Monday, January 2, 2017

automobile vs motor vehicle.

Hello folks, back to talk with you about how they misuse terms or change words in order to fool us. Today we will be talking about the difference between an automobile and a motor vehicle. A studious learning by now would have noticed that all laws in the motor vehicle code deal ONLY with "motor vehicles" and NONE of them deal with "automobiles".

No big deal you say since as they no doubt will tell you, all motor vehicles are automobiles. This is absolutely correct, however while all motor vehicles may be automobiles, not all automobiles are motor vehicles. The courts have been very clear on the distinction between the two as you will read below.


The term ‘motor vehicle’ is different and broader than the word ‘automobile". - [City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 232]

[I]t is a jury question whether ... an automobile ... is a motor vehicle[.]United States v Johnson, 718 F.2d 1317, 1324 (5th Cir. 1983).

Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled - Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20

The word ‘automobile’ connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways. - American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200

A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received. - [International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120, 122]

(6) Motor Vehicle. - The term "motor vehicle" means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, or passengers and property. -18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 section 31 definitions

Used for commercial purposes" means the carriage of persons or property for any fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. - 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 section 31 definitions

The word 'operator' shall not include any person who solely transports his own property and who transports no persons or property for hire or compensation. - Statutes at Large California Chapter 412 p.83

A soldier's personal automobile is part of his ‘household goods. - U.S. v Bomar C.A.5(Tex.), 8 F.3d 226, 235. 19A Words and Phrases - Permanent Edition (West) pocket part 94.

The Motor Vehicle Act is not unconstitutional as making an arbitrary and unwarranted classification, in that it requires professional chauffeurs, or drivers of motor vehicles for hire, to pay an annual license, but exempts all others operators of such vehicles from tax and regulation. - [In the Matter of Application of Stork (1914), 167 Cal, 294,295]

... (The Motor Vehicle Act classifies) drivers of automobiles into two classes, one professional chauffeurs, and requiring them to obtain a license, and pay an annual license fee of $2.00, the other embracing all others, who are not required to secure a license or pay license fee, is sound classification, and not arbitrary, so as to constitute special legislation. - Ex Parte Stork, 167 Cal 294. The Supreme Court of California Feb 24, 1914 - footnote inparamateria. Further confirmed in Beamon v. DMV (1960), 180. App.2d 200,4 Cal. Rpter396.

"A carriage is peculiarly a family or household article. It contributes in a large degree to the health, convenience, comfort, and welfare of the householder or of the family." Arthur v Morgan, 113 U.S. 495, 500, 5 S.Ct. 241, 243 S.D. NY 1884).


"The Supreme Court, in Arthur v. Morgan, 112 U.S. 495, 5 S.Ct. 241, 28 L.Ed. 825, held that carriages were properly classified as household effects, and we see no reason that automobiles should not be similarly disposed of." Hillhouse v United States, 152 F. 163, 164 (2nd Cir. 1907).


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now in order to further separate them, we find that during some probate hearings deciding on what goods to classify as personal and what goods to classify as business goods, we find that what use they are put to is a deciding factor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The use to which an item is put, rather than its physical characteristics,
determine whether it should be classified as ``consumer goods'' under UCC 9-109(1) or ``equipment'' under UCC 9-109(2)." Grimes v Massey Ferguson,
Inc., 23 UCC Rep Serv 655; 355 So.2d 338 (Ala., 1978).

"Under UCC 9-109 there is a real distinction between goods purchased for
personal use and those purchased for business use. The two are mutually
exclusive and the principal use to which the property is put should be
considered as determinative." James Talcott, Inc. v Gee, 5 UCC Rep Serv
1028; 266 Cal.App.2d 384, 72 Cal.Rptr. 168 (1968).

"The classification of goods in UCC 9-109 are mutually exclusive." McFadden
v Mercantile-Safe Deposit & Trust Co., 8 UCC Rep Serv 766; 260 Md 601, 273
A.2d 198 (1971).

"The classification of ``goods'' under [UCC] 9-109 is a question of fact."
Morgan County Feeders, Inc. v McCormick, 18 UCC Rep Serv 2d 632; 836 P.2d
1051 (Colo. App., 1992).

