"practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

[Siegfried Shrink]

I don't know how long ago that was, but the barrel from muzzle to chamber looks under 20 inches and it appears to have a semi-automatic action and to hold more than 2 cartridges. I don't think it would be legal now. I may be wrong.

========================================================================
Our local police are not all that well informed either. I bought an 8mm Belgian pin fire revolver at a local auction. A few days later a police firearms man knocks on the door telling me it is illegal and an 'absolute offence' (no mens rea needed) to posess it. He had the idea that all fixed ammunition weapons were prohibited and I had to dig around a bit to produce evidence that obsolete calibers, not just pinfires but quite a lage number of well obsolete rim and center fire rounds were unavailable and handguns using them are quite legal. It is an obscure part of firearms legislation that does not seem to be general knowledge. I 'got away' with that one, but an early air rifle in the contents of a house I had bought was seized while I was not looking and allegedly destroyed 'Because it had no serial number' on a first world war period 177 air rifle. I could not really chase that one because although I had ageed a deal, I had not , at the time the air rifle and couple of antique swords were taken, actually handed over the money.

Modern times, I suppose. Nowadays they call out the army, almost, over the odd plastic waterpistol, 50 odd years ago we'd stroll down to the fields with shotguns on our arms and no one batted an eyelid. And don't get me started about knives, I have carried a pocket knife for most of my life, and still do. But no-one stops and searches a respectable looking elderly gentleman.

[BoomerSooner17]

Like any self-respecting Texan, I never go anywhere without an (imaginary) "sharp as a razor, heavy as a hatchet, long as a sword, wide as a paddle" Bowie knife strapped to my leg. (In actuality, just a Victorinox Tinker and a Leatherman multitool). On my first trip to England, I was so paranoid about y'all's knife legislation that I wound up throwing away the tiny Swiss Army Knife Classic that I brought in my checked bag.

[BoomerSooner17]

For brevity, I omitted details of the revolver action, but took the clicks to mean that the revolver was cocked and ready. I really don't know if the .44 magnum is single or double action.

I've never fired a .44 Magnum (only .357 and .38 Special), but I believe that it is double action. The clicks were supposed to represent cocking the hammer and then firing on an empty chamber.

[JimUk1]

Like any self-respecting Texan, I never go anywhere without an (imaginary) "sharp as a razor, heavy as a hatchet, long as a sword, wide as a paddle" Bowie knife strapped to my leg. (In actuality, just a Victorinox Tinker and a Leatherman multitool). On my first trip to England, I was so paranoid about y'all's knife legislation that I wound up throwing away the tiny Swiss Army Knife Classic that I brought in my checked bag.

You can carry a folding knife, such as a Swiss army style one, as long as it's under 3 inches in length and you have a valid excuse for it.

"I like to take my knife for a walk officer", still might not make them batter an eyelid. I take mine when I go walking in Wales and I've never had anyone complain when I've had it out.

https://www.police.uk/crime-prevention- ... f-weapons/

[aesmith]

You can carry a folding knife, such as a Swiss army style one, as long as it's under 3 inches in length and you have a valid excuse for it.

As a matter of fact the "good reason or lawful authority" (England and Wales) or "reasonable excuse or lawful authority" (Scotland) does not apply to a folding knife with a cutting edge not exceeding 3 inches, but apply to possession of any other bladed or pointed object in public.

Criminal Justice Act 1988 (E&W)
Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995

Furthermore the fact that knives with locking blades do not count as "folding" was based on case law, so presumably that is the sacred Common Law that the FMOTLs go all dewy eyed about.

Aside - my current regular pocket knife comes from a US manufacturer Spyderco, specifically designed to comply with UK law and going under the name of UK Penknife. From my reading we're not the only place with weird or restrictive laws, some countries don't allow a knife that can be opened one handed, and some don't allow concealed carry.

[aesmith]

The question no one seems to be asking is 'are you still driving?'

Given that his job involves driving, I'm assuming that he is. He also can't plead ignorance of the disqualification seeing as he's posted the evidence for all to read.

Harking back to Mark Abbott, in earlier exhibits he showed his registration number (am I allowed to mention it?). That vehicle comes up as untaxed since 1st July 2017, and MOT expired August 2016. If he drives while disqualified that will invalidate his insurance as well.

[Footloose52]

The question no one seems to be asking is 'are you still driving?'

Given that his job involves driving, I'm assuming that he is. He also can't plead ignorance of the disqualification seeing as he's posted the evidence for all to read.

Harking back to Mark Abbott, in earlier exhibits he showed his registration number (am I allowed to mention it?). That vehicle comes up as untaxed since 1st July 2017, and MOT expired August 2016. If he drives while disqualified that will invalidate his insurance as well.

It won't invalidate the third party liability part of the policy but only that part that provides recompense to the policyholder. However the insurance company can, if they believe it productive, seek to reclaim, from the policyholder, the amount paid out.

[longdog]

I don't know how long ago that was, but the barrel from muzzle to chamber looks under 20 inches and it appears to have a semi-automatic action and to hold more than 2 cartridges. I don't think it would be legal now. I may be wrong.

