Understanding The Contractual Relationship


In my last post, “To Protect And Serve” (link), we discussed the nature of the contractual relationship between the people and government. The importance of this relationship cannot be understated, as the authority and jurisdiction of government CODE, legal requirements, licenses, taxation, imprisonment, and everything else that is forced upon the people is done so through contract. And force is used upon the people when the stipulations of a legal contract are not met and the people decide to not cooperate with the law enforcement officers who protect and serve the people on behalf of government. As we discussed, protecting and serving does not mean protecting and serving your God-given natural rights, but instead it means to enforce the law through the protection of its continuity and uniformity, as well as to serve you with arrest, summons, process, and notices. To protect does not mean to defend you, and to serve does not mean to be hospitable to you or help you.

Again, the understanding of the following U.S. CODE explains this quite well…

42 USC § 1981 – Equal rights under the law

(a) Statement of equal rights

All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.

(b) “Make and enforce contracts” defined

For purposes of this section, the term “make and enforce contracts” includes the making, performance, modification, and termination of contracts, and the enjoyment of all benefits, privileges, terms, and conditions of the contractual relationship.

Protecting your rights to be punished, put in pain, penalized, taxed, forced to obtain licenses, and exacted (extorted) from is the job of a police officer, and the service of these “benefits” and “privileges” of extortion through process, notice, and summons is the requisite of that protection – the protection of the right of government to extort.

But the important aspect for the implementation of this protection and service is all based on what paragraph (b) defines as the contractual relationship. This relationship between you and government must be understood if ever you wish to stand up against this legal extortion via contract.

The interaction of police with you as a contracted or licensed citizen is a prerequisite for this interaction. In other words, the police must “identify” you through license or other form of identification in order to serve you with a process, summons, or notice. Agreeing to this contractual relationship is agreeing to being protected and served… and arrested, put in pain, and punished for non-compliance of contract.

A police officer cannot lawfully interact with you unless you are legally contracted with his corporation (government), giving him jurisdiction and authority (your permission and consent) to do so. As a citizen and licensed driver, you are within this contractual relationship.

The best way to understand this need for police to verify your legal person through legal license or other identification is to revisit an old confrontation I had with the Salt Lake City Airport Police. Keep in mind as you are watching this video that I did not have a contract in the form of a “permit” to be in the airport handing out fliers. I was in a public area, not within a secured area. As you are watching, you will realize what I was realizing as this event unfolded – that these police officers had no authority or jurisdiction over me or my actions because I did not sign a contract called a permit. If I had obtained this permit for free speech, I would have been subject to their will. But without the contract, they knew that they had no real power over me… except that of threat and coercion.

In my opinion, this was one of the most important “caught on tape” moments in modern history, and so here it is again. Enjoy!

Part 1:

“Free speech is not absolute.” – David J. Bywater, Airport Police

Illogical, irrational, unreasonable…

Notice that the police officer states as fact that if I violate the stipulations of the permit (which I don’t have), then and only then are my actions a misdemeanor. So why would I then sign a permit limiting my rights and giving this idiot permission to protect and serve me by arresting me and serving me process? He then states that I can get in trouble for not getting a permit – charged for the crime of not obtaining permission for free speech… That’s about as ridiculous as being charged with resisting arrest with no other charges for being arrested in the first place.

So if I don’t cooperate with military rule by obtaining a permit, martial law tactics of violence by police will be enforced. Cooperate with martial law military statutes or become a prisoner of the Civil War with no ending? Do you get it yet, folks?

Now watch as the media spins this and makes us look ineffectual. Notice that I completely explained the situation, and gave the media the opportunity to report on the absolute violation by Airport Police of my rights. Instead, they chose to protect the government; which is really their first priority – just as it is the police’s first priority. I also handed them my flier, chalked full of information about these scanners. Yet not one mention to the public as a service to the people. This is why you should never trust your major media, which is owned through collective government investments by the very governments (private corporations) who are destroying our way of life:

Part 2:

If you understand what happened here, you now understand that the contractual relationship between you and government is everything, and it allows the tyranny that you just saw and live under every day. Perhaps you haven’t experienced it first hand yet, but you will… Perhaps when forced vaccination of your child comes to town, or the banning of your fresh organic backyard garden that you don’t have a permit for. The contractual relationship is what allows peaceful military rule through the cooperation of the citizenry and through a martial law De facto government. The only reason that you don’t see the fact that martial law already does and has been in place since 1863 (General Orders 100) is simply the fact that you are contractually obligated to be cooperative and peaceful like sheep – and you consent to this every day. These police are acting under martial law, though they wont admit it or don’t comprehend it themselves. All police and military are the secret police, you see?

In these situations, the most important responsibility for you is to attempt to educate these men, who are acting under color of law but not true law. Your fate will be in the hands of these men some day.

If only I knew then what I know now…

Original Opt Out Day post with full radiation information on body scanners is here:

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2010/11/28/national-opt-out-day-the-most-important-story-you-missed/

Read it. Understand it. Print it. Us it!

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Wednesday, August 15th, 2012

Advertisements

How The News Uses Agent Provocateurs


As the time for Occupy Salt Lake protesters to be physically removed came closer, the news media spin machine jumped into action. For it is always necessary to occupy public opinion, especially when it comes to squashing the rights of individual Americans.

Here we see the conclusion to our Agent Provocateurs’ performance the day before the police and city workers marched on Pioneer Park and bulldozed all private property into a rather large industrial dump truck.

Now, as you can see, the ABC news editors were quite busy in the editing room making it look like this “crazy” man was one of the protesters, claiming that he was angry about being asked to leave the park as a protester, and was arrested as a violent protester.

Of course, as we documented earlier, not only were the real protesters demanding for this agent provocateur to clean up the mess he was making and to cease and desist from entering other people’s tents, but actually clapped their hands in praise of him being arrested for his actions, as HE WAS NOT ONE OF THE PROTESTERS!

