Local "I don't need a driver's license" activist

[Unidyne]

I'm in charge of a local meet up of Southern Nevada Mensa and for the past few weeks, a local man who is borderline "sovereign citizen" has shown up, handing out pamphlets about "native born Citizens" (sic), "resident" vs "citizen", and whether nor not driver's licenses and registration is required to operate a car.

He asked me if I knew anyone who might be interested in his research. I told him about you folks at Quatloos, and that he might expect unfavorable responses. He didn't seem to mind.

He seems very set about his opinions, even though he's yet to prove them in a court of law (which I would just LOVE to see).

His website is hereby presented: http://nativeborncitizen.com/

[The Observer]

Considering the fact that he is selling all of this "information", he is obviously farther into the koolade than just "borderline." Either he believes this crap immensely, or he is doesn't and is swindling people just to make an easy buck. Especially with his disclaimer at the bottom of the page:

Disclaimer: This web site and these White Papers are for educational purposes only. Nothing in this web site or these White Papers is to be construed as legal advice. The reader should go to a law library and check every fact and citation for themselves, and form your own conclusions. The reader should get assistance of counsel, if you think you need it.

[Burnaby49]

Considering the fact that he is selling all of this "information", he is obviously farther into the koolade than just "borderline." Either he believes this crap immensely, or he is doesn't and is swindling people just to make an easy buck. Especially with his disclaimer at the bottom of the page:

Disclaimer: This web site and these White Papers are for educational purposes only. Nothing in this web site or these White Papers is to be construed as legal advice. The reader should go to a law library and check every fact and citation for themselves, and form your own conclusions. The reader should get assistance of counsel, if you think you need it.

A disclaimer didn't stop Porisky from getting convicted for counselling others to commit fraud (tax evasion) using his natural person argument (see my thread viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7827). As the decision said;

98] Each of the books and DVDs begin with the following disclaimer:

Disclaimer: I, Russell Anthony Porisky, present this information in my capacity as a natural person, as an exercise of my rights and freedoms. As such the information contained herein is for educational purposes only and should, in no way, be construed as either legal or financial advice. Therefore, before relying on any conclusions expressed herein or applying any of the information in your own life, I strongly recommend that in addition to thoroughly studying the information yourself you consult a competent expert on this subject matter to determine the veracity of what has been presented.

I will deal with this disclaimer when I discuss Mr. Porisky’s intent, although it is also potentially relevant to the conduct component of the counselling charge.

[116] It is clear to me that Mr. Porisky fully intended that Paradigm students follow his teachings by arranging their affairs as natural persons and avoid paying income tax. Given the offering of Paradigm’s consulting and mentoring services it would be impossible to conclude otherwise.

[117] The books and DVDs began with the disclaimer that I set out above at para. 98. I do not think this detracts from my conclusions on either the conduct or the intent components, because it is lost in a sea of material that is presented with 100% certainty.

[118] Further, the disclaimer was qualified in a later publication. I referred above to R. v. Sydel, a decision of Judge Meyers of the Provincial Court. Dr. Sydel was a Paradigm student. In his evidence, Mr. Porisky said that he prepared Dr. Sydel’s legal argument. Dr. Sydel was convicted of income tax evasion and Mr. Porisky prepared a detailed “analysis” of the judgment in which he referred to the disclaimer which had been mentioned in the judgment. It stated, at p. 33:

Apparently, Judge Meyers has made a few assumptions of his own in regards to the intended meaning of the words I deliberately chose to use in the disclaimer that appeared at the bringing [sic] of each of the five videos of the original version of the “Canadian Rights and Freedom Foundation” course, which is now more commonly known as the “Intermediate” course since the release of the second edition.

Although Judge Meyers is correct in stating I provided the following caution, “In no way should this be construed as either legal or financial advice. You should consult a competent expert”, his assumption that my deliberate use of the words “competent expert” included, or was even limited to, professionally trained tax lawyers or tax accountants is simply that, an assumption, or more appropriately, a false assumption.

Mr. Porisky then set out some dictionary definitions and continued:

… unless someone, be it a tax professional or not, was willing to spend the time to study the theory presented throughout Paradigm’s educational material enough to be adequately capable of either confirming the theory with additional insight or disproving the theory with a parallel theory of their own, or someone, especially a tax professional, who was not even willing to even consider the theory in its entirety, would not qualify as a “competent expert” in regards to consulting on the subject matter for which these words were deliberately used.

…

The main reason being is because I personally believe, and as time has shown, that regardless of whether the issue at hand relates to the topic of income taxes or not, when someone spends the time to fully understand who they really are, and how that relates to this legal system and to their private life as a whole, they will undoubtedly realize that the only one they can truly rely on as a “competent expert” is their self. After all, isn’t that why we’ve been given the ability to think?