"The definition of ``goods'' includes an automobile." Henson v Government
Employees Finance & Industrial Loan Corp., 15 UCC Rep Serv 1137; 257 Ark 273,
516 S.W.2d 1 (1974).
Household goods

"The term ``household goods'' ... includes everything about the house that is
usually held and enjoyed therewith and that tends to the comfort and
accommodation of the household. Lawwill v. Lawwill, 515 P.2d 900, 903, 21
Ariz.App. 75" 19A Words and Phrases – Permanent Edition (West) pocket part
94. Cites Mitchell's Will below.

"Automobile purchased for the purpose of transporting buyer to and from his
place of
employment was ``consumer goods'' as defined in UCC 9-109." Mallicoat v
Volunteer Finance & Loan Corp., 3 UCC Rep Serv 1035; 415 S.W.2d 347 (Tenn.
App., 1966).

"The provisions of UCC 2-316 of the Maryland UCC do not apply to sales of
consumer goods (a term which includes automobiles, whether new or used, that
are bought primarily for personal, family, or household use)." Maryland
Independent Automobile Dealers Assoc., Inc. v Administrator, Motor Vehicle
Admin., 25 UCC Rep Serv 699; 394 A.2d 820, 41 Md App 7 (1978).

"An automobile was part of testatrix' ``household goods'' within codicil. In
re Mitchell's Will, 38 N.Y.S.2d 673, 674, 675 [1942]." 19A Words and Phrases – Permanent Edition (West) 512. Cites Arthur v Morgan, supra.

"[T]he expression ``personal effects'' clearly includes an automobile[.]" In
re Burnside's Will, 59 N.Y.S.2d 829, 831 (1945). Cites Hillhouse, Arthur,
and Mitchell's Will, supra.

"[A] yacht and six automobiles were ``personal belongings'' and ``household
effects[.]''" In re Bloomingdale's Estate, 142 N.Y.S.2d 781, 782 (1955).

“A vehicle not used for commercial activity is a “consumer goods”, ...it is
NOT a REQUIRED to be REGISTERED under this code
“Passenger vehicles which are not used for the
transportation of persons for hire, compensation o
profit, and housecars, are not commercial vehicles”
“a vanpool vehicle is not a commercial vehicle.”
and;
Not the type of vehicle required to be registered and “use tax” paid of which the tag is evidence of receipt of the tax.” Bank of Boston vs Jones, 4 UCC Rep. Serv. 1021, 236 A2d 484, UCC PP 9-109.14. And;

“It is held that a tax upon common carriers by motor vehicles is based
upon a reasonable classification, and does not involve any unconstitutional
discrimination, although it does not apply to private vehicles, or those used
the owner in his own business, and not for hire.” Desser v. Wichita, (1915) 96 Kan. 820; Iowa Motor Vehicle Asso. v. Railroad Comrs., 75 A.L.R. 22.

“Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled.” Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20. And;

“In view of this rule a statutory provision that the supervising officials “may”
exempt such persons when the transportation is not on a commercial basis
means that they “must” exempt them.” State v. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; 6
C.J.S. section 94 page 581.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I have found through research that the act of us giving title to the state and getting back a certificate of title changes the classification of our automobile into that of a motor vehicle and thus subjects us to have them regulated by the state.



Tuesday, December 13, 2016

The common law is for subjects.


I keep hearing folks go on and on about the common law. Oh we are common law marshals, and judges and grand juries and yada, yada, yada. Sorry folks but the common law does not mean what you think it means.


Common Law

The ancient law of England based upon societal customs and recognized and enforced by the judgments and decrees of the courts. The general body of statutes and case law that governed England and the American colonies prior to the American Revolution.

The principles and rules of action, embodied in case law rather than legislative enactments, applicable to the government and protection of persons and property that derive their authority from the community customs and traditions that evolved over the centuries as interpreted by judicial tribunals.


The common law is just that which the court has decided before on a case based on the same set of facts. Thus if you are a citizen in a registered motor vehicle, then common law is not going to save you.