That footage here:

Of course, this isn’t the only time that I have been a victim of the lies and clever editing crew of ABC News and its anchor Brett Hunsaker. Back in 2010…

And then Hunsaker lied to his public, after speaking with us for over half an hour and watching as we passed out hundreds of fliers…

The worse part about this? I apparently have no legal recourse to hold this propaganda spin machine called ABC responsible for its actions. All we can do is stop watching and supporting this CIA front.

But I suppose sitcoms are more important than peoples rights.

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Sunday, November 20, 2011

Consent – Why The IRS, Domestic, And Homeland Security Have No Lawful Power


Is Domestic Security a lawful department of the U.S. Government?

The answer to this question lies within the U.S. CODE that gives the Department of Domestic and Homeland Security its power in the first place…

But what gives this CODE its power?

In this article, I will be referencing the U.S. CODE of the government of the UNITED STATES – a private corporation. All CODES referenced are sourced below each reference.

If you still have any doubt that your government is a corporation, see the indisputable proof here: http://thecorporationnation.com/ or just keep reading… For those skeptics and doubting Thomas types, here is some instant gratification showing the ‘UNITED STATES’ non-representative corporate structure:

TITLE 28—JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE

PART VI–PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS

CHAPTER 176–FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE

SUBCHAPTER A–DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS

§ 3002. Definitions

15) ‘‘United States’’ means—

(A) a Federal corporation;

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00003002—-000-.html )


First, let’s look at the most important word in legal code. This powerful and lawful word is the only reason that the majority of our U.S. CODE has any power over us at all…

CONSENT

CONSENT: (v) (law) To acquiesce, agree, approve, assent, to voluntarily comply or yield, to give permission to some act or purpose. Voluntary Acquiescence to the proposal of another; the act or result of reaching an accord; a concurrence of minds; actual willingness that an act or an infringement of an interest shall occur. Consent is an act of reason and deliberation. A person who possesses and exercises sufficient mental capacity to make an intelligent decision demonstrates consent by performing an act recommended by another. Consent assumes a physical power to act and a reflective, determined, and unencumbered exertion of these powers. It is an act unaffected by Fraud, duress, or sometimes even mistake when these factors are not the reason for the consent. Consent is implied in every agreement. (Source: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/consent

ACQUIESCENCE: Conduct recognizing the existence of a transaction and intended to permit the transaction to be carried into effect; a tacit agreement; consent inferred from silence. Acquiescence relates to inaction during the performance of an act.

If you understand the definition of consent, you have a legal weapon more powerful than any physical weapon you can ever carry. For consent is the very act that gives much of our legal statutes and codes their power… and in turn, our code enforcers (police) power over us.

Consent, for legal purposes, is a verbal or attitudinal contract. If a police officer (CORPORATE CODE enforcement officer) tells you that you must obey a code that is not statutory law, you must voluntarily give that police officer power (consent) by agreeing (voluntary acquiescence) to obey him; for your compliance with his request is strictly voluntary. You must volunteer to follow and obey non-statutory law (CODE).

But as we read above, consent can be “inferred from silence”, or even from “inaction”. Therefore, silence does not constitute a lack of consent. Your unwillingness to acquiesce must be made known in a verbal statement (non-contractual denial of authority). For instance:

I do not consent to an unlawful search and seizure.

I do not give you consent to unlawfully search my vehicle or my person.

I do not consent to a full body scan or a full body pat-down.

I do not consent to your Prima Facie code requiring a permit for free speech, as it is my statutory and constitutional right to express free speech and travel unencumbered while on public property, which overrides the non-statutory code that you have just quoted me.

What is PUBLIC PROPERTY?

Public Property: (n) property owned by the government or one of its agencies, divisions, or entities. Commonly a reference to parks, playgrounds, streets, sidewalks, schools, libraries and other property regularly used by the general public. (See: common property http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/public+property)

Public Property refers to roadways, highways, sidewalks, airports (the entire airport), and any government held or owned building or business that is paid for by tax-payer money. Technically, all government property should be considered public property. After all, why should government have secrets from the people it represents, let alone property that it owns? It only owns property due to its corporate status. Complete transparency should be an integral part of a just and constitutional republic government…

Since the entirety of the airport was built with tax-payer money, and since the airport is a government building, the entire airport is public property. This means that the passageway to and from the entrance to the ticket counter to the bathroom to the gate all falls under one category: Public Property. Because of this, you have the absolute natural and constitutional right to travel on this public property, without permit, license, or any other form of legality. Law trumps legality every time. The only way you can loose this right is if you consent to the non-statutory CODE, which limits your God-given right to travel, and which requires your voluntary acquiescence to give up this right in lieu of a codified permit, license, or contract.

Statutory Law

-vs-

Prima Facie Law

This is not to say that all code is non-Statutory. In fact, of the 50 “TITLES” in UNITED STATES CODE, only 23 of those TITLES have been enacted into positive law; i.e. legal evidence of law (Congressional Statutory Law). These TITLES are as follows:

1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 23, 28, 31, 32, 35, 36,37, 38, 39, 40, 44, 46, and 49.

(Source: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/uscode/about.html )

Statutory law: Laws, or statutes, enacted by legislatures, such as the New Jersey State Legislature or the United States Congress. (Source: www.judiciary.state.nj.us/njcourts-09.htm)

Statutory law: Law enacted by the legislative branch of government (congress), as distinguished from case law or common law. A statute (i.e. statutory law) is an act of the legislature declaring, commanding or prohibiting something. (Source: www.mnbar.org/mocktrial/2007-08/GLOSSARY%20OF%20LEGAL%20TERMS.doc)

All other TITLES within the federal U.S. CODE (the topic of this writing) are what is called “Prima Facie” evidence of law. Prima facie is not statutory law (not made into law by congress), which means that it is only enforceable via your voluntary consent.