That picture was just one from Google for illustrative purposes only. Mine was 24" barrel so legally a shot gun. The 2+1 rule came later.

[SteveUK]

Will he take me seriously? Watch this space!

Finally!

Meeting with the police detective on Wednesday at 1200h to discuss Lawful Rebellion.

During my conversation with him on the telephone I asked him to bring the copy of my oath with him. Before I had even finished requesting this he interjected with "I have it in front of me as we speak!". That was very encouraging.

I hope our discussion is more than just a brief encounter and that he takes what I relay to him seriously.

Watch this space!

[aesmith]

It won't invalidate the third party liability part of the policy but only that part that provides recompense to the policyholder. However the insurance company can, if they believe it productive, seek to reclaim, from the policyholder, the amount paid out.

The driver would never the less be guilty of driving without insurance. Assuming his policy contains the normal term making it a condition that the driver having an appropriate licence.

[Footloose52]

It won't invalidate the third party liability part of the policy but only that part that provides recompense to the policyholder. However the insurance company can, if they believe it productive, seek to reclaim, from the policyholder, the amount paid out.

The driver would never the less be guilty of driving without insurance. Assuming his policy contains the normal term making it a condition that the driver having an appropriate licence.

I never stated that the driver wasn't guilty of an offence, that wasn't mentioned in the original post. I agree and would point to the driver driving other than in accordance with the terms of their licence. In that respect anyone who has property damaged in an accident is still covered but damage to the insureds property is not and that was the point I was making.

[JimUk1]

Someone is not happy with the bailiffs.

Not very subtle with the threats of violence isn't this guy!

Practical Lawful Dissent. public group | Facebook

So yesterday I get a call from the misses (Vicky) telling me a bailiff was in the house, she was in the bath and he let himself in through the closed front door.
To say I went mad is an understatement.
This low life scum illegally opened the closed front door With some kind of tool and let himself in while my beautiful fiance is naked in the bath.
Vicky would not pass the phone to him so in my anger I phoned the council and told them if he is still there wen I get home in d sending him back in pieces. I said in Chop up the cunt and anyone else that gets in my way.
Then another one turned up, different company but this one was for me.
He did not enter the house but spoke to me on the phone, so I calmly spoke to this fella, after I left him know my lawful standing he said he knows common law and as much as he privately agrees he cannot comment as he is working, he knows A61 and its implications and after seeing my notice in the window he was not going to enter the property.
I then spoke to the first one and told him he best not touch my stud and get out my house now, I said he had one hour for Vicky to find my tenancy agreement, if she can't find it in coming home and if he is still there I will Everson my ride to bear arms under A61 of the magna Carta, and as a lawful Englishmen my house is my castle, if he is still in it when I get there I'll take it as an act of war and I'll defend it, if that means I send you back in pieces then so be it.

Vicky, bring the brains in this outfit, made an arrangement under extreme durress to get him out before I got home, well after he found my sheathed 30 inch Bola knife and took pictures of it, he realized I meant wot I said.

At this point I realized Vicky is far more clever than me and thought so that's how easy it is to get rid of them. So I told the other bloke I would make an arrangement, he did say they have a commital notice for me cos of three years unpaid ctax. So I said I would pay one of the bills and he buggard off.

Then the council phoned me to notify me they had phoned the police, I said too late I already phoned them (which I done after calling the council and told them the same as I did the council), I told her I made an arrangement with the bailiff and she said that I have to stop sending in FMOL notices. That pissed me off again and I told her, so not dare say I'm a free man on the land, they have no lawful standing, I have taken an path to the Barron's of the magna Carta and I'm a lawful man I have the rule of law in my side madam and all those notices are legal documents, to force me to pay tax is train against me to deny I have taken an oath under A61 is to deny or constitution and that is a crime of sedition, a very server crime indeed.

She simply said but your making an arrangement, I said yes but under durress.

So it was pretty much left at that.

But I'll bit be paying, I said what I had to go get these criminals out my house and away from my Vicky, and stop any more action against me for all the threats I made.

I now have to get lots of notices printed off and start sending them again.
I took my eye off the ball after we lost our babies earlier this year and have not sent a single notice since, and with my Vicky being diagnosed with MS is been a tough year.

Vicky can pay hers under durress as it helps her not to worry.

But I'm going down fighting, not one penny will I pay until justice is served for my country and my children's and my future grandchildren future is secured and safe again.

[NYGman]

Someone is not happy with the bailiffs.

Not very subtle with the threats of violence isn't this guy!

Practical Lawful Dissent. public group | Facebook

So yesterday I get a call from the misses (Vicky) telling me a bailiff was in the house

[SNIP]
Vicky, bring the brains in this outfit, made an arrangement under extreme durress to get him out before I got home, well after he found my sheathed 30 inch Bola knife and took pictures of it, he realized I meant wot I said.

At this point I realized Vicky is far more clever than me and thought so that's how easy it is to get rid of them. So I told the other bloke I would make an arrangement, he did say they have a commital notice for me cos of three years unpaid ctax. So I said I would pay one of the bills and he buggard off.