The common law is the common law of the subjects, it is the customs and cases from subjects past long before you were born.

There is NO common law for free men, because you need a society and courts in order for there to be a common law.


Free men use natural law, subjects use common law.

I would suggest a couple of links here, and then followed by extensive research on YOUR part for a better understanding.

http://risetogether.weebly.com/blog/common-law-versus-natural-law
http://risetogether.weebly.com/blog/enslaved-by-the-law-of-the-land-common-law
http://www.starshipearththebigpicture.com/2015/05/24/common-law-vs-natural-law-not-what-you-think-video/

Monday, December 12, 2016

Freedom, what is it?

           Most of my fellow countrymen think they are free and perhaps they are. I mean a man not in chains and a cage is free to an extent correct? But what is the freedom our hearts beckon us to? Is it the freedom we have in America?

           Most would say not anymore, most would agree that they were able to do more in years past, and the amount of laws passed yearly would be strong evidence in their favor. But where exactly does subjection end and freedom begin?

           Most would also say that Americans have more freedom then any other citizen of any other nation. But is that true? How do our freedoms compare? And did Jefferson not say that all men are created equal with unalienable rights? So how can rights of men in different countries be different?



                                         Civil Rights

            As always lets start with some definitions and common understanding of what we are discussing.

Civil Rights

Personal liberties that belong to an individual, owing to his or her status as a citizen or resident of a particular country or community.


Civil rights are rights granted by governments to their subjects, no man in any society has his natural unalienable rights, he has traded them for civil rights.

The difference between the two forms of rights, natural vs. civil is wide, and needs a deeper look then what I will give you here. I will say that the bill of rights are nothing but civil rights. We can tell if a right is a civil right a couple of ways. 1. If alone on an island and not in a society, would I have this right? 2. Does this "right" have a fee or permit attached, is it regulated in any way? If so, its a civil right friend.

Right to bear arms.....civil right
Right to gay/straight marriage... civil right
Right to vote.... civil right


The government can regulate or even take away your civil right whenever it wants, hence the gun bans in DC and Chicago for so long.

The concept of freedom is so foreign to most Americans today that I felt compelled to address it here in this post.

A quick google search brings up this thread...
http://www.survivalistboards.com/showthread.php?t=631753

A quick glance will assure you that most have little clue as to what a right is and what it is not. Without this very important information, freedom is a lost concept.

When people think that freedom/rights can be granted, regulated, licensed, etc. Then anything is possible in the deceit of those people, and we can attest to such as time has gone on under the American system of government. As time moves on, more privileges are taken.

It is an absolute must that the nature of our status and obligations as citizens are understood, for if not, we can never truly be free by guessing what the state may or may not, can or can not do.

Thus I implore everyone to use the information presented on this blog, not as a basis for beliefs, but as a starting point for understanding and a dismissal of beliefs as the learning block that blinds us all to certain truths.

Now for those of you who want to understand I offer some links to help you along.

https://theroadtoconcord.com/2013/04/26/defining-natural-rights/
http://jim.com/rights.html

The best understanding you will come to is when you understand the rights you had alone in nature, or alone on a island if you will.

When you come to understand what freedom truly is, you will likely come to the same conclusion that I did, and that is most do not want to be free, and the majority would reject true freedom due to the controlling nature of man and their need to exert control over others, as one of many reasons.

Sunday, November 13, 2016

If you have received a business card

Welcome to my little corner of understanding, here you will find things most have never heard of and most will find hard to believe. That's ok, I was at one time as much a skeptic as you friend. In fact I would be hard pressed to tell tale of anyone not as sheep like as I was.

The government has worked long and hard to direct our beliefs and understanding about society, and it is near impossible to reach most people, hopefully you reading this are the kind of man or woman who would rather die finding the truth then living a lie everyday and hoping things do not fall apart in your lifetime.

Everywhere I look I see confusion, not just in the masses but even within the patriot/law community. The reason for this I have come to find out is simple, our beliefs. Along with our ego's, our beliefs guide us thru information to find the stuff that agrees with what we already hold to be true..... Confirmation bias.