Prima Facie: (Latin) A legal presumption which means on the face of it or at first sight. (Source: http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/PrimaFacie.aspx)

Prima Facie: At first view; on first appearance absent other information or evidence — (Source: S. L. Lynch)

Prima Facie: Sufficient to establish a fact or case unless disproved < prima facie proof.  (Source: Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.)

So, now that we have established that more than half of federal U.S. CODE is in fact not statutory law by congressional decree, and is instead a legal presumption which requires voluntary consent, and with an understanding that legal and lawful are two completely different concepts with regards to your consent, lets take a look at the U.S. CODE that covers federal airport security operations: DOMESTIC SECURITY.

The Domestic Security and Homeland Security offices are Federal Executive Agencies (see below), meaning they are Departments created and appointed by the Executive branch of the government (the President). Part of the lawful measures that protect the freedom of the American people against the always evident tyranny of government corruption and absolute power is our system of checks and balances. Because of these checks and balances, any act of the president of the UNITED STATES (Executive Branch) alone or through any Executive office or officer he appoints does not have power over the Free People of America. In other words, the president is not a dictator, and cannot act as one through his appointed officers without congressional authority. This is the greatest of checks and balances…

TITLE 5—GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES  (TITLE 5 is Statutory Law)

PART I–THE AGENCIES GENERALLY

§ 103. Government corporation

For the purpose of this title—

(1) ‘‘Government corporation’’ means a corporation owned or controlled by the Government of the United States;

(2) “Government controlled corporation” does not include a corporation owned by the Government of the United States.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode05/usc_sec_05_00000103—-000-.html )

§ 105. Executive agency

For the purpose of this title—

‘‘Executive agency’’ means an Executive department, a Government corporation (see above), and an independent establishment.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode05/usc_sec_05_00000105—-000-.html )

§ 301. Departmental regulations

The head of an Executive department or military department may prescribe regulations for the government of his department, the conduct of its employees, the distribution and performance of its business, and the custody, use, and preservation of its records, papers, and property. This section does not authorize withholding information from the public or limiting the availability of records to the public.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode05/usc_sec_05_00000301—-000-.html )

TITLE 5

First, we must note that TITLE 5 is indeed Statutory Law.

SECTION 103 (above) confirms to us that “Executive Agencies”, regardless of their TITLES, are in fact CORPORATIONS – and in paragraph (2), that the federal government does indeed “control” corporations and also “owns” corporations.

SECTION 105 (above) then confirms that “Executive agencies” are the same as and are defined as “Executive Departments”, which are in fact “Government Corporations”.

SECTION 301 (above) then tells us what these “Executive Departments” (Government Corporations) have authority to do by this Statutory Law (as defined in TITLE 5 of U.S. CODE). And so we can see that these Presidential appointed “Executive Departments” only have the authority by congress to make regulations within the bounds of the Presidents’ own appointed Executive Agency, and not outside of said Executive Department, and definitely not for or over the free American people without their consent. “Executive Departments” and their appointed officials have no authority over the free people granted from within this TITLE (5), and only have been granted power over the “employees” within that Executive Department.

In other words, the law (CODE) states that the head of an Executive Agency or Executive Department can only make regulations for and within his own agency, not for and within the Free People of America.

And this is where CONSENT comes in to play. For it is simply your consent that gives these codified non-statutory presumed laws and the code-enforcement officers who enforce them authority over you. Without your consent, they are literally powerless. They have no authority without your consent.

Executive DOMESTIC SECURITY Department

DOMESTIC SECURITY and most of its presumed authority and legality, and therefore its power, is in TITLE 6. Title 6 is not one of the 23 TITLES of U.S. CODE enacted into “Positive” or Statutory Law. So, nothing in TITLE 6 is in fact statutory law, and therefore it requires voluntary compliance through your consent. Also, in TITLE 6, you’ll find much of the regulation and power related to “HOMELAND SECURITY”.

TITLE 6—DOMESTIC SECURITY (remember, TITLE 6 is not Statutory Law)

CHAPTER 4–TRANSPORTATION SECURITY

SUBCHAPTER I–TRANSPORTATION SECURITY PLANNING AND INFORMATION SHARING –

Reference to: EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 13416. STRENGTHENING SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY -George W Bush

      Ex. Ord. No. 13416, Dec. 5, 2006, 71 F.R. 71033

§ 1101(c) ‘‘security guideline’’ means any security-related guidance that the Secretary recommends, for implementation on a voluntary basis, to enhance the security of surface transportation

(Source: http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/06C4.txt )

Note: An Executive Order is an order that is not approved by Congress. It is an act solely of and by the President of the Corporation of the UNITED STATES that is not Staturtory Law nor constitutional. Since we have already established that the President is not a Dictator, these Executive Orders and Presidential Directives only apply to the Executive branch of the corporate Federal government and departments within, and only have authority over the Free People with their (your) consent!

Here in black and white it is written in U.S. CODE that the TSA’s security-related guidance is in fact voluntary, meaning its power derives from your consent to give up your constitutional rights and allow this Executive Department to have the power to violate your God-given and 4rth amendment rights.

TITLE 6—

CHAPTER 1–HOMELAND SECURITY ORGANIZATION (not statutory law)

SUBCHAPTER 1 – DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

§ 111 Executive department; mission

(a) Establishment
There is established a Department of Homeland Security, as an executive department of the United States within the meaning of title 5.

§ 112. Secretary; functions

(a) Secretary

(1) In general; There is a Secretary of Homeland Security, appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

(2) Head of Department – The Secretary is the head of the Department and shall have direction, authority, and control over it.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode06/usc_sec_06_00000112—-000-.html )

Section 112 states that the Department of Homeland Security is an Executive Department of the United States, as defined in TITLE 5. This means that the Department of Homeland Security is a Government Corporation, appointed by the President, who is not a dictator, and therefore this Executive Department requires consent by the Free People to have power and authority over those people. The Department of Homeland Security is not constitutionally lawful, as it is not consented to and made Statutory by congress.

