based in remedy, then you are talking about something else.

I think that to clarify the source of the friction between you and I will be very edifying to the Readers - and for that I thank you greatly - as it causes me to sleep on it, and to simply justify my implication that you are pushing fabrications. You keep pushing the idea that there is an account, but then you back off, saying:

I do not care any more about all this accounting lingo, nor did I ever give a crap about some money in some account somewhere.

If it makes no sense to me, then I have to doubt it is making sense to anybody else. You put some dots out there and I admit I even threw in a couple dots to make my point - that you do care about your premise, that there are funded accounts hypothecated upon the birth certificate. That is why you never paint a sensical portrait by connecting any more than two or three dots at once; like your MANTA link and out-of-context quotes from the Treasury. You just declare that you don't care and go into infantile deletion tizzyfits.

The source of the discrepancy is that the Emergency needs to be properly defined. Then the Readers and maybe you, can get it; why the 'saving to suitors' clause demands that when the US government turned over responsibility for money in America to the Fed, they had to provide remedy, yes remedy, to each and every one of us for us to decide - to make a conscious decision - with each and every cash-received transaction, electronic or not.

The original Emergency upon which IN GOD WE TRUST originated (1863) was:

No State, or Confederation of States may secede from the Union.

The Emergency of 1933 - the War on the Great Depression - was to save the Fed from the 20-year expiration of the Charters on Fed Banks. The bankers dealing in Fed Notes were about to make a run on the Fed - redeeming lawful money. That is the Trust;

...held in trust

Why can't we just redeem gold? Because we already spent it to Save the Fed! That is what FDR was pleading we cooperate with - saving the Fed by going into the New Trust (Deal) with our signature bonds on the backsides of the salary checks. He wanted us to form the new trust by endorsing it.

This is where the HJR-192 funding falls through for your fabrications.

Your constant attempts to convince me the birth certificate is being hypothecated on fail because HJR-192 (reinstatement of the gold clause) and the Emergency was ended in 1974-76. However, the emergency lives on in the Stipulation that another Bankers' Holiday may be called by either the President or the Secretary at any time - in order to save the Fed from the new Fed banks - the people supporting FDR's new trust of 1933.*

People do that by non-endorsing their paychecks. Remedy. That is the Solution. Same thing in this context. My responsibility, I feel, even with Internet Yarn is to make this as simple as possible. The hypothetical hypothecations you keep trying to fabricate are welcome as they express the same patriot mythologies that many suitors have broken free from. All that I did was help them to connect the dots - and when they kept trying and could not, they started seeking the simpler answer/solution/remedy naturally. It will come to light and that is what is so exciting about 'Saving to Suitors' Club!

As we redeem lawful money according to law, we are causing the Run on the Fed we bought out of in 1933 with all that gold.



Regards,

David Merrill.


* Pull up this image again and look at ; This is all based in the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act - the ability to seize gold during the War on the Great Depression. But we also find a duplicate citation - under the same number 95(a)

...the Comptroller of the Currency may designate by proclamation any day a legal holiday for the national banking associations

Next at the top) shows:

The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March 4, 1933, pursuant to the authority conferred by section 95a of this title, are approved and confirmed.

[David Merrill]

P.S. Your spirit, and expressing things of the spirit is great except for the limitations of language make the discussion subject to interpretation. The demands are those that you put upon yourself. We actually all put these demands upon ourselves and let's face it; you are showing us other people's success stories here - not your own. [You are having scanner/camera troubles, remember?] If suitors and others do not want to make that demand of themselves that is fine by me. Many of them have provided small samplings for me to sanitize so that I can do the same thing you have done; show some food for thought about the reproducible mental models that are useful in practice day to day where we need to depend on expressing ourselves clearly.

What I am addressing is your consistent assertion that America's participation in FDR's gold seizure was somehow dishonest. He presented his new trust and people began signing their paychecks into it. The gold was spent to save the Fed America loves enough to murder Presidents over when they start getting in the way. Watch the driver's (William GREER) left hand closely.

[martin earl]

From the perspective of a former Police Officer, (I am still a peace officer) I can tell you this and I will make it as clear as I can.

The Police officer on the side of the road has the discretion to cite, arrest, warn, instruct or arrest.

Many, many times people record "Success" because they think something they said or did had some lawful/binding effect on the cop, I can tell you, that is NOT the case.

More often than not, the Cop literally tells himself (or another cop tells them) "I am not dealing with this @#$T right now.

In my years of law enforcement, never ONE time did I ever hear a dispatcher tell any officer over the radio some kind of "WARNING: this guy knows the law and you better leave him alone."

With these exceptions: Diplomats. Dealing with certain Federal Law enforcement officers (FBI/CIA/SS) because the vehicle registration or the DL would trigger LE/undercover alerts in the NCIS system. Usually with a DNS/DND, Do not stop/Do not detain.

Or, dealing with high end military or Radio Active/ Nuke/classified transport vehicles. (In which cases NOTHING would come up on the computer or there would a Suburban on the scene soon enough and guys with heavy arms to politely explain to the State or city officer, in no uncertain terms, that vehicle was "HANDS OFF" and should the officer push the issue, well, he would lose, badly.

There are credible accounts of State officers being handcuffed to their own vehicles to while the vehicle they stopped drove quietly away. While I never witnessed this occur I did hear about it happening more than once.

In short, the Government does not re-cognise any Spiritual power (from you and I anyway) individual officers might, but that in no way is a REMEDY or Solution in my book.

There are tales of men living in the wilderness and being fed by Ravens too, is that a REMEDY or Solution to Grocery stores that is applicable to the average man or woman with a family?

With enough faith, I agree it could be, but the fact is, we live in a world where MONEY is depended on for daily living.

Within the rules of this world, their is REMEDY/Solution to that system which allows me and my family to conduct our business affairs with non-elastic lawful money, so that is what I will do.

Will this temporal act or law SAVE me? Nope, never claimed it would, but it is part of living a lawful life in this physical existence, and even the Master obeyed the law of the land He lived on.

What most spiritual warriors fail to see is this: The law is binding on all men, even the ones who hide behind Titles and offices of public trust. IF they choose to break the law, it does not mean I have the right not to bound by the same law.

That is what makes the DEMAND for lawful money binding on me and them, but they still have the choice to be a criminal, its called AGENCY and it is a crime for me to take agency away from another without DUE POSSESS of law, Spiritual or physical.

Part of MY due process is using and trading with lawful money, that is ORDER, I live the law to the best of my ability and knowing and then demand the protections it provides me, the nature of the law being both spiritual and temporal.