by Anna Von Reitz
Sheriff Mack took the question of whether or not
Sheriffs of incorporated counties (operating on the international jurisdiction
of the sea) could legally enforce The Constitution (as part of their job) all
the way to the Supreme Court and the answer was yes, they could. But, that in no
way makes it a mandate. It merely means that individuals like Sheriff Mack
himself could freely decide whether or not to enforce The Constitution (and
presumably other Organic Laws) in their counties.
For truly "Constitutional" Sheriffs enforcing the
Constitution and the other Organic and Public Laws is the entire focus of their
job assignment, not an afterthought or personal choice after a long day of code
and regulation enforcement.
And therein lies the rub. Sheriff Mack apparently
wants the office of sheriff to have the right to pick and choose when to act as
a peacekeeper and respect the guarantees of The Constitution, and when to act as
a Code Enforcer and use the oppressive plenary power that system gives to the
STATE and the OFFICE OF SHERIFF based on the expediency of the moment and the
Sheriff's own assessment of what is called for.
I side with the Bible--- no man can serve two
masters, and Sheriff Mack's fence-sitting just clouds the issues.
I understand the practical reasons that he and
other sheriffs want to retain plenary powers over "citizens" and just pick and
choose when to recognize the constitutionally guaranteed rights owed to the
American people---- but the fact remains that such a commingling of
jurisdictions and such a grant of power based on one's own conscience alone is
nowhere to be found in any part of The Constitution or other Founding
Documents. It isn't even implied.
The Law of the Land is the Public Law of this
country. When corporate employees step foot on our soil, they are obligated to
obey it. They aren't empowered to pick and choose when to enforce it and when
to ignore it. They aren't authorized to "presume" anything about us, including
our political status. And therein lies the additional rub.
The federal corporations and their "federal state"
franchises have contrived to establish legalized monopolies of essential
governmental services that they are supposed to be providing for us under
contract--- and via self-interested and often brainless enforcement activities
have extorted compliance with their regulations under conditions of monopoly
inducement regardless of anyone's actual political status.
As a result, for example, nearly everyone has been
coerced into obtaining a "Driver's License" when in fact most people aren't
using the public roads for any private gain and are not actually required to
have a DL at all. Then the mere fact that you have a DL is used as the basis of
further "presuming" that you are voluntarily accepting the status of a "citizen
of the United States"----thereby allowing corporate sheriffs and other "law
enforcement personnel" the latitude to arrest, fine, threaten, brutalize, and
jail you over statutory infractions like broken tail lights.
Men like Sheriff Mack need to bite the bullet and
give up the false powers of legal presumption. They need to admit that it is not
their choice of when to obey our Public Law and when to enforce private
corporate statutes instead.
---------------------------------------
See this article and over 200 others on Anna's website here:www.annavonreitz.com
To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.
Since the Definitive Treaty of Peace recognizes two political classes, Free, Sovereign and Independent and resident, does this not imply that government services organizations must operate in two separate jurisdictions?
ReplyDeleteSome of us are not of this corporate system, but it surrounds us and we still must live among the residents and function. the STATE OF WISCONSIN knows that I am not a resident, having defaulted on an administrative process claiming that, yet after a minor confrontation with local law enforcement over not having a DL the STATE DOT authorized the issuance of one to me despite not being a resident (in violation of STATE statutes). The STATE DOT also acknowledges that I am exempt from sales tax when purchasing an automobile or airplane.
There appears to be a bifurcated system in place, whether we like it or not.
Ditto on what James says.
ReplyDeleteM
ReplyDeleteTwo constitutions, incorporated and unincorporated, leads to apartheid justice. Apartheid justice is the result of two constitutions. Apartheid justice is no justice.
The Living upon the Land are NOT the dead corp[se] fictions upon the sea jurisdiction. kinda like oil & water not mixing well... just sayin'
ReplyDelete