Office of the Person

[BADecker]

Legally, men and women are not persons. The only way is if they say that they are and nobody objects. The following is in PDF format, and has linked references at the site. Go to the site and read the rest of it. It's only a few pages long.

Office of the Person:

The official state office known as "Person"

This is the single most important lesson that you MUST learn.
If you spend an hour to learn this material you will be rewarded for the rest of your life.
The word "person" in legal terminology is perceived as a general word which normally includes in its scope a variety of entities other than human beings. See e.g. 1 U.S.C. sec 1 and Church of Scientology v. U.S. Dept. of Justice (1979) 612 F.2d 417, 425.

One of the very first of your state statutes will have a section listed entitled "Definitions." Carefully study this section of the statutes and you will find a portion that reads similar to this excerpt:
In construing these statutes and each and every word, phrase, or part hereof, where the context will permit:
(1) The singular includes the plural and vice versa.
(2) Gender-specific language includes the other gender and neuter.
(3) The word "person" includes individuals, children, firms, associations, joint adventures, partnerships, estates, trusts, business trusts, syndicates, fiduciaries, corporations, and all other groups or combinations.

Example: NH RSA 21:9 Person. – The word "person" may extend and be applied to bodies corporate and politic as well as to individuals.

NOTE HOWEVER, THE DEFINITIONS STATUTE DOES NOT LIST “MAN” OR “WOMAN” – THEREFORE THEY ARE
EXCLUDED FROM ALL THE LEGISLATIVE STATUTES!!!

Under the rule of construction "expressio unius est exclusio alterius," where a statute or Constitution enumerates the things on which it is to operate or forbids certain things, it is ordinarily to be construed as excluding from its operation all those not expressly mentioned.

Generally, words in a statute should be given their plain and ordinary meaning. When a statute does not specifically define words, such words should be construed in their common or ordinary sense to the effect that the rules used in construing statutes are also applicable in the construction of the Constitution. It is a fundamental rule of statutory construction that words of common usage when used in a statute should be construed in their plain and ordinary sense.

If you carefully read the statute laws enacted by your state legislature you will also notice that they are all written with phrases similar to these five examples :
1. A person commits the offense of failure to carry a license if the person . . .
2. A person commits the offense of failure to register a vehicle if the person . . .
3. A person commits the offense of driving uninsured if the person . . .
4. A person commits the offense of fishing if the person . . .
5. A person commits the offense of breathing if the person . . .

Notice that only "persons" can commit these state legislature created crimes. A crime is by definition an offense committed against the "state." If you commit an offense against a human, it is called a tort. Examples of torts would be any personal injury, slander, or defamation of character.

So how does someone become a "person" and subject to regulation by state statutes and laws? There is only one way. You must ask the state for permission to volunteer to become a state person. You must volunteer because the U.S. Constitution forbids the state from compelling you into slavery. This is found in the 13th and 14th Amendments.

[1714843671]

1714843671

[1714843671]

1714843671

[1714843671]

1714843671

[franky1]

"person"
(facepalm) your still freemaning it i see

just wake up. again your a decade too late.
stop referencing guys with freeman rhetoric.

oh by the way
try bothering to even read
1 U.S.C. sec 1 and Church of Scientology v. U.S. Dept. of Justice (1979) 612 F.2d 417, 425

it will tell you about plain meaning..

the trick freeman try to do is by knowing common law is due to well known customs. such as common sense where a certain thing is commonly known.
freeman are trying to rewrite what is common' by trying to get people to think that a person is anything but a person. EG prtending a person is a pink dress wearing cow that can fly a helicopter.

and if they can convince enough peolpe that the common knowledge/common sense meaning of person is suddenly something else. they can then try to fight laws that use the word person

but the problem is
1 U.S.C. sec 1 and Church of Scientology v. U.S. Dept. of Justice (1979) 612 F.2d 417, 425
states that in law the plain meaning is just that. and people have the common sense and have customarilly used the word person in reference to a human whether they are just an individual human or a human doing a political job or a corporate job
person does not man it excludes a individual from the term it means it expands it to cover all foolish entities a human tries to pretend to be
such as freemen trying to say their name is a corporation


so person=human being
and freeman are not gonna win that fight.
its becoming just as bad as flat earthers trying to convince the earth aint round to try making some lame point

anyway try to actually do some research and stop copying and pasting freeman rhetoric

[BADecker]

"person"
(facepalm) your still freemaning it i see

just wake up. again your a decade too late.
stop referencing guys with freeman rhetoric.

oh by the way
try bothering to even read
1 U.S.C. sec 1 and Church of Scientology v. U.S. Dept. of Justice (1979) 612 F.2d 417, 425

it will tell you about plain meaning..

the trick freeman try to do is by knowing common law is due to well known customs. such as common sense where a certain thing is commonly known.
freeman are trying to rewrite what is common' by trying to get people to think that a person is anything but a person. EG prtending a person is a pink dress wearing cow that can fly a helicopter.

and if they can convince enough peolpe that the common knowledge/common sense meaning of person is suddenly something else. they can then try to fight laws that use the word person

but the problem is
1 U.S.C. sec 1 and Church of Scientology v. U.S. Dept. of Justice (1979) 612 F.2d 417, 425
states that in law the plain meaning is just that. and people have the common sense and have customarilly used the word person in reference to a human whether they are just an individual human or a human doing a political job or a corporate job
person does not man it excludes a individual from the term it means it expands it to cover all foolish entities a human tries to pretend to be
such as freemen trying to say their name is a corporation


so person=human being
and freeman are not gonna win that fight.
its becoming just as bad as flat earthers trying to convince the earth aint round to try making some lame point

anyway try to actually do some research and stop copying and pasting freeman rhetoric

Thank you for the compliments.

