What to do if you know people who may get duped

[davids]

alas, there is procedural troll due process here at Quatloos...

I think BOTH topics are interesting and the links are great information. But it is correct that my initial post had nothing to do with federal reserve / magical money creation theories.

I certainly never though that "pd" would emerge to give advice on how to prevent others from falling victims to sov cit scams. (wut? )

[Patriotdiscussions]

It may be hard to believe but I will state it again. I am not a sov citizen, even if you feel some of my ideas might be.

I'm working on helping the police deal with sov's on their own level, hopefully to help minimize these people who take the first gurus advice and throw away their license and tags.

I know your thinking, will I ever make the move to cancel my contracts with the government, and to be honest, who knows. I do know I have some more reading to do on many of the subjects before I make up my mind.

What I do know is anyone calling themself a sovereign citizen needs more study time and less time espousing ideas they have not thoroughly researched.

Of course to everyone on this site, the belief is that government is all powerful and the people need not question how the government gets its power.

It seems each side has beliefs that might not be true, best thing is to drop the beliefs and review the information without bias.

Hard for the ego to ever admit we were wrong and that we are not the smartest person posting on the subject.

Human nature is not hard to understand, controlling and directing it is another matter.

[notorial dissent]

This is off topic - - do not continue. mod

[Patriotdiscussions]

Lol

[AndyK]

FINAL WARNING

Any subsequent posts not specifically on topic regarding the title of the thread will be summarily deleted.

No warnings. Nothing Just the ax.

[notorial dissent]

Further Notice

• - attempted thread high jacking, off topic response(s), ANYTHING not having to do with topic will be summarily deleted.

There will be no future warnings. - mod

[Patriotdiscussions]

I have a mortgage based legal practice, and often persons that know me, or that know someone who knows me, will come to me to consult or try to retain me on matters. Quite often these people don't retain me as they have no money left, don't have a good case, or didn't get told "what they want to hear."

Because of this I know of some who have been pitched by / marketed to /serenaded by (and hopefully not duped by) certain sov-cit based schemes. I thought I would just put it out there - how would you, or have you, have dealt with such information? Not talking legal ethics here but just practical, what would or did you do when you found out a sov cit was trying to sell nonsense to an acquaintance of yours?

Admins - If this is the wrong forum to ask this, please fee free to move it.

To get back on topic, David I would ask them if the teacher of this method has any wins using it, I would tell them that if he has or can point out others who have won, then the next step would be to deconstruct his process and do it yourself so you can be knowledgeable about the topics they are using.

And I would also tell them if they were good friends of mine to wake up cause there is no such thing as a sovereign "citizen", and then I would tell them why.

Sadly everyone has beliefs and very few realize how they affect them, perhaps one day schools will teach kids how to use their mind.

Until then, good luck changing someone's belief.

[davids]

PD, I can always tell a sovereign citizen by their refusal to admit that sovereign citizens are a "thing" that exists.

I and many others call them that because that term works.

I understand that sovereign citizens hate being called that, because it correctly conjures up images of decades and decades of failing losers tripping over their bad jargon in court, losing petty traffic offenses that they try to turn into conceptual inquiries into whether police should exist, or whether they have to "consent."

So, go ahead and use whatever word to describe them/you that you would like. Your getting caught up on this point is actually, for me, a sign that you are a sovereign citizen (or whatever it is that is fashionable for sovereigns to call themselves this week).

You continue to believe they've had "wins." I had someone who I am concerned about call me and ask me about their "wins" who was duped into believing Charlie Sprinkle stories among other things. That is a great case in point, not only do they have no wins, but they don't even know a loss when they see one.

And this thread is ALSO not about you protesting over the terminology we use to identify sovereign citizens. That too is off-topic, and unlike money creation mechanics, not the least bit interesting!

[PeanutGallery]

Ultimately if someone wants to drink the Koolaid they will, to some extent all you can do is set out the risks for them and provide examples of Sovrun theory not working and hope they make an educated choice. They won't always.

I've had this issue come up before, with a friend on social media posting a link to a "Know your strawman" web page. I tried to explain that it was really a bullshit theory (citing appropriate sources) and that they were surely too smart to fall for this, they responded that it wasn't a theory and was fact.

I could have responded further, and de-constructed the web page, highlighting areas where it was variously Nazi loving, Jew hating, and where it made claims that simply were implausible. But my feeling was that I'd done enough and that if I did any more I'd spook them off down the rabbit hole. So I left it alone, now they haven't posted any more Strawman stuff but I still feel that they want to believe it.