[119] This conveys the message that if someone gets a legal or accounting opinion that contradicts the Paradigm view, then the opinion is worthless.


http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/ ... 67cor1.htm

[notorial dissent]

It comes under the heading of you can call a pig a horse and believe that it is for all you are worth, but at the end of the day, you still won't be able to ride it, it still won't fly, it will still roll in the mud, and when you fry it up, it will still taste like bacon.

I seem to recall that variations of the "for informational purposes only" haven't done any of our TP crowd any real good either. Some of them do it to avoid the UPL charges, but if they are selling it for money I don't think they do too well either for the same reasons.

Just because you stood there in your mask holding the gun, all the while swearing you weren't holding up the bank, doesn't mean the police or judge is going to pay you much attention.

[Gregg]

...
Just because you stood there in your mask holding the gun, all the while swearing you weren't holding up the bank, doesn't mean the police or judge is going to pay you much attention.

That was a performance in Street Theatre. Really.

[Pantherphil]

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court recently ruled "per curiam" in State v. Timothy Cason, 2012 ME 1991, that there is no inherent constitutional right to travel on public highways without an operator's license and that the State could impose a requirement of obtaining a license. Mr. Cason appeared pro se. State of Maine did not bother to file a brief. Short and sweet opinion from the Court.
Here in Maine there seems to be a sudden increase in the number of "sovereigns" cluttering up the land records with "common law" lien filings. County Registers of Deeds are looking for legislation to enable them to summarily reject such bogus filings.

[notorial dissent]

I was kind of under the impression that VT, NH, and Maine to a degree had been infested with the "common law" take back our country crowd. I know there was a push at one point to get them to move in to one of those states and take over the gov't, rather suspect it went about as well as any of the rest of these great plans did, since they can't get along with themselves any better than they do with anyone else, but I would suspect that it has added some real oddos to the local mix.

[Number Six]

I'd agree that New England has a fair number of these kooks who you run into at the usual "contrarian" activities trying to socialize with people who "understand" them. In some there may be a natural opposition to what they regard as new laws or government over-reach, such as the Vermont "civil union" bill that caused many of them to become more visible and agitated. New England was a highly independent region from the Pilgrims on but they were not law breakers, they were conservatives who knew how to work within the system not spend their funds and energies in fruitless wrangling.

[Pantherphil]

Oops, a fat finger error in the citation of the Cason case; the cite is 2012 ME [u]91[/u].

New Hampshire is the target of the "Free State" project. Both Maine (particularly southern Maine) and Vermont have trended "blue" in the last few election cycles. The more independent minded folks in Northern Maine (north of Bangor) occasionally speak of secession but no one takes them seriously.

[wserra]

The more independent minded folks in Northern Maine (north of Bangor)

All eight of them?

[Wes - A several-time climber of Baxter Peak (Mt. Katahdin), the northern terminus of the AT.]

[Pantherphil]

We love Baxter Park, Wes. Usually take a week every summer camping at Kidney and Daicey Ponds, fly fishing the Nesowdnehunk Stream and several small nearby trout pools, and prowling around Double Top, the Owl, and Chimney Pond and the lowland trails. Good boating and rafting trips available as well. Hope you make it back soon.

[wserra]

Lots and lots of Baxter Park is special, but the vista I don't forget is Chimney Pond. Moose in the foreground, Katahdin in the background. I'm sure I will be back. But I think my Baxter Peak to Pamola via the Knife Edge days are unfortunately behind me.

The St. John / Allagash is great too. Hell, Acadia is spectacular, if overtouristed.

Maine is a special place.

[Pottapaug1938]

Lots and lots of Baxter Park is special, but the vista I don't forget is Chimney Pond. Moose in the foreground, Katahdin in the background. I'm sure I will be back. But I think my Baxter Peak to Pamola via the Knife Edge days are unfortunately behind me.

The St. John / Allagash is great too. Hell, Acadia is spectacular, if overtouristed.

Maine is a special place.

Ay-yup... you got that right.

My paternal grandparents were born and raised in D.C.; but my grandmother's sister married a guy from South Berwick, Maine, and my grandparents began vacationing in Maine every summer (this was in the years before air-conditioning, when any family which could get out of D.C. for the summer did). Eventuallly, they bought a seaside hotel in Wells Beach; and to shorten the story somewhat, after the war Dad's stepsister brought her college roommate down from Portland for a visit... and Mom and Dad met. So, dpending on your point of view, Maine takes the credit -- or the blame -- for the fact that I am able to write these words.

My Scout troop likes to go camping up in Maine; and in Lewiston, Baxter Brewing Company makes one of the best IPAs in the country.