Since the Secretary of Homeland Security is appointed by the President (with only the Senates’ consent), and indeed not the consent and approval of the Congress, and since this appointment is in TITLE 6 which is not Statutory Law, this tells us that there is no Congressional power behind the Secretary of Homeland Security over the actual Free People of America. In fact, the “Executive Departments” known as Domestic and Homeland Security has no authority over anyone outside of their own agency and employees. Remember… Washington D.C. (the Federal Government) is a 10 mile patch of land in the District of Columbia, and it is not located in and is not a part of the united states of America. It is a separate entity. A corporation. A country within a country.

To put this into perspective… let’s look at another Executive appointed office within the Executive branch of government. The President of the corporation of the UNITED STATES has appointed an executive department for the care of current corporate President Obama’s dog (the “first dog”). This department has the job of taking care of and grooming this dog, and is paid an over $100,000 salary plus $45,000 in benefits. But that is where his and his Executive appointed Departments’ power ends. He does not have the power to take care of your dog, and he certainly doesn’t have the power to force you or your dog to do anything you don’t want to do. But then, he might ask you or even tell you forcibly that he is going to feed, brush, and groom your dog! And if you wanted him to, all you’d have to do is to give Him and his “Executive Department” permission (consent) to do so, be it by verbal permission or lack of declaration of non-consent (inaction). Likewise, the Executive Departments of Domestic Security and of Homeland Security have no power to force you to do anything, especially to grope and hand-rape you and your children or to force you to walk through radiation expelling DNA destroying cancer causing devices… unless you give them permission (consent).

Remember, the President is not a Dictator due to governments checks and balances! And because of this, the President cannot dictate power over the Free People through any appointed office or political appointee. He is only in charge of the federal government as President of the CORPORATION. There are only two persons in the Executive Branch of government who have the peoples authority over the Executive Branch, but not over the people themselves: The President and the Vice President of U.S. INC. Every other officer, office, department, military branch (army, navy, air force, marines, coast guard, national guard etc…), and any other political appointment by the President has no authority over you, a free and natural man or woman – without your consent.

I cannot stress this enough. Your consent is the only thing that gives these bullies any power. This single word is the most powerful weapon in your arsenal against mislaid tyranny. It is a shield against the presumption of law, known as legality, or Prima Facie law.

The DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TITLE 49—TRANSPORTATION     (TITLE 49 is Statutory Law)

SUBTITLE I–DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

§ 102. Department of Transportation

(a) The Department of Transportation is an executive department of the United States Government at the seat of Government.

(b) The head of the Department is the Secretary of Transportation. The Secretary is appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

…….Note: Also very interesting in this section…….

…….An office to mitigate the effects of Climate Change (Chemtrails?)…….

(g) Office of Climate Change and Environment.—

(1) Establishment.— There is established in the Department an Office of Climate Change and Environment to plan, coordinate, and implement—
(A) department-wide research, strategies, and actions under the Department’s statutory authority to reduce transportation-related energy use and mitigate the effects of climate change; and
(B) department-wide research strategies and actions to address the impacts of climate change on transportation systems and infrastructure.
(2) Clearinghouse.— The Office shall establish a clearinghouse of solutions, including cost-effective congestion reduction approaches, to reduce air pollution and transportation-related energy use and mitigate the effects of climate change.
(h) The Department shall have a seal that shall be judicially recognized.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode49/usc_sec_49_00000102—-000-.html )

TITLE 49—TRANSPORTATION

SUBTITLE VII–AVIATION PROGRAMS

§ 40103. Sovereignty and use of airspace

(2) A citizen of the United States has a public

right of transit through the navigable airspace.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode49/usc_sec_49_00040103—-000-.html )

TITLE 49 is in fact Statutory Law by order of Congress, according to the list of U.S. CODES that are law above.

SECTION 102 states plainly that the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION is in fact an “Executive Department” – meaning it is a corporation that was appointed by the Executive Branch. And in Paragraph (B) it states that the Secretary of Transportation is an Executive (Presidential) appointed office with only the consent of the Senate, not of the congress. This makes the office of Secretary of Transportation Executive non-Statutory Law, and assigns no power over the Free People to this office or its Secretary.

SECTION 40103 in SUBTITLE 7 states that it is Statutory Law that transit through the “navigational airspace” is in fact a right, and not a privilege. This is important, because it reinforces the natural and constitutional right to travel freely by the American people, without permission, permit or regulation, throughout the land (and airspace). This TITLE is actually beneficial to the Free People, as this CODE recognizes the Free Peoples’ ability to travel as a right, not a privilege, and makes that a law – which severely cripples the “States” authority over you!

What is a RIGHT?

Public Right (as quoted in SECTION 40103): (n.) a right created by the legislature that may be exercised against the government. (Source: http://research.lawyers.com/glossary/public-right.html)

Right: (n.)  – 1) an entitlement to something, whether to concepts like justice and due process, or to ownership of property or some interest in property, real or personal. These rights include various freedoms, protection against interference with enjoyment of life and property, civil rights enjoyed by citizens such as voting and access to the courts, natural rights accepted by civilized societies, human rights to protect people throughout the world from terror, torture, barbaric practices and deprivation of civil rights and profit from their labor, and such American constitutional guarantees as the right to freedoms of speech, press, religion, assembly and petition.

2) (adj.) just, fair, correct.