Our leaders have always been working on better ways to control the masses, as this is the main job of government, to keep its subjects happy and docile. They do this thru our own mind, bread and circuses taken to a whole new level. Research the Milgram experiments to see how the government is using some of this information in regards to obeying authority.

Most people are smart, however very few people are intelligent, the difference being the ability to understand how beliefs effect our intake and processing of information. The only way for us to truly understand our world and life in general is to look at our beliefs, and to discard the ones that have no factual backing. I myself say toss all beliefs in favor of idea's. An idea can be changed as new information presents itself, a belief however is almost impossible to change and most times is fought against.


"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so". Mark Twain



If you can put aside what you know for sure, then you just might find the truth you have always been missing.

Monday, October 17, 2016

In it to win it?

I see a lot of posts these days, all talking about the many ways to get freedom, or to get money from the government from your bond, etc. I can not help but think we are better then this crap, if only we could understand that our beliefs are guiding us down different paths. The amount of blind acceptance I see, for something someone already believes in is massive. People filling notices and doing this and doing that. Fake judges and marshals all talking about restoring the constitution and the real republic. I hate to break it to you folks, but here it is ONE MORE TIME, all as in ALL societies are fictions, and members of a society are not free, nor have they ever been, nor will they ever be. Get it yet?

The very nature of society is that members have rights and obligations to the society they live UNDER, I say under because a society can only exist present rule of law. In other words, a society can not exist where the governed do not have to listen to the law of the government.

And we find in ALL societies, that the government, for the public good of course, soon begins limiting what you can do.

If you want to study law/history/freedom, then do so, Stop listening to every guru and learn the information for yourself, come to that understanding for yourself.

Without it, then no answer a guru gives you is going to keep you out of jail.

Stay safe folks.

Tuesday, October 4, 2016

The United States, clearing up the confusion.

Now a LOT of folks think that they were born and live in the United States. This however is wrong, very few of us were born OR live in the United States. First we have to ask, what is the territory of the United States?


Territories of the United States

Portions of the United States that are not within the limits of any state and have not been admitted as states.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Territories+of+the+United+States


---Which makes sense when you consider what the constitution lays out as it's territorial boundaries.---

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
Art 1 Section 8

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings



As the definition states, portions NOT within the limits of any state. Only federally owned land inside a state(aka army base, etc) would be considered as the United States.

Now as to the District which shall be the seat of our government and it's jurisdiction, how many have heard of the boundary stones? Reading this will be eye opening for most.....  http://www.boundarystones.org/articles/rchs_1897.pdf

Now congress has two jobs, one job it does for the union and is limited by the constitution to only what is mentioned, the second job however is to...

Art 4 Section 3
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States;

--Make all the needful rules and regulations in relation to their territory. What they do not tell us is if the law they are passing is for the union or the territory.


When people were born in Atlanta before the 14th amendment, then they were born in Georgia, however after the 14th amendment, folks born in that same city of Atlanta were considered born in the United States.

What changed?

First thing that changed was the definition of the term "State", they changed the meaning of this term in 1864 to mean, federal territory. All states after the civil war were now political subdivisions or federal territories. This is confirmed by the 1868 North Carolina inauguration speech from Gov. Worth, just read the first few paragraphs. Also now there are many ways to see it including the Zip Code and SS districts, etc.

So now, when you confess to being born in a state, you are really saying that you are born in the United States, and NOT the separate sovereign State that once was.

Example:  (26) “State” means a state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, or any territory or insular possession under the jurisdiction of the United States. The term includes an Indian nation or tribe.

This is from a State statute, but you would be hard pressed to tell me which one, because it does not DEFINE State.

Only thru understanding statutory construction can you figure out what this means.


The united states are composed of DC and any land it owns.

Lets run thru an example to help us understand it better.

Lets say I own half the country, and it is called Patland, and you own half the country and you call it Riotland and we decide we need a uniform guidance between our countries and to help each other for defense. We decide to set up a corporation to handle these affairs, we give a part of our land in each country to this new corporation, call it Patriotland. Now, this land is separate from Patland and Riotland, there are different rules for those living and working there, separate from our own countries rules. Being born there would make you a citizen of Patriotland and not a citizen of either country. Same if you were bon in Patland, clearly you are a citizen of Patland and not Riotland, nor could you be a citizen of Patriotland.