Don't we all want to be free? Or do you like being a slave?

Using the law to the fullest insures freedom. What's written in the doc I provided is an aspect of law that people don't often read about. Use it and be free. But don't use it crazy-like, like the freemen you are talking about might have.

[franky1]

your the freman.
your the one using the words and rhetoric

you even lack researching what you copy and paste

try spending more time researching your crap and less time trying to convince others that freeman rhetoric is real
and then when you do wake up dont then start trying to say that others are freeman to hide your the freeman

because its like your trying to convince people that your a helicopter not a human.. when you realise your not a helicopter then trying to convince people that they are the helicopter and you are the only human...

your just spinning yourself into circles

dont waste your time on the freeman stuff. research tresspass and contracts and find your escape of where freeman rhetoric goes wrong

[BADecker]

your the freman.
your the one using the words and rhetoric

you even lack researching what you copy and paste

try spending more time researching your crap and less time trying to convince others that freeman rhetoric is real
and then when you do wake up dont then start trying to say that others are freeman to hide your the freeman

because its like your trying to convince people that your a helicopter not a human.. when you realise your not a helicopter then trying to convince people that they are the helicopter and you are the only human...

your just spinning yourself into circles

dont waste your time on the freeman stuff. research tresspass and contracts and find your escape of where freeman rhetoric goes wrong

Thank you, again. I like being a free man. But I have to compliment you on your liking slavery. There aren't many people who enjoy slavery the way you do.

I know, I know. I'm a slave to capitalization and punctuation. But I'm free from a lot of ambiguity because of this. I guess freedom is in the eye of the beholder. Or, freedom by any other name is just as sweet.

[franky1]

lets pretend that you finally woke up to the freeman cult and instead diverted to constitutional law and common law(the real stuff)

constitutional law and civil law and common law of countries applies to its citizens. meaning by you trying to say you follow the constitution and want all your constitutional rights. means you are the same slave to the constitution

its the difference between
knowing you bodies physical capability to walk.
vs
demanding your 'right to travel'
by you demanding your right under law puts you in the same box you call slavery

if you really wanted to go against the laws and be independant from civilisation well your only way would be to go to a country without laws.
being an idiot and pretending laws dont apply to you because you declare your a new undocumented pronoun does not mean you have no responibilities or consequences in a country with laws.
you are just in olden times considered an outlaw or modern times a criminal for breaking the rules of law.
and no pretending your a pink dress wearing fairy that rides a mechanical bull will get you out of the consequences of braking the law.

so if you want to be a free man. find a deserted lawless island

have a nice day
or understand the real law. and use it to your benefit by learning what is allowed and not allowed and staying out of trouble

[BADecker]

lets pretend that you finally woke up to the freeman cult and instead diverted to constitutional law and common law(the real stuff)

constitutional law and civil law and common law of countries applies to its citizens. meaning by you trying to say you follow the constitution and want all your constitutional rights. means you are the same slave to the constitution

have a nice day

its the difference between
knowing you bodies physical capability to walk.
vs
demanding your 'right to travel'
by you demanding your right under law puts you in the same box you call slavery

There you go again, spouting freeman stuff. Why are you so hung up on it? I mean, don't tell me. But at least you said it clearly enough that you might be off your booze for a moment.

[franky1]

lets pretend that you finally woke up to the freeman cult and instead diverted to constitutional law and common law(the real stuff)

constitutional law and civil law and common law of countries applies to its citizens. meaning by you trying to say you follow the constitution and want all your constitutional rights. means you are the same slave to the constitution

have a nice day

its the difference between
knowing you bodies physical capability to walk.
vs
demanding your 'right to travel'
by you demanding your right under law puts you in the same box you call slavery

There you go again, spouting freeman stuff. Why are you so hung up on it? I mean, don't tell me. But at least you said it clearly enough that you might be off your booze for a moment.

your the one spouting it in many topics. im correcting your rhetoric.

[BADecker]

lets pretend that you finally woke up to the freeman cult and instead diverted to constitutional law and common law(the real stuff)

constitutional law and civil law and common law of countries applies to its citizens. meaning by you trying to say you follow the constitution and want all your constitutional rights. means you are the same slave to the constitution

have a nice day

its the difference between
knowing you bodies physical capability to walk.
vs
demanding your 'right to travel'
by you demanding your right under law puts you in the same box you call slavery

There you go again, spouting freeman stuff. Why are you so hung up on it? I mean, don't tell me. But at least you said it clearly enough that you might be off your booze for a moment.

your the one spouting it in many topics. im correcting your rhetoric.

There you go again, trying to correct my rhetoric with improper capitalization and punctuation.

I thank you for your good intentions, but try removing the log from your eye before removing the splinter from my eye... you know, like going back to grammar school, first grade.

[franky1]

im correcting the legal context. but all you can scrape the bottom of the barrel of responses, is over is my grammar.
my point is made

to respond to below badecker is in such denial about how wrong he is that he has resorted to being a grammar nazi
he has either become ignorant of his failing or realised his mistakes but doesnt want to admit he failed.
kind of petty

[BADecker]

im correcting the legal context. but all you can scrape the bottom of the barrel of responses, is over is my grammar.
my point is made

I didn't want to go to the bottom of the barrel, but that was the only way I could reach you.

I know, I know. When you use poor grammar, you have the excuse that nobody understands you. Poor baby... at the bottom of the barrel.

Don't worry. It's a standard size barrel. They aren't all that deep.