Right: In an abstract sense, justice, ethical correctness, or harmony with the rules of law or the principles of morals. In a concrete legal sense, a power, privilege, demand, or claim possessed by a particular person by virtue of law… In Constitutional Law, rights are classified as natural, civil, and political. Natural rights are those that are believed to grow out of the nature of the individual human being and depend on her personality, such as the rights to life, liberty, privacy, and the pursuit of happiness. (Source: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Right)

So in general, a right can never be restricted. If it is restricted by your consent to a contract, legality, etc… then it is no longer a RIGHT, but a PRIVILEGE granted by government (the State). Again, CONSENT must be given to turn a right into a privilege, through verbal contract or a lack of verbal non-consent, or through a written contract (permit, license, etc…) which you sign, giving up your rights for the privilege to do something, like traveling freely in a car as a natural right -vs- driving a car with a license, which is a contractual permission to drive from the state and permission (consent) by you to be punished for not obeying their rules under contractual law.

The “STATE” and the “UNITED STATES”

-vs-

The Republic and the 50 states united

It is important to understand what the corporate U.S. CODE defines as “the State”, and how that relates to the 50 states that form the Republic of the united states of America.

You must remember that U.S. CODE is the code writen for the corporation that is UNITED STATES INC. It is the system of law set up for the federal corporation to follow. This corporate structure was created to build a legal bridge over the lawful constitution for the united states of America, whereas the corporation of the same name, UNITED STATES INC, can operate outside of that constitution. And they created the corporate equivalent of the constitution through such tools as U.S.CODE.

Read the following very carefully…

TITLE 28—JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE

PART VI–PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS

CHAPTER 176–FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE

SUBCHAPTER A–DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS

§ 3002. Definitions

(14) ‘‘State’’ means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States.

(15) “United States” means—

(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or

(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00003002—-000-.html )

TITLE 4–FLAG AND SEAL, SEAT OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE STATES

CHAPTER 4–THE STATES

Sec. 110. Same; definitions

(a) The term “person” shall have the meaning assigned to it in section 3797 of title 26.

(d) The term “State” includes any Territory or possession of the United States.

(e) The term “Federal area” means any lands or premises held or acquired by or for the use of the United States or any department, establishment, or agency, of the United States; and any Federal area, or any part thereof, which is located within the exterior boundaries of any State, shall be deemed to be a Federal area located within such State.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode04/usc_sec_04_00000110—-000-.html )


Once again, the U.S. CODE states irrevocably that the term “United States” is defined as a Corporation – In this case a “Federal Corporation”. This Federal Corporation was created strategically, to build a legal bridge over and bypass the real lawful declaration of independence and the constitution. This is not to say that the original constitution for the united states of America is not still in effect, but it is to say that as consenting citizens of the UNITED STATES as a corporation, we are bound by the corporation of the UNITED STATES and by its corporate rules, codes, legalities, and therefore its punishments, taxes, and fines as long as we consent and continuously enter into voluntary acquiescence of IT’S contracts, licenses, permits, and other contractually binding documents via our social security numbers (which are our livestock informational ownership ID’s)…

The word “State” is being defined here as anything other that the actual geographical land and Free People of the united states of America, and is being defined as all territory and PROPERTY of the corporation of the UNITED STATES. Here the “States” are not any of the 50 states of the constitutional republic. “States” in this CODE refers to something which belongs as property (a corporate term) to the UNITED STATES INC, the corporation. No state of the union is owned by the federal government according to the constitution, and no part of any of the 50 States is owned by the United States, for that would be against the precepts of the Constitution and the very foundation of the republic and the intentions of and enumerated powers of the federal government.

Paragraph (a) states that a “person” is defined elsewhere. After following the breadcrumb trail, I finally arrived here:

TITLE 26–INTERNAL REVENUE CODE

SUBTITLE F–PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 79–DEFINITIONS

§ 7701. Definitions

(a) When used in this title, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof—

(1) Person

The term “person” shall be construed to mean and include an individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association, company or corporation.
(14) Taxpayer

The term “taxpayer” means any person subject to any internal revenue tax.

TITLE 26–INTERNAL REVENUE CODE

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26.html )

Wow! This is the big one!!!

TITLE 26, which holds the INTERNAL REVENUE CODE that is used by the Internal Revenue Service as the basis to tax, steal, imprison, subjugate, and ruin the lives of many Americans… IS NOT STATUTORY LAW. IT REQUIRES CONSENT!

This means that the entire basis for the Income Tax levied on the people of America is strictly voluntary! You enter into an agreement with the IRS tax forms you fill out.

If  the word “taxpayer” as defined above in paragraph (14) is any “person” as defined above in paragraph (1) that is “subject to any internal revenue tax”, and if the U.S. CODE requires consent for the so defined “person” to be subject to any authority presented by the IRS and it’s non-Statutory, Prima Facie INTERNAL REVENUE CODE, then no individual Free Man or Woman in America is required to pay and income tax on their wages earned, unless they consent to doing so by signing the corporate IRS and IRC paperwork that binds them to the tax.

This is not the case with individual “persons” who own corporations, for the corporation is an artificial person, which is not a Free Man or Woman, given permission to exist by the U.S.CODE, and must obey these CODES as required in the INTERNAL REVENUE CODE listed above. It is not the individual “person” that owes the tax, but is instead the corporation for which that real “person” owns.

The question is, can that individual “person” be held responsible for paying Income Taxes to the IRS for their Corporation out of their own income from said Corporation. Is this not just a paycheck similar to every other “person’s” income, written by a separate entity called a corporation – an artificial person?

This is an interesting paradox… Can you be held accountable for your corporation’s debt to the IRS if the corporation is not you, a Free Man or Woman, but indeed a separate (artificial) “State”-created person altogether?

TITLE 5–GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES

PART I–THE AGENCIES GENERALLY

§ 103. Government corporation – For the purpose of this title—

(1) ‘‘Government corporation’’ means a corporation owned or controlled by the Government of the United States

(Sourced above)

TITLE 31—MONEY AND FINANCE

SUBTITLE I–GENERAL

§ 103. United States – In this title, ‘‘United States’’, when used in a geographic sense, means the States of the United States and the District of Columbia.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode31/usc_sec_31_00000103—-000-.html )

TITLE 5, repeated here from above, once again shows that the United States, for which TITLE 28 defines as a Federal Corporation, now helps to define what the word “State” means in this U.S. CODE. TITLE 5 helps to define the word “State” as a Government Corporation.