I feel that is the main problem, they want to believe the Guru as the Guru promises a better outcome for them. We don't, we promise them a realistic outcome but people don't always want the reality that they have, they want the one they think they are entitled to.

[noblepa]

To get back on topic, David I would ask them if the teacher of this method has any wins using it, I would tell them that if he has or can point out others who have won, then the next step would be to deconstruct his process and do it yourself so you can be knowledgeable about the topics they are using.

This is a good first question. The problem is that the gurus will always provide a long list of "wins". At first blush, and according to the guru's description, these cases may, in fact, sound like real wins.

However, if one digs deeper, it is invariably the case that the so-called "win" is not a win at all. Rather, it is usually a smack-down by the courts. In tax cases, the "winner" may have avoided jail time, but lost their house to pay the taxes they claimed they didn't owe. They may have delayed a foreclosure for not paying their mortgage, but, in the end, they always lose.

In the rare event that a case is dismissed, it is not because of the merits of the guru's magic words or magic papers. It is a technicality or procedural error.

The point is, that, not only must one ask for success stories, but one must learn to do PROPER research to determine what REALLY happened in the case. Proper research does not mean visiting other echo-chamber websites. It means checking court rulings and other such documents.

If I were in such a situation, I would not even fully trust Quatloos. I would consult a REAL lawyer and look up court decisions, preferably in my own jurisdiction. A ruling in California is probably not worth much in an Ohio court. Nor is a state court ruling binding on a federal court. A federal court ruling may or may not be binding on a state court, depending on several factors.

[Hyrion]

If I were in such a situation, I would not even fully trust Quatloos. I would consult a REAL lawyer and look up court decisions, preferably in my own jurisdiction.

I'd take that a step further. Read the Court Ruling if it's been publicly published: some, like Burnaby49, are willing to go to the Courthouse and pick up copies - thanks LOADS to such generous individuals.

Read the Court ruling, review the arguments to see what makes sense, read how the Judge responded and - based on the Judges ruling - form your own opinion with regards how the case fared.

Then one is in an intelligent position to be able to review the different perspectives and see who one might be able to trust with regards opinions.

Granted, if you've already drunk from the kool-aid then you're likely to form the opinion "Judge: OPCA lit fined $5,000 and sentenced to 30 days in jail" as a "win".

If the "guru" presents that as a win and you clearly think it's a loss... perhaps you shouldn't trust the other stuff the "guru" presents.

I'm morbidly curious how anyone who wishes to stay out of prison would honestly view that as a win.

[wserra]

A federal court ruling may or may not be binding on a state court, depending on several factors.

The primary one being whether you're in Alabama.

[davids]

To get back on topic, David I would ask them if the teacher of this method has any wins using it, I would tell them that if he has or can point out others who have won, then the next step would be to deconstruct his process and do it yourself so you can be knowledgeable about the topics they are using.

This is a good first question. The problem is that the gurus will always provide a long list of "wins". At first blush, and according to the guru's description, these cases may, in fact, sound like real wins.

However, if one digs deeper, it is invariably the case that the so-called "win" is not a win at all. Rather, it is usually a smack-down by the courts. In tax cases, the "winner" may have avoided jail time, but lost their house to pay the taxes they claimed they didn't owe. They may have delayed a foreclosure for not paying their mortgage, but, in the end, they always lose.

In the rare event that a case is dismissed, it is not because of the merits of the guru's magic words or magic papers. It is a technicality or procedural error.

The point is, that, not only must one ask for success stories, but one must learn to do PROPER research to determine what REALLY happened in the case. Proper research does not mean visiting other echo-chamber websites. It means checking court rulings and other such documents.

If I were in such a situation, I would not even fully trust Quatloos. I would consult a REAL lawyer and look up court decisions, preferably in my own jurisdiction. A ruling in California is probably not worth much in an Ohio court. Nor is a state court ruling binding on a federal court. A federal court ruling may or may not be binding on a state court, depending on several factors.

Yes, agreed, but a few finer points. A lot of the sovruns, in my neck of the woods, are involved in mortgage issues. Their definition of a win is essentially "the house hasn't been taken yet" and that is just a matter of time in some cases. So much for "wins."