Then the council phoned me to notify me they had phoned the police, I said too late I already phoned them (which I done after calling the council and told them the same as I did the council), I told her I made an arrangement with the bailiff and she said that I have to stop sending in FMOL notices. That pissed me off again and I told her, so not dare say I'm a free man on the land, they have no lawful standing, I have taken an path to the Barron's of the magna Carta and I'm a lawful man I have the rule of law in my side madam and all those notices are legal documents, to force me to pay tax is train against me to deny I have taken an oath under A61 is to deny or constitution and that is a crime of sedition, a very server crime indeed.

She simply said but your making an arrangement, I said yes but under durress.

So basically, paying under Duress gets them off you back, who would have thought it. Paying what is owed will stop teh collection, Genius! They should just pay everything under Duress, then they wouldn't have to worry about getting these visits. On the other hand, once they pay under duress, what do they do to get the money back? In the words of Bachman Turner Overdrive - Ain't Seen Nothing Yet

[ArthurWankspittle]

well after he found my sheathed 30 inch Bola knife and took pictures of it, he realized I meant wot I said.

Or he was hoping he'd get a good price for it or he'd come back while you are away busy explaining to the Police how you came to be an unemployed sugar cane cutter.
And I agree that the Law Society bill looks like an old Legal Aid bill that, now the house is threatened to be sold, they want their money.

[aesmith]

Harry Marlow > ‎Practical Lawful Dissent.

hmrc sent bankrupt letter from debt department with agents name. and signiture, i served notice well over 18 months ago.the same as in notes Just checking i now serve notice to stop to new agent ? also same old tricks letter sent 2nd class date 10th only got today they want contact by today 19th or start bankrupt .

Another one brewing, he needs to move quick to get those notices out to put a stop to it.

[Siegfried Shrink]

And I agree that the Law Society bill looks like an old Legal Aid bill that, now the house is threatened to be sold, they want their money.

wrong thread, possibly?

[ArthurWankspittle]

And I agree that the Law Society bill looks like an old Legal Aid bill that, now the house is threatened to be sold, they want their money.

wrong thread, possibly?

Bollocks it's the "Random Freeman" thread that refers to.

[SteveUK]

Well, the meeting with the detective as mention earlier went ahead. I think it didn't go well, hence the way over the top glossing over. He also admits it was actually a meeting over a bag of weed, rather than a constitutional show down.
I callback bS

Met with the detective from Belfast today.

We discussed the topic of constitutional law and protocol at great length. Arriving at 12.30pm and not leaving until 3.20pm, he left armed with a lot of evidence that he is determined to test out.

He also had an outstanding caution to serve me with regarding a bag of weed that was seized from my house two years ago (another story), but suffice to say was very open about the fact that I had the right to challenge it and admitted that the condition of acceptance I imposed regarding the caution, that of asking him to prove to a jury court that Magna Carta was not the law and that I have no right swear to obey those who petitioned the Crown in 2001, was one that he could not disprove as he knew it to be the law. His own words were that the Crown's reply within the alloted 40 days proves beyond all doubt that the initial petition by the barons committee must have been lawful and that if one part is lawful, all of must be lawful. He then asked about the circumstances that I would sign the acceptance of the caution. I reiterated the position of duress of circumstance and the "vis coactus" method of signature. He immediately admitted that he could not insist on it as it would nulify the caution and accepted he had no power to enforce it upon me.

I took him through the last 106 years of orchistrated treason from the Pariament Act 1911 to the Treaty of Nice as best I could recall whilst mentioning as many of the constitutional documents I could as well as the quotes of past and present VIP's on the validity of the subject.

One point he found incredibly disturbing was the legislation that was passed recently to prevent the Monarch from being prosecuted for any cause, effectively putting her above the law. I showed him that our constitutional law makes this very legislation unlawful.

Having a written copy of MC1215 from Salisbury Cathedral was a great help in starting the conversation. It ended with him quite exited to find out how far up this goes. He intends to put my challenge forward to the legal department to see if it is ignored outright or brushed under the carpet. Either way, he intends to ask questions as to its outcome.

A very pleasing outcome today. He was impressed to find out that we have "Lobby the Bobby" in order to highlight this crime to as many police officers as we can and went away from my home with an education he had been otherwise completely unaware of. We are to keep in touch through private email whereby I will supply him with the evidence he needs to pursue his investigation.

So today I may have found an ally within the constabulary to help with exposing the treason being wrought upon us all.

More info to report when I get it.

[notorial dissent]

So right, dumbern' the proverbial rock. I will agree that the constable/whatever went away with a lot, a lot of information to hand over to the prosecution, and this buffoon IS NOT going to have a good experience if he ever shows up at court, and he will be ever so confused, under the "but he agreed with me understood me" line.

[longdog]

One point he found incredibly disturbing was the legislation that was passed recently to prevent the Monarch from being prosecuted for any cause, effectively putting her above the law. I showed him that our constitutional law makes this very legislation unlawful.

Recently?