TITLE 31 is statutory Law. This TITLE declares that the “United States” are the 50 “States” (government corporations) of this “Federal Corporation”.


TITLE 18–CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE     (Statutory Law)

PART I–CRIMES

CHAPTER 109–SEARCHES AND SEIZURES

Sec. 2236. Searches without warrant

Whoever, being an officer, agent, or employee of the United States or any department or agency thereof, engaged in the enforcement of any law of the United States, searches any private dwelling used and occupied as such dwelling without a warrant directing such search, or maliciously and without reasonable cause searches any other building or property without a search warrant, shall be fined under this title for a first offense; and, for a subsequent offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

This section shall not apply to any person–

(a) serving a warrant of arrest; or

(b) arresting or attempting to arrest a person committing or attempting to commit an offense in his presence, or who has committed or is suspected on reasonable grounds of having committed a felony; or

(c) making a search at the request or invitation or with the consent of the occupant of the premises.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002236—-000-.html )

TITLE 18 is Statutory Law. Simply stated, paragraph (c) tells us that we have no recourse against the Agency Agent (TSA, Policeman, etc.) if we give our consent to be searched, meaning they can touch us anywhere and however the want if we consent to a search, and the fact that you do not deny your consent means that you are indeed granting consent to search and seizure, by which consent eliminates this protective CODE – as stated above in paragraph (c): “This section shall not apply to any person–making a search at the request or invitation or with the consent of the occupant of the premises.” This cancels this statute in court for use as in your defense, because your consent relieved any protective aspect of this statutory law. They could rape you because you gave consent, and this Statutory Law (CODE) would stop a courts’ ruling of rape, calling that rape or molestation a “consensual search”. VERY IMPORTANT!!!

By denying consent to be searched and/or to have your property seized by this Government Corporation/Executive Department, IT has no right or authority to interact with you, detain you, or block your way to freely travel without reasonable proof of a commitment of a felony, or in order to serve a warrant for your arrest (and a warrant would take a long time to acquire from a court).

Recap

Nobody has the right to see or check your plane ticket or ID but the airline in which you are doing business with. Only an airline representative can request your ticket. Unless the TSA and police have probable cause to detain you, you are not bound by these corporate code enforcement officers if you do not consent and acquiesce to their presumed authority. Consent and non-consent must be verbally stated, as inaction and silence can be considered as consent. Do not be intimidated by these power-hungry thugs in Federal Corporation U.S. INC  uniforms. Remember, their power is delegated by Statutory Law only to the 10 mile non united states of America piece of land called Washington D.C, and only within their own federal department – not over you as a Free and Sovereign man or woman. Stand your ground. Fear and intimidation are the only power they have. Without it, and without your consent, they are powerless – but only if you so declare.

If these Executive appointed federal government corporate workers threaten or try to intimidate you by standing in your way or telling or asking you to wait for a supervisor, do not comply. Simply state that you are a Sovereign man or woman, that you do not consent, that you do not give that federal employee any authority over you or your children (or property), and that they may not impede your God-given and constitutional right to travel nor violate any of your natural rights. Then politely ask if you are being detained, and am I free to be on my way.

You may also let the federal corporate employee know that you intend to sue them and their department head’s bond at a certain dollar amount ($100 per minute, for example) if they interfere with your free right to travel on public property by contractually and forcibly detaining you (by verbally claiming authority to halt your free travel despite your non-consent to their authority to do so).

Film this process. A video camera is your best defense and offense, and these thugs do not like being filmed. Video footage of this exchange is your record and evidence of your lack of consent in a court of law.

If they still intimidate you, follow up with a taste of their own medicine… State that you are warning them that anything that you say and do to me or my family can and will be used against you in a Court of Law, a Common Law Court, and as evidence for a Grand Jury.

And most important, do not answer any questions posed to you by these Federal Employees. You have the right to remain silent! Remember, they have no authority or rule of law on their side to interact or ask you anything without your consent. Answering their questions could be construed by them and by a corporate judge in a court of law as consent.

And remember, your local police and Airport Police work for the municipal corporation that is acting as a government in your city or county. They are corporations as well, making them corporate police or code enforcers. They need your consent too. They cannot detain you or restrict your movement without violating the warning you just gave them. You are a free traveler. You do not consent to their questions or their unlawful interference with your freedom of travel in a public place. Again, you are not required to answer their questions as you have the right to remain silent. Your answers can be misconstrued as consent to their authority over you, and you must verbally acknowledge that you do not consent (the only reason to break your silence).

Be polite. Never become confrontational, rude, or arrogant. A confident attitude mixed with a polite and straight-forward attitude is a winner every time. Do not get tricked into a “friendly conversation” or banter with a corporate code enforcement thug. It will only lead to frustration, argument, and possible unwitting consent. These guys are trained to trip up people like you – free people claiming their rights above corporate tyranny.

If you do not let the situation escalate, and instead control the conversation by simply not consenting to have a conversation or answer any questions, you are free to go by law and Statutory Law.

Warning: they may not step out of your way. They may stand in front of you and not say anything or that you are free to go to intimidate you further. They will tell you, however, if you are being detained. It is a chess game. If they step aside or if they do not, you should just start walking to your destination. Their consent to your rights is their inaction to detain you.

Remember, the courts are private corporations, often owned outright by the very judges who rule the court, and rent that court to the corporate government municipality unlawfully. These “judges” are corporate attorneys in fancy black robes, who work for the corporate government of the United States, and will always rule in favor of the “city”, “county”, or “state” corporation he works for. An attorney will never represent you in court. An attorney is there to ensure the continuity of court procedure, and by taking an attorney as representation for yourself in court, you have just contractually admitted to the corporate court that you are unfit and too mentally unstable to represent yourself in court. You are then a ward of the court. This is consent of the judicial system, which again is part of the corporation. Every judge works for the United States Corporation, and therefore his first interest is always to protect the corporate interest, to not set precedent that could be beneficial to Sovereignty and freedom, and is never concerned with justice for the people including yourself.