And often, part of their shtick is to talk their marks out of consulting with real lawyers. The kinds of persons who fall for it are in my experience quite willing to entertain upside-down logic so they will go for that.

One particular clown, who may even be PD for all I know, promotes several other sov scams such as common law grand jury scams, saying they have "wins" in Florida - their definition of a win I guess is their "foreperson" getting prosecuted. Or do they tell their marks about it?

[Patriotdiscussions]

PD, I can always tell a sovereign citizen by their refusal to admit that sovereign citizens are a "thing" that exists.

I and many others call them that because that term works.

I understand that sovereign citizens hate being called that, because it correctly conjures up images of decades and decades of failing losers tripping over their bad jargon in court, losing petty traffic offenses that they try to turn into conceptual inquiries into whether police should exist, or whether they have to "consent."

So, go ahead and use whatever word to describe them/you that you would like. Your getting caught up on this point is actually, for me, a sign that you are a sovereign citizen (or whatever it is that is fashionable for sovereigns to call themselves this week).

You continue to believe they've had "wins." I had someone who I am concerned about call me and ask me about their "wins" who was duped into believing Charlie Sprinkle stories among other things. That is a great case in point, not only do they have no wins, but they don't even know a loss when they see onIe.

And this thread is ALSO not about you protesting over the terminology we use to identify sovereign citizens. That too is off-topic, and unlike money creation mechanics, not the least bit interesting!

I see your point. It would.be hard to prove to your friend that sovereign citizens don't exist when you yourself believe they do. So it would do you no good to expose this easy to see fallacy in that one of thinking.

Now if it was me, I would tell him that the term is an oxymoron, it is impossible to be a sovereign( no higher power) and a citizen( subject to a higher power).

You can be one or the other, but not both. AS such, anyone claiming such status, should be Bitch slapped and told to hit the books again.


But since it's you, just change his beliefs, I'm sure that would be much easier for you.

[Judge Roy Bean]

My sense is that "sovereign citizen" definitely lacks nuance and has apparently become something that some of the promoters don't want to be labelled with. It's now become a go-to term for the media and law enforcement. Calling someone "bat-sh** crazy" just isn't acceptable and has even has prejudicial overtones; "espousing sovereign-citizen beliefs" is the apparent common-denominator description in use today.

But for those of use who have been around this a long time, there are facets, one of which includes mental defect.

Note the attorney who appears on the scene near the of the linked video in the "... earns another 87 months" thread - he indicates that he's going to study this subject because he's seeing so much of it.

Maybe someone ought to write a book.

[notorial dissent]

P.D. is right in one sense, barely, there is no such thing as a sovereign citizen, it is an oxymoron, usually put forth by morons, a nullity, a non-existent thing, but that doesn't stop people from believing that they are, and calling themselves that, anymore than reality stops some people from claiming they are Martians or whatever. It boils down to them having a belief set that is incompatible with reality.

[Duke2Earl]

Actually, you can call them whatever you like but the sad truth is that people who want to "study" and act on alternate theories of reality are just wasting their lives. No court case or alternate reading of any statute will change anything of substance. People who get caught in this trap are hurting themselves, accomplish exactly nothing, and are worthy of pity.

[Pottapaug1938]

Trying to change the beliefs of a sovrun citizen (or however one might wish to characterize or label them) is like trying to extract a dollar out of a hardened miser. Unless (to borrow a term from the world of alcoholism) a sovrun "hits bottom" and is able to see the depths of his/her mistake, it's much easier to blame the ebil illegitimate worldwide gummint conspiracy for one's "persecutions".

[davids]

And just to be clear, the persons that I am concerned about don't have "beliefs" that need to be "changed" but are just teetering back and forth between believing what they want to hear and realizing that it's too good to be true...and then there are occasional troublesome moments where they remember we are a representative republic, gleaned from way back in their high school civics classes...which I wonder if PD ever attended....

[Patriotdiscussions]

Actually, you can call them whatever you like but the sad truth is that people who want to "study" and act on alternate theories of reality are just wasting their lives. No court case or alternate reading of any statute will change anything of substance. People who get caught in this trap are hurting themselves, accomplish exactly nothing, and are worthy of pity.

What exactly matters in all that to you?

Does it affect you in any way what they choose to study or believe?

People hurt them self smoking crack, do I find post of yours on NA boards pontificating on the dangers of crack?

I find it odd, that people who question what they are told are mocked, yet the majority who clearly can not even think are normal.