The only way they could say that you were born in the United States is because society is a fiction, and not geographically based, but politically based and the "state" is a political subdivision.

Hope this helps....

Monday, October 3, 2016

The bank loan scam part tre

This part is going to be dealing with the funds transfer and some other parts. We start with some definitions to get us on the same page.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ 4A-104.  FUNDS TRANSFER - DEFINITIONS.
In this Article:
 
(a)  "Funds transfer" means the series of transactions, beginning with the originator's payment order, made for the purpose of making payment to the beneficiary of the order.  The term includes any payment order issued by the originator's bank or an intermediary bank intended to carry out the originator's payment order.  A funds transfer is completed by acceptance by the beneficiary's bank of a payment order for the benefit of the beneficiary of the originator's payment order.
 
(b)  "Intermediary bank" means a receiving bank other than the originator's bank or the beneficiary's bank.
 
(c)  "Originator" means the sender of the first payment order in a funds transfer.
 
(d)  "Originator's bank" means (i) the receiving bank to which the payment order of the originator is issued if the originator is not a bank, or (ii) the originator if the originator is a bank.
 
 
§ 4A-202.  AUTHORIZED AND VERIFIED PAYMENT ORDERS.
 
(a)  A payment order received by the receiving bank is the authorized order of the person identified as sender if that person authorized the order or is otherwise bound by it under the law of agency.
 
(d)  The term "sender" in this Article includes the customer in whose name a payment order is issued if the order is the authorized order of the customer under subsection (a), or it is effective as the order of the customer under subsection (b).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Ok from the definitions alone, we see that we are the sender/originator of the first funds transfer/payment order. We issue the payment order when we instruct the bank to pay for the house for us.
 
Now, a couple of other things here.

From my earlier blog posts we found out that the bank Monetizes our private debt, it then turns around and sells it aka MBS(mortgage backed securities)

Now federal statue 15 usc 78c(10) tells us that any note maturing after 9 months is a security instrument.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/78c
(10)
The term “security” means any note, stock, treasury stock, security future, security-based swap, bond, debenture, certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement or in any oil, gas, or other mineral royalty or lease, any collateral-trust certificate, preorganization certificate or subscription, transferable share, investment contract, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit for a security, any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege on any security, certificate of deposit, or group or index of securities (including any interest therein or based on the value thereof), or any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege entered into on a national securities exchange relating to foreign currency, or in general, any instrument commonly known as a “security”; or any certificate of interest or participation in, temporary or interim certificate for, receipt for, or warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing; but shall not include currency or any note, draft, bill of exchange, or banker’s acceptance which has a maturity at the time of issuance of not exceeding nine months, exclusive of days of grace, or any renewal thereof the maturity of which is likewise limited.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now the real test is if the instrument ACTS like a security, which by being monetized and securitization, we think that it is.  If it is a security instrument there can be no holder in due course as specified in UCC3-106d.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/3/3-106
(d) If a promise or order at the time it is issued or first comes into possession of a holder contains a statement, required by applicable statutory or administrative law, to the effect that the rights of a holder or transferee are subject to claims or defenses that the issuer could assert against the original payee, the promise or order is not thereby made conditional for the purposes of Section 3-104(a); but if the promise or order is an instrument, there cannot be a holder in due course of the instrument.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The way to defeat them in this game is to show, using the accounting forms banks are required to file, that we are the creditor and that no "loan" happened. Be it a home, car, or personal loan. The way to do this before a foreclosure action is to write out a QWR (http://consumerfinancialserviceslaw.us/recent-changes-to-the-law-governing-qualified-written-requests/).


For those already in foreclosure, the way to go about it is to file a counterclaim for recoupment or "setoff" as the one side of the books cancels the other side of the books. We can alo ask for the accounting documents thru discovery.


I have won cases using the information, I also do one on one training and I can provide legal information for those in need.

Hope this information helps you out there.