FEMA Camps, Oh My!

Now, some of you may be thinking, after years of fear and conditioning, that Homeland Security might throw you into a FEMA camp for such disregard of corporate legality and authority over your freedom. But guess what? FEMA is in TITLE 6, is an Executive Department, is not Statutory Law, and requires your consent of authority!

TITLE 6–DOMESTIC SECURITY  (TITLE 6 is not Statutory Law)

CHAPTER 1–HOMELAND SECURITY ORGANIZATION

SUBCHAPTER V–NATIONAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

§ 313. Federal Emergency Management Agency
(a) In general

There is in the Department the Federal Emergency Management Agency, headed by an Administrator.

(Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode06/usc_sec_06_00000313—-000-.html )

Constitutional Corporate Statutory Law?

Oxymoron?

Paradox?

One question remains… Even though some of these U.S. CODES exist in the Congressional Statutory realm of Law, can a corporation – a private for-profit non-representative corporation – enact any law over the Free and Sovereign people of the republic of the united states of America without their consent?

Constitutionally speaking… No.

The powers of the Federal Government are specifically enumerated in the constitution.

More importantly, nowhere does it mention that a vile corporation should be given power to take the place of this constitutionally created representative federal government and then enact laws and CODES which break free of these enumerated powers. Therefore, if we examine the source of this U.S. CODE, no office in the Federal Government can have lawful power over the people unless it is consented to by the Free People, simply because the whole of the private Corporation known today as the Federal Government of the UNITED STATES is not a constitutional entity. Thus even the Statutory Laws based on U.S. CODE are not constitutional, and therefore require our consent as Free People. No corporation can be government, nor can a private corporation nor their corporate code-enforcement police force have power over the people without our contractual consent.

Learn the Law!

For more information, and for much of the source of this info (with my gratitude), please visit this website: ( https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1NKPsi1ofhiMmavI5hi3z_zYOEeWM9b4JSiSfeL64pd0 ) and his new YouTube Channel: (http://www.youtube.com/user/donotconsent83) which will be updated periodically with more of this type of information.

Also, you’ll find that many Federal Executive Departments in fact have no authority except by your consent if you start on your own journey of researching U.S.CODE. Health and Human Services, Child Protective Services, Terrorism Protection, Military, and many more unconstitutional Executive corporate structures that have no Statutory Law to back up their powers.

To access and search the corporate U.S.CODE, go here: ( http://www.gpoaccess.gov/uscode/index.html ) and here: ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ )

Yours in freedom and constitutional Sovereign liberty,

.

Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

 

National Opt Out Day: The most important story you missed


Think you live in a free country?

You’ll think again after seeing this:

.

Part 1:

Now watch as the media spins this and makes us look ineffectual. This is why you should never trust your major media, which is owned through collective government investments by the very governments (private corporations) who are destroying our way of life:

Part 2:

November 24, 2010 was the national opt-out day across America, where individual citizens like myself in groups like We Are Change went to airports on our own time and protested the TSA’s blatant and unconstitutional use of unreasonable searches and seizure… and of cancer causing and DNA destroying full body scanners on innocent travelers.

I learned something very important on this day.

I learned that the Airport Police and other government agencies (private corporations) for which these police work for require you to get a permit to protest not because they are keeping the peace, but because they have no authority over the people who wish to exercise their right of free speech unless we enter into a contract – known as a permit or license – for which we are then required to follow the rules and regulations of that permit, since it is a signed contract between you and the private corporate government.

Without it, because I refused to acquire one, these police could not detain or remove me. For if they did, there would be no law or code broken, no crime committed, and therefore no charges to file against me… BECAUSE I WAS NOT UNDER CONTRACT (PERMIT)!

In the video above, the policeman who admittedly works for the Salt Lake City Corporation, a private for-profit corporation (municipality) acting in lieu of my city government, told me that “free speech is not absolute” and that I would need a permit to practice my free speech anywhere in the city, even on my own street. And yet I have Mormons, Girl Scouts, Students, and all sorts of salesmen and activists coming to my door trying to sell me one thing or another. Do they all need permits as well? The other policeman agreed that he’d beat my head in if he was told to do so because hey, “you gotta feed your family somehow”.

.

This smells like a lawsuit to me! What do you think? Comment below…

.

.

Here is the information sheet (front and back) that I was passing out…

Note: To download the paper, click here:

M.Word document: Opt Out

PDF document: Opt Out

—≈—

Opt Out!

The Facts About The Whole Body Imager Device

Is It Constitutional?

The 4th amendment to the constitution specifically states:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED, and Warrants shall not be issued, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

 

Is It Stopping Terrorism?

Thousands of illegal immigrants come across the southern border of these United States unchallenged, while an honest American cannot go about his own country without being subjugated to an illegal search and seizure at the airport, and get molested by TSA agents for declaring their rights to “Opt-Out”.

Is It Photographing And Storing Your Naked Photos?

“It will show the private parts of people, but what we’ve decided is that we’re not going to blur those out, because it severely limits the detection capabilities… It is possible to see genitals and breasts while they’re going through the machine…” -Cheryl Johnson- Office of Transport Security manager

These “devices are designed and deployed in a way that allows the images to be routinely stored and recorded, which is exactly what the Marshals Service is doing… We think it’s significant.” -EPIC executive director Marc Rotenberg in interview with CNET

“Approximately 35,314 images… have been stored on the Brijot Gen2 machine…” used in the Orlando, Fla. Federal Courthouse. -William Bordley- Associate General Counsel with the Marshals Service

A 70-page document showing the TSA’s procurement specifications, classified as “sensitive security information” says that, in some modes the scanner must “allow exporting of image data in real time” and provide a mechanism for “high-speed transfer of image data” over the network. It also says that image filters will “protect the identity, modesty, and privacy of the passenger.” –Procurement Specification For Whole Body Imager Devices For Checkpoint Operations, report by U.S. Department of Homeland Security, TSA

TSA spokeswoman Sari Koshetz lied to CNET, stating that the agency’s scanners are delivered to airports with the image recording functions turned off. “We’re not recording them… I’m reiterating that to the public. We are not ever activating those capabilities at the airport”

Can These Scanners Cause Cancer?

