All men are not persons

[Famspear]

I love how PD, David Merrill and so many others treat the 1856 Bouvier opus as if it were legal holy writ, instead of a mildly amusing historical artifact.

Yeah. I see cites in a couple of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions:

Bullock v. BankChampaign, NA, 133 S. Ct. 1754 (2013), citing the Fourth Edition of Bouvier from the year 1852;

Johnson v. Williams, 133 S. Ct. 1088 (2013) (Scalia, concurring), citing the Eighth Edition from 1914.

Lawyers and judges know when and how to use Bouvier's Legal Dictionary and other secondary authorities. Sovereign citizens, tax protesters, and other wackos generally do not.

[The Observer]

If patriotdiscussions [sic] is not a person, that would mean he doesn't have the rights of a person. If he is an outlaw, someone outside the law in the old sense of that word, any person can legally kill him: it wouldn't be a crime, nor a civil offense subject to a wrongful death lawsuit.

This has been my position for quite some time, ever since tax protesters and sovruns have started dwelling on this nonsense that they are not under the law and can't be obligated to obey it since they are not "persons" as the law defines them. I have said often enough on this site that the law should follow these claims to their logical conclusion. When they come into court postulating such nonsense, the court should agree, declare them no longer under the law, and then announce that it is open season on this "free man" to all interested parties. And if the nincompoop objects too loudly, then deport to him to Somalia via the open door of a C-130.

[LPC]

I find nothing that states every man is a person according to the law.

Well, there's this:

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

1 U.S.C. § 8(a).

[jcolvin2]

I find nothing that states every man is a person according to the law.

Well, there's this:

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

1 U.S.C. § 8(a).

So, following the twisted TP reading of the word "includes", only infants are persons?

[Hyrion]

So, following the twisted TP reading of the word "includes", only infants are persons?

Hmm.... you're a person till you're no longer an infant. And since the belief is that taxes on income only apply to "persons" does that mean Sov Cits are attempting to promote child labor using infants?

[jcolvin2]

So, following the twisted TP reading of the word "includes", only infants are persons?

Hmm.... you're a person till you're no longer an infant. And since the belief is that taxes on income only apply to "persons" does that mean Sov Cits are attempting to promote child labor using infants?

Puts a whole new twist on the "kiddie tax."

[Pottapaug1938]

If patriotdiscussions [sic] is not a person, that would mean he doesn't have the rights of a person. If he is an outlaw, someone outside the law in the old sense of that word, any person can legally kill him: it wouldn't be a crime, nor a civil offense subject to a wrongful death lawsuit.

This has been my position for quite some time, ever since tax protesters and sovruns have started dwelling on this nonsense that they are not under the law and can't be obligated to obey it since they are not "persons" as the law defines them. I have said often enough on this site that the law should follow these claims to their logical conclusion. When they come into court postulating such nonsense, the court should agree, declare them no longer under the law, and then announce that it is open season on this "free man" to all interested parties. And if the nincompoop objects too loudly, then deport to him to Somalia via the open door of a C-130.

Including the "flying lesson"?

[Gregg]

Including the "flying lesson"?

No person I know of it capable of flying sans some craft or parachute. Oh, wait, what I mean is no person I know of is capable of landing from sustained flight without significant risk of serious injury or death.

Logically, it follows that all persons, when flung from an aircraft at altitude will need a parachute or some other means of not dying upon landing.

But, I know not what non-persons are capable of, and therefore, non-persons are left to their own devices. They are free to declare the law of gravity does not apply to them.

And with that, I think we're done with today's lesson in stupid from the current village idiot. (Who I was under the impression was no longer able to start topics, an error I'll see if we can't get corrected)

Topic Locked