“Some studies reported significant genetic damage while others, although similar, showed none…” -Boian Alexandrov- Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico

Although the forces generated from these scanners are tiny, resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication. Translation: It destroys your DNA! -Boian Alexandrov- Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico

“…any X-ray photon may be the one which sets in motion the high-speed, high energy electron which causes a carcinogenic or atherogenic (smooth muscle) mutation. Such mutations rarely disappear. The higher their accumulated number in a population, the higher will be the population’s mortality rates from radiation-induced cancer and ischemic heart disease.” -Dr. John Gofman- Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley.

Gofman’s studies indicate that radiation from medical diagnostics and treatment is a causal co-factor in 50 percent of America’s cancers and 60 percent of our ischemic (blood flow blockage) heart disease. He stresses that the frequency with which Americans are medically X-rayed “makes for a significant radiological impact”. -Dr. John Gofman- Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley.

Children and passengers with gene mutations – around one in 20 of the population – are more at risk as they are less able to repair X-ray damage to their DNA. The most likely risk from the airport scanners is a common type of skin cancer called basal cell carcinoma. -Dr. David Brenner- head of Columbia University’s Centre For Radiological Research

“If all 800 million people who use airports every year were screened with X-rays then the very small individual risk multiplied by the large number of screened people might imply a potential public health or societal risk. The population risk has the potential to be significant… If there are increases in cancers as a result of irradiation of children, they would most likely appear some decades in the future. It would be prudent not to scan the head and neck… There really is no other technology around where we’re planning to X-ray such an enormous number of individuals. It’s really unprecedented in the radiation world.” -Dr. David Brenner- head of Columbia University’s Centre For Radiological Research

“They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays… No exposure to X-ray is considered beneficial. We know X-rays are hazardous but we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner…” -Dr Michael Love-, Department of Biophysics and Biophysical Chemistry at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

“While the dose would be safe if it were distributed throughout the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be dangerously high,” they wrote. “We still don’t know the beam intensity or other details of their classified system…” -John Sedat- Biochemist, University of California, San Francisco (UCSF)

“Collectively, the radiation doses from the scanners incrementally increase the risk of fatal cancers among the thousands or millions of travelers who will be exposed, some radiation experts believe… We don’t have enough information to make a decision on whether there’s going to be a biological effect or not.” -Douglas Boreham- professor in medical physics and applied radiation sciences at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario

“The thing that worries me the most, is not what happens if the machine works as advertised, but what happens if it doesn’t” -Peter Rez- Arizona State University

“[We] cannot exclude the possibility of a fatal cancer attributable to radiation in a very large population of people exposed to very low doses of radiation.” -National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, from a 2002 report that studied these security devices.

“Based on our results we argue that a specific terahertz radiation exposure may significantly affect the natural dynamics of DNA, and thereby influence intricate molecular processes involved in gene expression and DNA replication.” -Technology Review article from: http://arxiv.org/abs/0910.5294

In other words… millimeter wave scanning devices may damage your DNA!

Report by Clint Richardson of We Are Change Utah (wearechangeutah.org) with references provided for your own research.

–≈–

Reprint [begin excerpt]

Update: Here’s a bit of code you should look into and ask your self… why is the United States government immune to this???

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002332—h000-.html

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113B > § 2332h
§ 2332h. Radiological dispersal devices

(a) Unlawful Conduct.—

(1) In general.— Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for
any person to knowingly produce, construct, otherwise acquire, transfer directly
or indirectly, receive, possess, import, export, or use, or possess and threaten
to use —

(A) any weapon that is designed or intended to release radiation or
radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life; or

(B) any device or other object that is capable of and designed or intended to
endanger human life through the release of radiation or radioactivity.

(2) Exception.— This subsection does not apply with respect to—

(A) conduct by or under the authority of the United States or any department or agency thereof; or

(B) conduct pursuant to the terms of a contract with the United States or any department or agency thereof.

(b) Jurisdiction.— Conduct prohibited by subsection (a) is within the jurisdiction of the United States if—

(1) the offense occurs in or affects interstate or foreign commerce;
(2) the offense occurs outside of the United States and is committed by a national of the United States;
(3) the offense is committed against a national of the United States while the national is outside the United States;
(4) the offense is committed against any property that is owned, leased, or used by the United
States or by any department or agency of the United States, whether the property is within or outside the United States; or
(5) an offender aids or abets any person over whom jurisdiction exists under this subsection in committing an offense under this section or conspires with any person over whom jurisdiction exists under this subsection to commit an offense under this section.

(c) Criminal Penalties.—

(1) In general.— Any person who violates, or attempts or conspires to violate,
subsection (a) shall be fined not more than $2,000,000 and shall be sentenced to
a term of imprisonment not less than 25 years or to imprisonment for life.

(2) Other circumstances.— Any person who, in the course of a violation of
subsection (a), uses, attempts or conspires to use, or possesses and threatens
to use, any item or items described in subsection (a), shall be fined not more
than $2,000,000 and imprisoned for not less than 30 years or imprisoned for
life.

(3) Special circumstances.— If the death of another results from a person’s
violation of subsection (a), the person shall be fined not more than $2,000,000
and punished by imprisonment for life.

[end excerpt]

Sent by:
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

–≈–

.
.

Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)

Sunday, November 28, 2010